Fast Take On: Super Bowl LI
By MEC — February, 2017
SB51: MAKING A SUPER BOWL SIZE STATEMENT IN SOCIAL MEDIA
History was made as the New England Patriots mounted a record-setting comeback against the Atlanta Falcons, including the first overtime in Super Bowl history. Millions tuned in not just for the game, but also for the halftime show, which saw record viewership, and of course the commercials! Brands did their best to match the level of energy that the Patriots’ Tom Brady and the team brought through a series of emotionally-driven and politically-charged messages, with the occasional interjection of humor. While brand messaging broke new barriers, this year’s second-screen marketing was largely derivative from years past, with few brands taking risks on creating new and innovative experiences.
Now that you’ve re-played the halftime performance and maybe even a few of your favorite commercials, MEC offers a deep dive into the key marketer trends, from the influence of the political climate to the continued fragmentation of audience attention.In this Fast Take, we cover Super Bowl by the numbers, key social observations and pro tips, complete with a Moment Matrix that links to this year’s social media moments.
The Numbers
- $5MM Cost of a Super Bowl TV Spot (source)
- $500K Cost of Twitter Trend (source)
- 113.7MM Average TV Viewers (source)
- $500K Cost of Snapchat Advertising Package (source: Internal Data)
- 415MM Super Bowl Related Interactions Across Facebook + Instagram (source)
- 27.6MM Tweets using #SB51 (source)
- 1.7MM Estimated Viewers Across Streaming Devices (source)
6 Key Takeaways
-
Brands in the biggest spotlight delivered politically charged messages. Brands that earned the most conversation shared emotional stories that expressed company values. Some brands intentionally designed spots to make a political statement, such as Airbnb, 84 Lumber and Audi, while others claim audiences read into their purposefully non-political message, such as Budweiser. Ultimately, three of the top five top most talked about ads were politically charged; however, the social conversations were polarizing among consumers, with many questioning the brands corporate policies and message authenticity.
- Social platforms assumed different roles in brand activation strategies.
With 27.6MM mentions of #SB51, Twitter is still the hotbed of conversation for the Super Bowl among audiences and brands. Brands, however, also tapped into Facebook, Instagram and YouTube to boost content that extended the scale of their TV campaigns. Meanwhile, Snapchat was used by brands like Budweiser, Campbell’s and Gatorade to drive audience engagement, and Pinterest got into the game with a board-generator providing event hosting needs.
-
The appeal of the TV spot reveal still pays off.
Many brands continued the trend of teasing their TV spots in advance of the big game, allowing for longevity; however, this approach can dampen the swell of excitement that comes when an ad airs live on game day. For Stranger Things,Netflix chose not to pre-seed their spot, resulting in the brand winning the most brand mentions on Twitter (307K) while receiving about the same number of average video views online in a fraction of the time (3.5MM).
-
Brands struggled to expand the role of livestreaming.
Following the Squarespace Key & Peele live commentary during Super Bowl 50, the hope was to see brands advance the role of livestreamingin complementing the TV experience. Unfortunately, the few brands who tested livestreamingwere basic in nature (e.g. Budweiser streamed the Clydesdales). Both Snickers and Hyundai sought buzz for running live TV spots, but struggled to enlighten audiences of the special live production, and did not receive recognition for their efforts.
-
Brands leveraged influencers large and small to cut through noise. Brands continued to tap into celebrities and influencers to cut through the noise and amplify their brand message. This was a key tactic employed by T-Mobile, using Justin Bieber, Snoop and Martha Stewart to share memes and solicit user generated content. Alternatively, brands like Avocados From Mexico employed micro-influencers to push participation in their #sweeps. While this was successful in getting them to rank high in volume, a large volume of posts are canned messages en masse.
-
Brand on brand conversation continued but with less audience recognition.
Some were snarky, some were funny and some were…uncomfortable. Brands have continued inserting themselves into each other’s conversations by taking advantage of real time replies across social platforms like Twitter and Facebook. While this used to be thegrassroots tactic to breakthrough the noise, it’s been three years of this behavior and has become part of the normal Super Bowl chatter, removing some of the thrill.
- Brands are narrowing in on events within the game. According to Nielsen’s ratings, halftime viewership surpassed that of the actual game for the second year in a row. Rather than trying to compete, brands like Intel and Tiffany & Co. narrowed their focus to the halftime show, rather than the game as a whole.
To continue reading, download Fast Take On: Super Bowl LI (pdf, 0.42Mb).