That's not how a marketing ploy works. Marketing is meant to enhance the image of something or draw viewers not to create outrage or backlash. If it truly was marketing they would have shared the video loki posted, not the video that blew up online talking about naked child escaping the Palace.
Some of us are far too awake for nonsense like this. The media lies.
Christ on a cracker guys. This example we are looking at is nearly the perfect definition of a viral marketing campaign. You don't reveal that it's a viral marketing campaign first, that would defeat the viral aspect of it. You release some sort of viral video or website or what-have-you and then let it run rampant for a day or two, then once as many eyes as possible have seen it and are talking about it you send out a press release linking the viral campaign to your product. To do it the other way woudl defeat the purpose because nobody would believe it is real and thus nobody would be compelled by it. View the video through the lens that it is fake; a guy on a green screen being superimposed digitally onto Buckingham Palace and falling harmlessly onto a safety mat, probably only a few feet. Is the video still compelling? Would you want to dig into it or care about it or get invested? No, it's just a silly video. But, if you don't let anyone know it is fake beforehand then social media goes wild with theories and speculation, your video is shared all over the internet, and then when you reveal it was a marketing campaign at least a portion of those people who were following the story and became invested are going to check out your show or website. Sure, some people are going to be agitated you toyed with them or lose interest after it turns out to be fake, but you got the name of your show out there and it hardly cost you anything beyond the cost of filming and editing.
@Tanya as I've tried to explain already, I was mistaken when I said that this clip was in the show. That was a misunderstanding because when I first did a bit of research and commented on it I didn't really have the time to dig into it so my early understanding was that it was a clip for the show. It wasn't. It was actually a clip developed for the online show D-Throned, as I've previously explained in this thread, which is a supplementary online aspect of The Royals. They took the part from the clip that they knew might be taken as real and posted it to the internet a few days before their D-Throned site went live where they then posted the full video they'd created. The full clip that I've continuously linked to is literally the first post on the site I believe, because they made it specifically to be a viral marketing campaign and bring eyes to their website.
Here is a quote from Jonah Berger, marketing professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and author of
Contagious: Why Things Catch On.
"There is a science behind why people share. It's not chance, and it's not random. If you understand the underlying science of human behavior, you can predict what people are going to pass on, and you can craft your own contagious content--whether it's messages, products or ideas--that people are more likely to spread."
They knew that the way they'd shot this video was going to fool a certain number of people who aren't as trained in analyzing digital footage and those people would share it because they believe it is real and if it is real then it is shocking. They succeeded, clearly.
If what I've said and shown you still hasn't convinced you, perhaps your fellow conspiracy theorists from Reddit will be able to. When this video was posted to /r/conspiracy this was an image shared by the top response:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-87w6DWoAAW6J_.jpg:large
For some reason it wouldn't embed, so you will have to click it. It details all the differences between the fake video and the actual Buckingham Palace. Because I'm not English and have never seen the Palace in person I personally would have never noticed how different the viral video's version is, I could mostly tell something was off with how the guy looked and interacted with his surroundings.
If you still don't believe maybe this breakdown will help:
http://www.thatsnonsense.com/naked-man-escapes-buckingham-palace-video-debunked/
And if you're still not convinced that the poor falling fella is an actor and is fine, then, in the least offensive way possible, I must say that you don't seem to want to see the truth of the matter. If you choose to disagree with my assertion, that's fine, it's only my opinion after all.
