This was like if Mitt Romney did an AMA: it came across as robotic and represented an inability to connect with people when it should have been insanely easy to do so.

RELATED: Stephen Colbert Discusses His Interview Process And Famed Bush Roast In Out Of Character Reddit Interview

But there’s something else at work here: a general misunderstanding of the internet from those whose productions are still reliant on visual media. We are more than a decade into a new millennium, and it seems like the Hollywood crowd still doesn’t understand how to successfully market in the digital age. This is not a universality, of course. There are some more adept at marketing on digital media than others. But the failure of Rampart‘s PR people to effectively market the movie online is clearly symptomatic of a general misunderstanding of how the internet works.

“AMA” stands for “Ask Me Anything.” Some people have the option of going for an “AMAA,” which means “Ask Me Almost Anything.” That second one tells you right off the bat there are certain questions the subject will just not answer, no matter what. But when you agree to having a celebrity come on a forum to answer questions, you should have some idea of what the forum is about. The most cringeworthy aspect of the Harrelson AMA was the disjointed sentences in the replies. Here are pieces of the responses throughout the session to illustrate the point.

well there was a lot of …the great thing about working with Oren is …he gives you an incredible playground. And all the tools… great direction, wonderful words to say…and inside of that he says “go play.”

Especially Brie, who initially that part was much smaller, just by virtue of her…the power of her personality

also you just feel completely safe and protected…Oren, he just won’t let you fail

When people speak, they tend to switch thoughts mid-sentence. Who does that when typing things out? Did they think this would make Harrelson sound more authentic? I read excerpts aloud and realized this is the kind of drivel you could probably hear verbatim if the movie was being plugged on an entertainment news program or late night talk show.

The problem is, the internet is a completely different platform from television. TV is all about creating moments to captivate audiences. Shows branded as “reality television” are perhaps the least realistic programs on the air right now. On the internet, everything happens in real time, and when you appear in a forum like Reddit, you need to come across as authentic and unscripted. The distance of television means politicians and public figures can get away with saying all sorts of nonsense without anyone being able to call them out on it effectively, with the occasional exception. The internet does not give you the same luxury. You need to be willing to speak off the cuff and have your facts on hand, because fact-checking through crowdsourcing is now more common than ever.

As any persuasive writer will tell you, the best arguments are the ones tailor-made to each specific audience. When you’re on Letterman, you crack a few jokes, recite the lines that the studio fed you to plug your project, and that’s it. When you’re interviewed by The New York Times, you speak more intellectually about the acting process and the themes addressed in the movie. And when you’re doing an AMA on Reddit, you drop the act and engage with real people. Some will be fans, some won’t, but if you’re just honest and it doesn’t seem like your answers have been planned out, people will respect you for it.

Of course, this isn’t really about Hollywood or Woody Harrelson or Reddit. It’s about presenting yourself as authentically as possible, because with the high level of skepticism you find on the internet these days, there is a lower tolerance for bullshit or hearing someone’s talking points.

Hollywood is in the business of creating moments, so allowing one to just pop up organically is unheard of. (This also applies to Washington.) That’s why insiders completely misunderstood how SOPA got shelved in the first place. TechDirt’s Mike Masnick explains:

I was amazed at how many people from the legacy music business believe, 100%, that the reason SOPA/PIPA were stopped was because Google stepped up its lobbying efforts. I can’t even begin to count how many conversations I had with people trying to explain to them that Google only played a small role in what happened, really jumping on the bandwagon pretty late in the game. It was a widespread group of internet users who spoke up, and that really has changed the equation. And Hollywood still can’t seem to wrap its mind around that.

RELATED: Defending Gervais: Why Every Awards Show Should Now Hire The Caustic Host

Mesnick adds that Hollywood might be in this state of reactive shock because it’s worried that it “no longer drives pop culture.” And for the most part, that’s true. But the reason people prefer comedians like Ricky Gervais to host award shows is because they’re no longer amused by industry toadies just getting up there, smiling awkwardly for the camera, and pretending the whole thing isn’t about Hollywood pleasuring itself. They want someone more raw and honest who’s willing to bite the hand that feeds them. We are slowly beginning to fade away from an era where we’re perfectly content to see such blatant fakery on television. People are more cynical about the media than ever, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

I’m not talking about pure honesty here. That’s a separate issue. But this is the 21st century. People need to learn how to engage with people without the aid of agents or communications directors. In the past few months, candidates for political office have done AMAs on Reddit that worked out very well, because they were willing to answer unconventional questions and drop certain formalities to fit in with the format.

McDonald’s started the trend to get people to talk about their great experiences at the fast food establishment. Unfortunately, not everyone had positive experience. According to The Street, people immediately took advantage of the trend to go after McDonald’s in a very public and devastating way.

While McDonald’s own tweets on the topic tended along the lines of “When u make something w/pride, people can taste it,” actual customers were less inclined to toe the company line. “I haven’t been to McDonalds in years, because I’d rather eat my own diarrhea,” read one top tweet by @Muzzafuzza. Another user, @Jetsonjetsonjet, referred readers to a viral video of a mouse crawling through a bag of hamburger buns.

Meanwhile, animal rights activist @michellevegan tweeted that “@McDonalds scalds baby chicks alive for nuggets,” and linked to a site run by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. It was retweeted more than 100 times.

McDonald’s actually responded to that last tweet, dismissing such claims as false.

h/t The Street

Movie marketing isn’t exactly an area we cover a lot here on the site but readers coming here mostly for politics should be interested in the one big crossover, talking points. Just like politicians (“kicking the can,” “taking the nation hostage”), anyone who follows the soul-sucking world of press junkets and talk show appearances can see actors repeating the same tired, studio-approved messages over and over again. In the case of this movie, the message just seems weird. To paraphrase, someone appears to have instructed Bateman and Reynolds to let the world know, “Yeah, this movie is just as dumb as it looks but it’s also really, really gross!”

I first noticed it during Bateman’s recent appearance on The Daily Show in which he informed Jon Stewart that, sure, body switch movies are old and boring, but this one was R-rated so that was different. It seemed, in Bateman’s skilled hands, to genuinely be an actor going off script to promote a slightly silly trifle. Bateman really is so charming that his admissions were refreshing.

Then, however, the studio released this viral video, and it became clear that this “off-script” conversation was as scripted as anything in the movie:

Now, for all I know, the movie really does transcend its plot (and, hell, I’ve always kind of enjoyed body switch movies), but that video really puts me off. Watching the two gifted actors having to pretend to “rebel” while clearly saying exactly what the studio wrote down for them is just painful. It’s “faux edginess with a clear agenda” reminds me of the immortal “No Adults Allowed” sketch from Mr. Show.

Still, while the marketing puts me off, I do find it pretty fascinating. Can anyone think of another movie that’s attempted to diss itself to sell it?

Now there’s a new marketing strategy out, in ads playing on News Corp. cable news networks but also across the dial, that features Fox News talent tag-teaming with Fox Business hosts – including one with Glenn Beck and somtime-fill-in Andrew Napolitano.

The ad begins “Two networks, twice the power,” and features ominous music over Beck and Napolitano addressing the camera from their respective studios. “America is in trouble,” says Beck. “The government is slowly killing the constitution and forgetting what makes us great.” Says Napolitano: “Personal freedoms are on the line. over-regulations are strangling small business.”

It ends by the pair declaring: “Two networks, solving America’s problems,” and the tagline, “Fox News: The Power To Inform, Fox Business: The Power To Prosper.”

The idea that either network is in the business of “solving America’s problems” is a stretch. But the new promo of grouping similar personalities on each network could pay dividends for FBN, a young network still fighting to attract more and new viewers, and to compete with industry-leader CNBC. Napolitano is a well-known host, thanks to his past and current work on FNC, and he’s actually on the way up at FBN too – he says he’ll begin hosting Freedom Watch nightly in prime time during the week beginning next month.

Other ads feature the teams of Megyn Kelly and Liz Claman and Bill O’Reilly and Eric Bolling.

While NBCU may be looking to separate NBC News and MSNBC further, News Corp. is hoping to tie FNC more closely to FBN, to boost the brand. Here’s the Beck/Napolitano ad:

—–
» Follow Steve Krakauer on Twitter

Not only that, they filmed it all. From Advertising Age:

“Bungalow 25, the Madrid-based independent agency that masterminded the “Crimes of Summer” scare campaign also planted a camera underwater to record the reactions of horrified scuba divers who thought they had stumbled across a murder victim. The video was sent to bloggers to spread virally and posted on YouTube. Seen up close, it’s clear the mannequin’s feet are cemented into a box that says ‘New channel. Fox Crime. Discover It.’
‘This isn’t just a simple ambient idea,’ said Julio Gálvez, executive creative director and one of three founding partners at seven-year-old Bungalow 25. “We aimed to find a new advertising channel. Their reactions were spectacular. The whole situation became so realistic that more than once we had to dissuade people from calling the police.’”

Yeah, that would have definitely been hard for me to forget. So hard that I’m purposefully making sure no TV channels are premiering any time near my next vacation. I mean, can you imagine if they had handled the launch of Fox Business. I can picture it now; a bunch of New Yorkers surprised one morning to see a bunch of dummies dressed up like suicidal stock brokers flying out of Wall Street windows.

Still, though, it’s a pretty hilarious idea. It’s just a good thing that none of those divers had heart problems. Check out the video of some of the reactions below and read more about the stunt here.

According to IEG, North American companies will spend about $1.55 billion on cause marketing efforts in 2009, a roughly 2% increase over 2008. MediaPost reports that 41% of Americans said companies should increase their spending on cause marketing. Additionally, a recent report by Cone Inc., a leader in the industry of cause marketing has identified 10 top trends in the world of cause marketing. One of the most interesting that they have spotlighted is dubbed: “a la carte Cause,” that is, leveraging online media, brands are engaging consumers to choose the causes the company will support.

As a digital strategist and Director of ThinkSocial, I am interested in ways that brands can utilize the power of social media, especially Twitter, to bring people together around the world to support social causes.

Here are some notable examples of social cause-marketing efforts:

· Retail chain Target and their “Bullseye Gives” campaign: The company will give 5 percent of its income to charity – about $3 million every week. For a short time, the company will let Facebook users decide how to allocate this money to a list of 10 charities.

· Staples “School Supply Drive”: Staples is again partnering with DoSomething.org to provide school supplies to children in need. Consumers can get involved by giving at the register, buying extra supplies to donate or running their own school supply drives in schools and communities.

In addition to my work at ThinkSocial, I am also helping to organize NYC Twestival. For those of you unfamiliar with the concept, Twestival is a global series of events held within a three-day period across the globe and is famous for harnessing the power of social media to bring people together for great causes.

On September 12^th, New York will host a Celebrity Bowling Tournament, in association with Brooklyn Bowl and Flavorpill to benefit non-profit charity, CampInteractive.

As part of the fundraising effort, SeamlessWeb, the nation’s leading online food ordering service, will be donating the change from every single transaction made on its platform. While it’s not known exactly how much the effort will raise, it is clear that given the success of the site and the number of transactions they do on any given day, it could be significant.

But the really interesting part is in the way they are integrating with Twitter. SeamlessWeb recently introduced a ‘Tweet this’ feature to their site, allowing customers to Tweet about their recent SeamlessWeb order. If you’ve ordered from them you may have tweeted something like this:

“Thanks @SeamlessWeb! Just ordered my meal online from Red Basil Thai Kitchen at http://www.seamlessweb.com“

On September 12th they will be change this message to:

“Just ordered my meal online from Ashiya Sushi and @SeamlessWeb donated 67 cents to @campinteractive! http://www.seamlessweb.com”

This is an interesting example of social cause marketing on so many levels:

1.  The campaign fits within the existing flow of the customer transaction

2.  It creates awareness without being disruptive

3.  It integrates with Twitter, without asking the customer to do any additional work

4.  It utilizes the brands core strengths, without deflecting from their message

5.  It drives attention to the cause, while raise money passively, not through donations

6.  Everyone wins; the user, the cause and the brand

“By combining a commitment to give back to the local community with social media tools like the “Tweet This” feature, we’re enabling our customers with both a reason to speak well of us, and the tools to do so easily,” said SeamlessWeb’s Director of Marketing Matt Johnson.

This example demonstrates that initiatives such as Twestival provide compelling opportunities for brands as they create natural online buzz as members of the digital media community blog and tweet extensively around the event. Leading up to the events this September, Twestival has already generated a tremendous amount of attention and has been picked up by national television, radio, online, and print publications including: The New York Times and Guardian, Mashable, PBS, and CNET.

With SeamlessWeb’s involvement and willingness to try something creative and untested, we hope this initiative will generate even more buzz and awareness and most importantly essential funds for the charities it supports through this initiative. We also hope that more brands will follow their lead and work with other Twestival’s around the world to support vital causes through integrated social cause marketing initiates.

You can find out more about NYC Twestival here.

Toby Daniels is an entrepreneur and digital strategist. He is the founder of SocialMediaWeek, cofounder and Director at ThinkSocial at the Paley Center for Media and facilitator of mass-collaboration. Dupe Ajayi contributed to this column.

In a report released Monday, advertising broker and technology firm Pontiflex says that marketers will pay publishers an average price of $2.27 for each reader they can convince to fill out a form with their real name and e-mail address, along with a few bits of personal data such as their Twitter handle, phone number or answers to questions about their shopping habits.

That hefty price suggests publishers should consider abandoning cheap ads sold for guaranteed prices and should instead try to use space on their Web pages to convince readers to turn over their personal information.

Sound frightening? Maybe the next step is asking everyone to send in a strand of hair for DNA testing when they subscribe! Truly, at the rate we’re going it’s just a matter of time before our lives as consumers turn into that scene from Minority Report where the subway ads change depending who is walking by them (video below). The truth of the matter, of course, is that people volunteer an enormous personal information about themselves online every day without ever being asked — I know more about the personal lives of some people I follow on Twitter but haven’t met, than I do about some of my close friends. It’s the asking that usually turns them off. So really it may just be a matter of connecting Twitter Search with IP addresses, or something like that. In the meantime…

This is the kind of viral marketing that executives dare not even dream about.  In fact, while outlets like Gawker have come under fire for their use of sponsored content like Bloodcopy, the folks behind AMC’s “Mad Men” are reaping huge PR dividends for free.  Their personalized icons have swept over Twitter like a nuclear daisy.

If you’ve never heard of “Mad Men,” that’s kind of the point.  AMC’s series about an early-sixties ad agency is high on critical acclaim, but hidden away on basic cable.  The show’s pitch-perfect period reproduction takes you right back to the days of 3-martini lunches, chainsmoking everywhere, and the kind of casual racism and misogyny that make last year’s presidential race seem all the more miraculous.  If Proust had been smoking a cigarette, this show is what it would have tasted like.

It all started innocently enough, as I perused a link roundup at my other web home, Asylum.com, yesterday morning.  I came across the AMC “Mad Men Yourself” application, and gave it a whirl.  The site lets you create a stylized version of yourself patterned after the show’s opening montage.  I liked the finished product, but itwas taking too long to download, so I skipped it.

Within hours, the Mad Men icons began dotting my Tweetdeck, like some martini-swilling Invasion of the Body Snatchers.  This put me in an awkward position, as I had spearheaded a movement to convert the White House Press Corps to South Park avatars.  The South Park tweeple are a very insistent bunch.  I made a silent pledge to hold firm against the onslaught.

I knew I was in trouble, however, when the originator of the South Park trend, Jake Tapper, crossed over.  As the day progressed, more and more of my Twitter pals made the switch.  Then, Tapper told me about the Mad Men suits (although he called them “ridiculous.”  Is that some kind of hipster slang for “awesome?”).  I feel like I’m inside some kind of internet horror show, The Stepford Tweeps.

Viral marketing is hit-or-miss at best.  For every “Blair Witch Project” (spoiler: it wasn’t real), there’s a ham-handed stunt like Bloodcopy.  The beauty of something like the Mad Men icons is that, even if you don’t catch lightning in a bottle, you haven’t really spent much.  If you score, you score big.

The appeal of the Mad Men app isn’t hard to understand.  Everything about the series’ look bespeaks cool, much like another recent icon-generator, Obamicon Me, which lets you personalize the famous Shepard Fairey campaign poster.

Perhaps the popularity of Mad Men will rise like a Mercury rocket in the Age of Obama, where it’s okay to be hip and urbane, and to laugh at our bygone selves.  After 8 years of “flyover country,” maybe it’s time for a little reciprocal cultural exchange.

That still leaves me with my own avataristic dilemma.  I went back and re-did my “Mad Men” icon last night, but I still haven’t made the switch.  I will let you decide.

Tommy Christopher is a freelance writer, blogger, and online journalist based out of New Jersey and Washington, DC. He has covered the progressive political scene and the historic 2008 elections, including live coverage from the Democratic National Convention in Denver, and becoming a freelance White House reporter in early 2009. This move follows a year in which he was able to break a number of big stories and was quoted in print and online by everyone from the LA Times and the New York Times to the Huffington Post and Hot Air. Tommy can also be found at his own blog: DailyDose.us. Follow him on Twitter here.