Comments on the shut down of Honeyshed

I read this week of the shutdown of Honeyshed, the Publicis Groupe’s much-watched online-shopping venture, just months after it finally got up and running. The ill-fated creative experiment was the brainchild of David Droga but was birthed through a partnership between Mr. Droga’s agency, Droga5, hotshot production house Smuggler and funding from Publicis, which published reports put at about $25 million. Its aim was to reinvent the online-shopping experience to make it more entertaining and engaging for the 18- to 35-year-old-set. Users could digitally “window shop” brands via vignettes in which attractive youngsters peddle products on channels dubbed “Fun Shit” and “Kicks to Lids” before making online purchases.

With it’s collapse, I found the commentary more interesting than the actual closure itself.  Here are some comments found online pertaining to the shutdown, showing the passion online consumers have for such issues;

I suspect the failure lies in the fact that new media is a lovely place to buy, but a hard place to sell.
It’s a distinction a lot of ad folk haven’t come to understand because they are bored with traditional advertising and just want to have fun on someone else’s dime. I think the concept’s failure can be read in the name Honeyshed, which must be an inside joke—a play on Love Shack? Who know?

Of course, going back to my initial thought, what exactly is the point of Honeyshed, except perhaps the notion that if it took off, it could be sold before its inevitable collapse. I don’t think the notion of a young ditigal audience makes much sense. Consumer fetishism relies on desire and seduction. You can’t make make a joke of it, no more than you can turn a 30-second sketch into a movie.

In the final analysis, the whole thing lacked sincerity and the truth may be that contrary to Droga et al’s expectation, even 18 to 35 year men and women resent being treated like children.

No related posts.