Archive for the ‘Crappy news’ Category

Shenanigans in the LG “Life’s Good” HD contest?

LG

Last week I posted the winner of the “Life’s Good” HD online film fest sponsored by LG.  The winner was a very, very impressive HD short film called “Nuit Blanche.”  You can see it by clicking here. But frequent video contest winner and friend of VCN, Lucas Ridley wrote me and explained that the whole contest was sort of one big clusterf%&k.  Lucas is a hang glider and submitted an excellent entry in LG’s “Sports” category.  You can see it here: A Leg to Fly on.

Though he submitted his entry on time and followed all the rules, for some weird reason, LG basically acted as if the entry didn’t exist.  Lucas’ dealings with LG were so odd that I asked him to share his story.  This is from Lucas:

Here’s the history:

* Made this film specifically for this contest in about a weeks time

* Made the Oct 16th deadline (had to mail in a physical DVD)

* Receive identical emails (on 16th and 17th) from two different people asking if this has been entered any where before and has it won any awards, my responses go unacknowledged.

* entries begin to appear on their website and youtube channel, except mine so I emailed on Oct 22nd asking when and where mine will be viewable, same day response was: “We’re not posting anything new for a while till we process the entries.”

* Nov 3 emailed to see if I could post the video to my personal account, response again came the same day: “OK to post on your personal acct.”

* Email sent on Nov 16th goes unanswered (month after entry deadline and my video is still not up anywhere): “Hi, I’ve looked at your updated website and youtube page and can’t find my submission, “A Leg to Fly On” on either of them? I’m kind of worried about what that means? Can you please give me a heads up? Thanks”

* Email sent on Nov 23rd gets answered the next day: “Hi, I’m just following up from my email a week ago since I haven’t heard anything yet.

From the response I received when I sent in my video it seemed that there wasn’t any problem with my video but I still don’t see it up on your youtube channel or your website. Please inform me of the status of my short film. Also, I never read in the official rules anything about a top 12, but there is a top 12 on your youtube page. Please let me know, I spent a lot of time and energy on this and I’m not getting a response back. Thank you” >>>>their response>>>> “Lucas

Not all films entered were posted on the LG FilmFest YouTube site. Keep watching the lgfilmfest.com site for more news about contenders.” >>>> That was the last I heard from them – and they never posted any more news about contenders.

* Over a month goes by and still my video is not viewable on their youtube channel nor on their website so I email them again on Jan 1st to no response: “… I was hoping you could give me a quick update on my film? I was also looking for the contest rules, but they were taken down …”

* Jan 10th follow up email with no response: “Hi, 10 days ago I emailed about getting information on where my short film is since I still have not seen it displayed on your site or on your youtube channel. Please advise, thank you”

* Jan 25th, my last email to them: “Hi, I am very concerned now that I have not heard any news or received a response from this email address in two months and the winners will be announced soon. Is my video being seriously considered for this contest? Thanks”

If you managed to read through that, there was no indication that my entry would have been disqualified for any reason, and they acknowledge that they did receive it.

Sketchiness:

* Lack of communication after it was obvious they were never going to put my video up on their website (my entry that I posted to my personal youtube acct has more views than all of the entries in the Sports category combined, so it’s not like it wasn’t watchable).

* Removing the official rules from their website

* they originally had entries like “The Moon – Vancouver Film School” which is like a year old, and clearly not made for this contest, but they renamed it something else and put it up like it was an entry, but since have taken it down.

* The quality of the other entries seem like they might be a similar story. Nothing created specifically for this contest (which wasn’t part of the contest rules or anything – to my memory at least since they’ve taken the rules down too -, just adds to the peculiarity), but it seems they just hand picked existing films out there, to give the illusion of high quality associated with the brand LG.

* There are only 5 entries shown for the Sports category. So it wouldn’t be a limitation of space. (did i mention that my single video has more views than all 5 of those entries combined? Not bragging, but just saying, it’s not like my video was unwatchable)

* The duplicate emails from two different email addresses asking if my film had won any awards before, of which I never heard a response from either, after my response to them.

* The “Top 12 Films” category on their youtube channel, now has been changed to just “Top Films” – neither of which were outlined in the official rules (again, to the best of my memory, but I’m 99.99% sure about this, since they took down their official rules)

My concern comes from a worry about the mistreatment of creators of content, like those reading this right now. My advice for the future is to never waste your time creating content for an LG contest in the future, because it won’t be given a fair chance and you will be ignored at best (unless it is a contest properly administered through youtube, like the one they did about two years back). I have learned, and advise others to do this, to copy and save the official rules of any contest you enter so you have something to fall back on if the rules are mischievously taken down, which if they are, you probably aren’t going to hear back from them anyways, but it never hurts.

I feel like this contest was just one in disguise to attract attention. Despite feeling like I fell into some advertising trap portrayed as a legitimate contest, I did still enjoy creating a short film that I’m proud of and others have seemed to enjoy, but I have learned my lesson to stay away from LG in the future and encourage others to do the same (to clarify this was LG Canada who put on the contest). Instead, spend your time on real contests that give our community a platform to display true user-generated work with a great deal of feedback and moderation and the best example of that so far has been the Doritos contest and I hope other contests begin to rise to that bar they’ve set, because this one feels like it took that bar and started clubbing baby seals with it. Okay, maybe that was a harsh ending, but a decent south park reference any way. What are your all’s thoughts on this? Did anyone else out there submit to this contest?

Ok, you’re back with Beardy now.  This is not the first time a suspiciously amazing video has won an LG video contest.  Last summer, I shot an entry for a contest were people where supposed to dance to the theme song for the new remake of FAME.  The Fame video contest was also sponsored by LG and at the last minute, an OUTRAGEOUS, over the top entry was submitted and wound up winning the $50,000 grand prize.  It’s called, The Art of Fame.

The Art of Fame and Nuit Blanche are the two most ELABORATE and professional video contest entries I have ever seen.  And both were made for video contests sponsored by LG.  Sure, both contests had big grand prizes and big money always attracts some pros, but is it possible that LG might be hiring or soliciting….ringers?  The winner of the $100,000 HD fest grand prize works for a well-known production company and the short was not created for the LG contest.  Is it possible that maybe someone at LG saw the short somewhere and then encouraged the filmmaker to enter it?

Sound far-fetched and pointless?  Well, guess what?  The head of a tech company once strongly encouraged me to enter his video contest.  The contest was his idea and he wasn’t happy with the submissions so went looking for someone who could do just want he wanted.  He saw some music videos I made on youtube and said if I made a similar music video for his contest I’d have a very good chance of winning <wink, wink.>    We stayed in touch during the whole production process and sure enough, I won.  My video was by far the best submission and the video even went viral but I never would have entered if I hadn’t been recruited by the sole judge of the contest.  So….ringers do happen.

Anybody else enter the LG contest?  If so, did you get jerked around at all?

Dueling Caskets (full of Doritos!)

Image from one of Doritos' Crash the Super Bowl winners; Casket

Image from one of Doritos' Crash the Super Bowl winners; Casket

Back in October, I wrote, directed and edited an entry for Doritos’ annual Crash the Superbowl contest entitled, “Rest in Chips.”  My commercial was about a dead guy who’s last wish was to be buried in a casket full of Doritos but to the surprise of everyone at his funeral, it turns out he faked his death and is alive inside the casket of chips that eventually gets knocked over.  Sound familiar?  It might if you watched the Super Bowl last night.  Because during the first quarter of the big game, Doritos aired the three winners of the Crash the Super Bowl contest and the third winning ad they showed just happened to be about a dead guy who’s last wish was to be buried in a casket full of Doritos but to the surprise of everyone at his funeral, it turns out he faked his death and is alive inside the casket of chips that eventually gets knocked over!

Unfortunately, it wasn’t MY fake-funeral/Casket-full-of-Doritos-that-gets-knocked-over entry.  It was another entry called “Casket” and it was created by a team of filmmakers from a “non-denominational megachurch” in LA called Mosaic that’s popular with aspiring filmmakers and actors. The church is headed by a well known author, producer and self-professed leader named Erwin Mcmanus and he funded the production of “Casket.”  (you can read about Mosaic and their Crash the Superbowl aspirations here)  Here’s their ad:

0

0

I’m sorry to say it but I suspect that the team that made “Casket” may have stolen several of their ideas from me.  How can that be?  Well first, here is the entry that I created for the Crash the Super Bowl contest, “Rest in Chips:”

0

0

Sure, they’re not on the same level technically, but there are so many similarities between the stories of “Casket” and “Rest in Chips” that I’ve had a hard time accepting that they’re just coincidences.  If you ignore the aesthetic differences between the two entries (camera quality, location, music) you’ll see that they share many common key elements.  (The kind of stuff you’d see in the scripts for each spot)  Really, the only significant difference in the two stories is WHY the two “dead” guys each decide to fake their deaths.  Other than that, in just 30 seconds, both ads manage to feature:

1. A dead man’s last wish to be buried in a casket full of Doritos

2. A “dead” man who turns out to actually be alive

3. A fake funeral orchestrated by the “dead” man as part of a nefarious scheme

4. A framed photo of the “dead” guy enjoying a bag of Doritos next to the casket

5. Shots of that guy in his casket buried up to his face in chips

6. Unsuspecting mourners who scream/gasp in surprise when the hoax is revealed

7. A climax in which the “dead” guy gets his comeuppance when the casket of chips is knocked over

That’s a lot for just 30 seconds, isn’t it!?  Well, the coincidences don’t stop there.  As it turns out, all of those elements can also be found in this crude animated storyboard that I made weeks before I went out and shot my entry:

0

0

Yeah…see where I’m going with this?  I created that storyboard as a test to see if I could fit all the dialogue and action into 30 seconds.  Then I posted it to youtube so that I could send the link to friends so they could give feedback on the idea.  The above version was posted to youtube on October 12th, 2009.  But that is actually the second version.  I posted the first version of the storyboard video on October 6th and named it “Doritos Storyboard.”  After about a week, a friend actually said to me, “aren’t you worried that another contestant could see that and steal your idea?”  I realized he was right and that I had made a dumb mistake.  Because the video was named “Doritos Storyboard,” any prospective Crash the Superbowl contestant who went to youtube to watch last year’s winning entries or other Doritos-related videos for inspiration could have seen my storyboard.  In fact, it would have appeared at the top of the page if the results were “sorted by date.”  So I pulled the original version and replaced it with the generically named “Dortest” version around October 12th.

The funeral photo used in "Casket"

The funeral photo used in "Casket"

A week or so after the submission period for the Crash the Superbowl contest closed, I saw “Casket” and I was flabbergasted.  I remembered the storyboard on youtube and immediately suspected that I had been ripped off.  I had to do something about it so I did what any self-respecting dork would do.  I blogged about it. I first compared the two ads in this blog post from November 19thA Tale of Two Caskets (full of Doritos.) Since “Casket” was so slickly produced, I was worried right from the start that it might make it to the finals.  So while Doritos was still evaluating all 4,000+ entries they received, I e-mailed them my concerns on December 9th.  They responded to my e-mail and said the company’s “legal team” would look into it.

Since the official rules said that Doritos judges were supposed to assign each entry a score, and since 40% of that score was supposed to be based on “originality and creativity,” I assumed that even if there wasn’t plagiarism, I uploaded my casket-full-of-doritos entry to the contest site first, so logically, that would impact “Casket’s” originality score.  And in a competition with 4,000+ submissions, the Top 6 videos would probably be decided by just fractions of a point.  So losing even a few originality points would end an entry’s chances of winning, right?

Boy was I wrong about that one.  On January 5th, 2010, “Casket” was announced as one of Doritos’ 6 CTSB finalists.  And man, let me tell you, I flipped the F%^& out.  I wasn’t just mad because a team of filmmakers that may have ripped me off had just won $25,000 and a trip to the Super Bowl, though.  In a way, I was much more upset with Doritos.  They knew that somewhere out there a filmmaker suspected that the “Casket” team had plagiarized his entry/storyboard.  There were tons and tons of awesome videos submitted to this year’s competition. Why did they have to pick the one video that they knew would drive some poor guy crazy and maybe even get them into legal trouble!?

The funeral photo used in "Rest in Chips"

The funeral photo used in "Rest in Chips"

A single question has been on my mind since I first saw “Casket” back in November.  “When did they come up with that idea?”  Obviously the entry was a very elaborate production.  Maybe they had spent months working on the thing.  If it turned out that the team came up with the concept for their entry prior to say, the start of October, then there was no chance they could have stolen the concept from me….unless they were mind readers.

I’m not insane and I’m not some jerk who likes ruining other people’s moments of glory.  I absolutely, positively do not want to paint anyone as plagiarists if they’re totally innocent.  I also really do not want to put my life on hold while I engage in a copyright battle with a megachurch and a multinational corporation if I don’t have to.  In the last few weeks I have exchanged many e-mails with FritoLay and the lawyer for the “Casket” team (yes…they already got a lawyer and it seems like he was hired just to deal with this issue.) I have asked them over and over and over and over to PLEASE, send me some kind of documents, materials or other proof that “Casket” was an independent creation that wasn’t wrongfully derived from my works.  My sincere hope has been that someone would want to provide me some kind of evidence that would put me, and my family and friends who support me, at ease.  I would have been happy just to see some copies of some e-mails that showed that their idea pre-dated the creation of my script for “Rest in Chips.”  If they could prove they were innocent, or even just offer a credible explanation, then I could apologize, drop the whole thing and move on with my life.

The beautifully drawn funeral photo from the storyboard video for "Rest in Chips"

The beautifully drawn funeral photo from the storyboard video for "Rest in Chips"

But even though the filmmakers behind “Casket” have known for weeks, and probably even months that some crackpot out in the suburbs of Chicago was accusing them of plagiarism they have not done one thing to counter my claims.  I have asked repeatedly for some shred of proof that they weren’t guilty of ripping me off.  But according to their lawyer, they don’t want to give me ammunition in case I sue them.

Let’s cut the BS here.  If there was some A%&hole running around the Internet, endangering my commercial’s chances of airing during the Superbowl and telling Doritos and the rest of the world that I might have stolen some of their ideas, you know what I’d do?  I’d shut that guy down immediately with a big facefull of proof.  I’d e-mail the guy and tell him he was full of s%^&.  I’d write my own blog posts and fill them with proof that my works were independent creations.  For God’s sakes, I’d offer to take a lie detector test if the guy wanted me to!  I would immediately do whatever it took to shut down a false accusation of plagiarism against me.

Now what I wouldn’t do is hire a lawyer if I had nothing to hide and I certainly wouldn’t keep my “proof” hidden from the world.  I think the thing that most makes me believe that I was ripped off is the fact that none of these people have ever contacted me to simply say “You’re wrong, and here’s why….”

The other thing that makes me think I was ripped off are the cold, hard, dirty facts.

Alive in a casket full of Doritos.  From "Casket"

Alive in a casket full of Doritos. From "Casket"

Here are my facts:  I wrote my script for “Rest in Chips” around October 1st.  I created an awesome-looking animated storyboard based on my script and first uploaded it to youtube on October 6th. That video could have been seen by anyone searching for Doritos-related videos up until about October 12th.  I shot my entry on October 25th, I posted my first rough cut to the web on October 28th and I uploaded my final entry to the Crash the Super Bowl contest site around November 5th.

Because Doritos and the Mosaic team would not even tell me WHEN the idea for “Casket” was born, I decided to do some digging myself.  And by “digging” I mean I just read the articles that showed up in my google alert notices.  The information below all comes from interview quotes from members of the “Casket” team.  These are my sources (1) (2) (3) (4)  Here’s what I’ve learned in the last few weeks:

1.  The idea for “Casket” was first suggested in a Mosaic pitch meeting that seems to have taken place in early October, probably around October 9th.

2.  The idea for “Casket” was pitched by one member of the group.  The group decided to shoot the idea and the person who suggested the idea then “wrote the original script.”

3. At least 4 other people are credited as having co-written or contributed to the script for “Casket.”

4. “Casket” was shot in one day on November 1st and the entry was uploaded just before the deadline on November 9th.

Alive in a Casket full of Doritos. From "Rest in Chips"

Alive in a Casket full of Doritos. "Rest in Chips"

As I said, members of the “Casket” team shared all of this information during interviews so unless they all lied to several reporters, the above points are facts.  And these facts line up perfectly with my theory of how I may have been plagiarized.  FritoLay has had a timeline of when I created the various incarnations of my Crash the Superbowl entry since mid-December.  I explained weeks ago that I wrote my script shortly after the Crash the Superbowl contest began and then created an animated storyboard version of my script and uploaded it to youtube on October 6th.

For roughly a week, the storyboard was on youtube and could be seen by anyone doing a search for videos tagged “Doritos.”  The “Casket” team has gone on record stating that from the day they decided to shoot an entry for this contest to the day they uploaded their video, only a month had gone by.  That means that their pitch meting seems to have happened right at the time my storyboard was visible on youtube.

Alive in a casket full of Doritos. From the video storyboard for "Rest in Chips"

Alive in a casket full of Doritos. From the video storyboard for "Rest in Chips"

I find it very hard to believe that not one member of a large, well-organized team of professional filmmakers went to youtube before their pitch session to research last year’s winning entries and watch other Doritos related videos.  I have known about the Mosaic pitch meeting for a while and my theory has been that one member of the team prepared for that pitch meeting by doing some Doritos research on youtube beforehand.  While there, they saw my storyboard, realized the idea would work great in one of Mosaic’s churches (I think they have 7 total) and probably figured that the concept was fair game and took it.  Now that I know when that pitch meeting took place, I suspect that my theory accurately describes how things happened.  And since it seems that as many as 5 people contributed to the story of “Casket,” that explains the differences between my works and the final version of the other team’s entry.

The goal of Doritos’ Crash the Superbowl contest was for the winners to score a spot in the “Top 3” on the USA Today ad meter.  If one of the Doritos finalists were to be ranked the best spot of the game, the creators would get a million bucks.  Second best would get the filmmakers $600K and 3rd would get them $400K.  The ad meter results are in and one Doritos ad actually scored the #2 spot.  But “Casket” wound up being ranked #14.  (click here for the full ad meter results)

I mention this because I want everyone reading this to understand that there is no big jackpot that I am trying to grab a piece of here.  All the makers of “Casket” got was $25,000 and I’m sure that money is already divided up and gone.  So my concerns aren’t part of some crass sue-a-church-and-get-rich-quick scheme.  For me, this is about principle and as I’ve told the lawyers at Doritos many times, my number one goal is simply to find out the truth about what the heck happened here.

Now that the contest is all over, I really don’t know what I should do next.  Should I get a lawyer?  Should I seal myself up in a casket full of Doritos and pretend this never happened?  What the heck is the little guy supposed to do in this country when he suspects that some giant megachurch with deep pockets and lawyers on retainer infringed on his copyrights?

Right now, the only thing I know for sure is that next year, I’m entering Careerbuilder’s Super Bowl commercial contest.

BTW:  I normally post under the pseudonym “Beardy” but here’s info about the real me.  Ironically, I do not actually have a beard.  If anyone (even a member of the “Casket” team) wants to contact me I can be reached at Videocontestnews@gmail.com.

Avoid like the plague: DocSniper.com

docsniper

NOTE:  Our traffic has gone up a good bit thanks to the Crash the Superbowl posts.  So if you’re new to the site, thanks for visiting.  If you’re looking for a place to promote your Doritos commercial, scroll down to the next post.  But if you feel like reading some non-CTSB video contest news, scroll your eyes down to the next paragraph.

There are lot of reasons NOT to enter certain video contests.  If the winner is picked by a public vote, you should probably stay out of that fight.  If the prize is really small that means the company is cheap and might not even pay up if you win.  But the most offensive red flag is a contest that charges you an entry fee.  All I can say about that is Fuuuuu*k that noise.  Finally, I try to avoid contests that are run by non-U.S. based companies.  For one, those contests are usually open to everyone, everywhere which means that your competition is THE ENTIRE FREAKING WORLD.  But more importantly, if you have a problem with that contest, what are you going to do?  Fly over to their home country and sue them?

So those are what I consider to be deal-breaking red flags.  That said, I think I have officially discovered the WORST video contest I have ever seen.  Somehow they managed to pull off the rare, 4-red-flagger contest here.  It’s “Doc Sniper’s Make Some Noise Video contest” and it immediately comes off as suspicious because the point of the contest is incredibly vague.  Check out this description:

6

That’s it?  Make a video with music in it?  What the heck is the point of that?  Ohhh..I know.  The point is that to enter the contest, you have to pay a $10 ENTRY FEE!  Pretty much any filmmaker will already have some kind of project that includes music in it.  So maybe a ton of them will decide to take a shot, pay the 10 bucks and enter to win the massive $500 jackpot!

This just has “scam” written all over it.  The winner of the $500 prize is picked by the “Doc Sniper” community.  So think about that; you have to PAY to enter the contest and then if you want the prize, you have to get a bunch of people to register to the site to vote for you.  I repeat, Fuuuuuuu*k that noise.

I kind of feel bad for ripping on DocSniper.com because after looking through the site, it seems to be the passion project of some young entrepreneurs hoping to build a new social networking site.  I don’t think they actually want to rip people off but based on the business model they are presenting, I think that it’s inevitable that people are going to get screwed.  Basically it looks like they are trying to build a pyramid scheme for video contests; if 100 people each pay 10 bucks to enter the contest then 50% of that money goes to the “winner” and 50% goes to Doc Sniper.  According to the site, it is their goal to do one contest like this every month.  But so far, just 3 people have entered the “music” contest.  Are they still going to pay out the 500 bucks if they only take in $30 in entries fees?

The final red flag here is a little weird but there are several videos on the site from “Doc Sniper” himself in which he explains certain aspects of the site.  Click right here to visit the site and watch one of these videos.  (best example is on the front page in the upper right hand corner)  Something is weird about Doc Sniper.  It took me a second to catch on but the guy in the video is doing a fake American Accent.  I kept poking through the site and in the forum, someone mentions that Doc Sniper is based in Australia.  So there you go, the final red flag.  And this red flag is so scary it has a picture of an even redder flag on it!  The people behind this site are going out of their way to make it appear like they are based in the US (besides the accent, they seem to really drive home the fact that prizes are paid in US dollars.)

Like I said, I feel bad for coming down so hard on this site.  Despite the weird fake accent, “Doc Sniper” even seems like a nice guy.  So Doc, if you have a google alert set for your name and you see this, I recommend that you drop the entry fee idea ASAP.  There are just way, way too many free video contests out there for the concept ever to catch on.

A tale of two caskets (full of doritos)

FEBRUARY 8th, 2010 UPDATE: In the post below I explain that I suspect that my Casket-full-of-Doritos idea for the Crash the Superbowl contest might have been stolen by another team of filmmakers.  Well, the suspicious entry, “Casket” went on to score a spot in the finals and last night it aired during the Superbowl.  Since I first wrote this post I’ve learned a lot about the other entry and I am more convinced than ever that I was plagiarized.  For a more up to date version of this story, click here:  http://videocontestnews.com/2010/02/08/dueling-caskets-full-of-doritos/

———————-

Beardy is camping out to buy tickets for tonight’s 12:01AM screening of Twilight so while he’s away I thought I’d step in and do a little self-promotion. I also wanted to share my Doritos hard luck story. Like pretty much anybody reading this site, I submitted an entry for this year’s Crash the Superbowl contest. And here is that very entry now!


Be honest, it’s the greatest thing you’ve ever seen right? I’m super proud of my submission but I know that the competition out there is tough. And I was totally ok with the fact that with thousands of entries coming in, 6 teams of professional filmmakers with deep pockets and Red cameras and fancy dollies would probably come along and take all the finalist spots. And like I said, I was totally cool with that. But then….I saw this:

Ahhhhh! Some team of professional filmmakers with deep pockets and a Red camera and a fancy dolly came along and filmed an idea a whole lot like mine! Man, that’s a bummer. The coincidences between that spot and mine are just crazy, aren’t they? When 4000 people each try and come up with an idea for a commercial for the same product there’s obviously going to be some overlap, but damn, there’s a lot of overlap here. Of course, I’ve seen a lot of CTSB entries that have really similar ideas. (For instance, how many Doritos-as-a-paper-football and dorito-loving-zombies spots have you watched in the last few weeks?) But of the 2200 or so Crash entries I’ve watched, I don’t think there are two of them that share more common elements than these two casket-full-of-doritos entries. I mean, it’s not just that both videos are funeral scenes. It’s that both videos include:

1. A dead man’s last wish to be buried in a casket full of Doritos
2. A funeral for that guy that turns out to be fake
3. A big, framed photo of the “dead” guy enjoying a bag of Doritos next to the casket
4. Shots of that guy in his casket buried up to his face in chips
5. A climax in which the “dead” guy gets his comeuppance when the casket of chips is knocked over

That’s sort of a lot of similarities to squeeze into 30 seconds, isn’t it? I have to wonder, what the heck happened here? Is this just a case of really bad luck or is the CIA monitoring my brainwaves as part of some kind of scheme to control the masses via secret messages hidden in a superbowl commercial? There’s no chance that another team of filmmakers were somehow (gulp) inspired by my entry, is there?

My entry, Rest in Chips was uploaded on Friday, November 6th and the other video, The Casket, appeared online a few days later. I might be paranoid but I’m not crazy enough to think that the makers of the other entry saw Rest In Chips and then ran out the next day and rented a church so they could make their own version of my spot. So I was left with only one conclusion; this was just a giant coincidence…nothing more.

But then it finally hit me; I am an idiot. After I wrote my script I created and animated storyboard so I could see if I could fit my entire idea into 30 seconds. On October 6th, I uploaded that storyboard animation on to youtube. Then I sent the link to a few people and asked for ideas and feedback. During that time, the video was set to “public” and could be seen by anyone. One of my friends even said to me “why did you put that on youtube? What if someone steals your idea!?” And I laughed and laughed at that notion. And then I stopped laughing because I realized I had made a very stupid mistake. I named the video “Doritos Storyboard.” Because the word “Doritos” was in the title, any CTSB contestant who went to youtube to study last year’s winning entries or actual Doritos commercials could have found and watched my storyboard.

I’ve been burned by plagiarism before so I went back to youtube and deleted the storyboard. But by then it had already been up for like a week. A few days later, I changed some of the dialogue in my script and created a slightly tweaked version of the animated storyboard. On October 12th I uploaded that video to youtube except I named this one simply “dortest” so that it would be hidden from youtube’s search engine. It’s still online. Here it is:

I hate to think the worst of people like this but if you think I’m going overboard, try a little experiment. Open The Casket in one window and my storyboard video in the other. Then hit “Play” on them as fast as you can so you can watch them simultaneously. The shots line up better than Dark Side of the Moon and The Wizard of Oz. I can maybe understand that two separate filmmakers could come up with the same ideas, but what are the odds they’d use the same site gags at the same moments??

I really have no idea what to think about this. I know it’s just speculation on my part but I think I might have declare shenanigans on the makers of The Casket. At the very least, I think it’s plausible that somewhere out there, another filmmaker who was planning on entering the CTSB contest went on to youtube and searched for “Dortios” related videos. If they “Sorted by date,” my storyboard would have been right up in their face. The storyboard seems too crazy to ever shoot (seriously, what kind of a nut would get a real casket and have a real grave dug?) so maybe they assumed it would never really be filmed and so the concept was fair game.

Or maybe it was the CIA. I dunno. At this point I’m pretty open to any possibilities.

1/6/2010 UPDATE: Well, Doritos announced their Top 6 finalists on Monday and I was extremely disappointed to see that “The Casket” made the cut. For making the top 6 they receive $25,000, a trip to the superbowl and a chance to see their ad air during the game. If their ad does air, they could win a bonus of up to 2 million dollars.

After writing this blog post I contacted Doritos and informed them of my plagiarism concerns and explained the situation. I received a response saying that the Doritos legal team would look into the matter.

So even though the company’s lawyers knew there might be a chance the idea was stolen the judges decided to choose it anyway. Since 40% of a video’s score was based on “originality” I cannot understand how “The Casket” could have gotten a high enough score to make the Top 6. There were 4000 entries. Common sense tells you that a fair judging system would yield many videos that were just fractions of a point away from making the top 6. So a serious deduction in any category should theoretically sink any videos chances.

Now that Doritos has chosen “Casket” as a finalist, a new and even bigger problem has presented itself. Even if the idea was not stolen from me, “Casket” should have been disqualified because it infringes on my copyright. Copyright infringement can happen on accident but that does not give the infringer a free pass to benefit from their actions. Unintentional copyright infringement is still copyright infringement. My storyboard animation for “Rest in Chips” was first posted to the web the first week in October. The version that is on youtube now was uploaded October 12th. On October 29th I posted the first rough cut of my entry to my youtube channel. It, and several other rough cuts are still there. That first rough cut was on line 4 days before “Casket” was even filmed. And finally, my entry was uploaded to the contest site well before “Casket” was.

This all means that I am the owner and creator of the “Dead man has his last wish to be buried in chips fulfilled but during the funeral he is revealed to be alive inside the casket full of chips that gets knocked over” story idea. If a commercial was running on TV right now that was as similar to “Casket” as my entry, storyboard and rough cuts are, the judges would never have been able to select “Casket” as a finalist because Doritos would be sued for IP theft and copyright infringement regardless of whether or not the concept was intentionally stolen. My rights as an independent filmmaker are the same as a multi-million dollar corporation. Just because my storyboard or entry have not aired on TV, it does not mean my Intellectual Property rights don’t count.

Since Doritos knew that I was concerned about plagiarism and since they knew that I have proof that I was the first person to publicly release this idea, I feel personally offended that they chose to ignore my rights and concerns. Back in the newspaper days, they used to say “never pick a fight with a guy who buys ink buy the barrel.” Let’s update that statement for the modern age and say that you should “never pick a fight with a filmmaker who has a blog and nothing to lose.”

More details about these new developments here: http://videocontestnews.com/2010/01/04/one-of-the-crash-the-superbowl-finalists-revealed-early/ and here: http://videocontestnews.com/2010/01/05/doritos-2010-crash-the-superbowl-finalists/

Dude with a lot of free time wins Horror contest

homerunn8

A few weeks back I blogged about the Home Run Inn Halloween Video Challenge. I love the concept (make a horror film featuring a Home Run Inn Pizza) but hated the execution (the winner of the $2,500 grand prize will be determined by web votes.) This week, Home Run Inn announced the winner of the contest. So…here’s the type of winning video you get when you let “the public” decide the results. The actual video was annoying to embed so click on the image to view.

homerunn9

First Place winner. Prize: $2,500

That is easily one of the worst videos I have ever seen win a contest. So how did this one win?  That’s easy to explain actually….the guy who made it apparently just stayed up every night voting for himself over and over again.  And what’s amazing is that technically, this wasn’t even cheating!  Home Run Inn made it very, very easy for contestants to stuff their own ballot boxes.  To vote, users had to register an e-mail address and then they could cast up to 15 VOTES A DAY for the video of their choice.  And the rules say absolutely nothing about not creating fake accounts.  So technically, the winner of this contest actually played by the rules…the stupid, crappy rules.  In the end, the winning video received more than 40,000 votes. Could 2,500 bucks really be worth all that work???

I wasn’t following the voting on this contest but the other contestants were. The comment box that went with the winning video is pretty ugly. People are not happy with the way things went down at all. Some contestants did keep track of the voting and the winner, “Foreseen Voices” would go up by thousands of votes in the middle of the night. And then, whenever someone would post a critical comment, a dozen, clearly fake comments (consisting of mostly random words) would appear so that the negative comment would be pushed off the page. Here are some of the more interesting comments that they tried to bury:

lyricopera2 says:

This is a lousy video in every way. Obvious duplicate accounts, and just a sad overall video. Nothing about this video is original, funny, slick, creative, or good in almost anyway. It is sad that this video is going to represent the entire contest. How about a contest based on creativity and execution rather than I’ll make 5 million accounts and carpal tunnel myself voting for it in my mom’s basement.

dpmotu3 says:

How come every time somone leaves a negative comment anther person obviuosly supporting the video comes on and leaves a stupid one line comment just enough times to get it off the front page??

mmsedm says:

People have viewed this video almost 15,000 times?!?
It has more votes in this short time span than it did in the longer Round 1 voting. What a joke this contest is! (If you can call it a contest.)

libnotice1 says:

why are people leaving bad comments? Maybe it is because no one understand how this video can get votes like crazy in the middle of the night. Maybe it is also because no one likes entering a contest you can’t win because no one can keep up with a video that is somehow getting 6000 votes a day.

Kirk LaSalle says:

This video had over 8000 votes in the fist 24 hours.. LOL when the votes get audited…(and they DO get audited)

LOL he’ll be in for surprise! LOL

“Kirk Lasalle” was wrong. There was no audit because the rules technically allowed all the activities that everyone was complaining about.  And these guys weren’t the only repeat voters by the way. The vote counts of many of the top 10 finalist videos are ludicrously high and there were plenty of accusations thrown at other filmmakers. So the whole thing was one big ClusterF#$&.

If you look at the contest website it’s immediately clear that Home Run Inn realizes they screwed up. They actually post a sort of apology NEXT TO the picture of the contest winner. It really comes off as a sort of diss against the guy. It’s like saying “ok, we screwed up and here’s the guy that wrecked the contest for everyone else by staying up all night voting for his own video over and over.”  Here’s the text of the announcement:

Thank you to everyone who participated and voted in this year’s Video Challenge. We appreciate everyone’s comments regarding how the contest should be judged in the future years. This is only our second year, so we take all comments/concerns into consideration. We are already talking about ways to make this contest better for next year and would like you to know that your feedback has definitely helped us! Something we are considering is adding in judge’s picks to the finalist round so that all videos, even those entered late in the contest, have a fair chance.

This was a really fun idea for a video contest and if judges had been in charge of picking the winner I would have entered in a second. So hopefully a new, improved version of the contest will be back next year.

Cheaters CAN prosper!

twirl

Temptation, thy name is TwirlTV. For the last few days I have been wrestling with an ethical dilemma. To force myself to do the right thing I’ll blog about my mildly-evil plan rather than carry it out.

I don’t know what Twirl TV is. Some type of Hulu thing maybe? Who cares? Point is they’re holding a video contest that seems designed to reward cheaters. The idea is that you make a 15 or 30 second promo for, or a 3 minute parody of, your favorite TV show. Then you upload the thing to youtube and forward the link to Twirl TV within 6 hours of the upload time so they can keep track of it.

Now, here’s the BS part: Whichever video has the highest VIEW COUNT by October 16th wins $1,000.

Can you believe that? What is the friggin’ point!? It is so easy to increase your view count on youtube it’s embarrassing. Obviously you can just sit at your computer hitting the play button over and over but with the help of a very basic add-on to your internet browser you can race to the top of any “highest view count wins” contest in no time at all. Because I couldn’t believe the rules of this contest I wrote the organizers. Here is the e-mail I sent them:

“I have a question about the Twirl TV video contest. I wanted to enter but I saw that the winning video will be the one with the highest view count on youtube. Getting a high view count on youtube is very, very easy. You just need to know a few super easy computer tricks and you can automatically rack up views. How are you guys going to ensure that a cheater doesn’t win the contest? I’d hate to spend my time shooting a video only to find out some guy with an auto-refresher won by a landslide.”

And here is the actual response I got from Twirl TV:

“Thank you for you interest in our contest. We understand the possible use of automatic refreshers and developed a judging prize that is equal in value. The judging panel will consist of a TV producer and two of our top two Twirl TV users. We look forward to seeing your video and i will gladly answer any additional questions.”

-contest@twirltv.com

Translation: We know and we don’t care. The people behind this contest understand that this “view count” race is going to be won by a cheater. They’re also giving away a $1,000 video camera to the video they like best so who cares about the view count contest? I do, that’s who. This is just total and complete laziness on the part of the organizers of this contest. Oh, laziness and stupidity.  A “highest view count wins” contest could only be dreamed up by people who have no clue how the internet works these days. These type of people keep hearing about Twitter and yotube and Digg and facebook and they feel the need to jump on the viral video/social networking bandwagon even though they don’t know where the bandwagon is going or why.

At some point, the marketing people who came up with this contest had to explain it to the tech people who were supposed to set it up. I’m a tech guy and I’ve had to deal with marketing people before and some of them can be really thick-headed. They are “idea people” who get tunnel vision when they think they have an ingenious plan. Maybe some IT nerd tried to speak up and suggest how easy it would be for someone to get an artificially high view count. But the marketing people didn’t care. As long as it LOOKED like a lot of people had watched these promos then they could tell their bosses that the contest was a huge success. “We’re happy to report that the video contest entries had a combined view count of over 200,000!” they’ll say. “That means we exposed our brand to 200,000 people and only spent $2,000. Look how awesome at marking we are!”

After I got the e-mail back from Twirl TV I honestly thought good and hard about entering and then doing the things it would take for me to ensure a win. There are still 8 days to go in the contest and right now the most viewed video in the competition only has 1,700 views. Pffffft. I could shoot and upload a video today and have 1,700 “views” by midnight. But I’ve decided that $1,000 just isn’t worth the guilt I’d feel.

However….that guilt wouldn’t extend beyond my own head.  If I were to upload a video for this contest and then auto-refresh myself to a view count victory I would technically not be cheating.  BECAUSE THE RULES OF THE CONTEST DO NOT PROHIBIT SUCH ACTIVITY.  There’s no way that Twirl TV could ever track which IP addresses your video’s views came from but even if they could, replaying your own video over and over is not against the rules.  So if you’re in the mood to make an easy $1,000 go knock your self out.

How to screw up a great idea for a video contest

homeruninnpizza2

In the last week I’ve gotten a few facebook messages from friends about Home Run Inn Pizza’s “Halloween Video Contest.”  This is happening because my friends all know that if there’s anything I love more than video contests it’s Pizza and Halloween

The idea for this contest is one of the best I’ve ever heard; make a horror film that includes a Home Run Inn Pizza.  Now….take a second to think about that.  You already have 3 great ideas you can film, don’t you?  How about Night of the Living Pizzas!?  Or Pizzaface the serial killer that wears a mask made of pizza!?  Or maybe a giant Pizza the Hutt type pizza blob starts getting some payback for all the pizza we’ve been eating and starts eating people!?

It’s great to see a contest that actually has a unique concept and isn’t just “shoot a commercial for us so we don’t have to pay an ad firm to do it.”  Even the contest website is one the absolute nicest I’ve ever seen; cool layout, easy to use and filled with cute monsters and pictures of delicious pizza.

No, how about I eat YOUR face!?

No, how about I eat YOUR face!?

There is only one grand prize in this competition.  First place will get you $2,500 but ten runners-up will each get 12 free pizzas (and Home Run Inn is like the best frozen pizza out there) and a flip video camera.

Even though there aren’t a bunch of big prizes, I was ready to start shooting just because I know me and my friends would have a ton of fun making a pizza-based horror film.  I bet you would too.  But don’t start charging up your camera battery yet.  The way this contest is being run is screwed up that no one should even bother to enter.

Here’s how the winner is selected:

  1. The submission period runs from 9/21/09 to 10/19/09
  2. The submission period is also the voting period.  Viewers cast a vote for their favorite video during this time.
  3. At the end of the submission/voting period the 10 videos with the most votes become the finalists.  Their scores are then reset.
  4. “Round two” starts and runs until 10/26.  During that time, viewers again vote for their favorite video.
  5. Finally the video with the most votes, wins.

SCREW….THAT……NOISE.  That sucks!  Any contest that lets viewers pick the winners sucks already but this plan seems like it was designed to make sure a really crappy video winds up the winner.

Google "pizza zombie" and you'll get some strange results

Google "pizza zombie" and you'll get some strange results

The biggest problem is that voting is happening during the submission period.  Right now, the video in First Place has 1,422 Votes!  The deadline is still 20 days away but anyone who entered right at the start of the contest has a gigantic advantage over people who submit later.  How is anyone who uploads a video today going to be able to catch up to 1,422 votes?  And to make things worse, all you have to do to vote for a video is register your e-mail address.  In the end, the winner will be whoever feels like registering the most accounts and voting for themselves over and over.

So this is a contest that you should stay a million miles away from because it will only break your heart.  What a fricking bummer.  You know what though?  It’s a pretty effective marketing campaign.  I seriously need some Home Run Inn Pizza now.

The ugly side of video contests

I really enjoy entering video contests. Each contest I enter is a new creative challenge that requires a different solution. Thanks to the contests I’ve entered I’ve become a much sharper filmmaker so it’s a great way to improve your skills. And of course, I also really like winning and getting big checks in the mail for my work.

But there’s a lot about video contests that frustrate me.  Contest organizers sometimes don’t play by their own rules and sometimes contestants just flat out cheat in an effort to win. And that’s why I started this blog. My hope is that if someone shines a little light on the negative aspects of video contests, people will be forced to do better and play fair.

I think the thing that bothers me most about video contests is the lack of civility and good sportsmanship. Greed, jealousy and desperation can make people go a little crazy.  Throw in the anonymity that the internet provides and you’ve got a recipe for sabotage and trash talk.  For example, in a score-based competition, how many times have you seen your star rating drop mysteriously in a very short amount of time? How many times have you gotten ugly, anonymous comments about one of your videos? Do other contestants really think that the judges will see that youtube user “rudeboy742” thinks your entry “sucks goat ass” and then think to themselves, “yeah! This video does suck goat ass!?”

A few days ago I wrote about suspicious voting activity in the Butterfinger contest. The next day, someone going by the name “Douche Pumper” (yes, that’s what he called himself) left a very angry, very depressing comment on that blog post. Here it is:

"Douche Pumper" turned out to be Dallas filmmaker Justin S*****

"Douche Pumper" turned out to be Dallas filmmaker Justin S.

Wow. Talk about someone who is bitter about being fat and having a small ding-dong. You think anyone really wants to listen to some fat, red-bearded turd ramble on about how disgruntled he is over video contests? They don’t. Loser.

Get a life and get a job, you lazy f—. And, better yet, why don’t you make your own videos and actually compete in these contests. Then someone might actually care about what you have to say. Until then, have fun watching your website float off into the ether of Internet sites never visited.

It’s always the fat guys with little ding-dongs who start sites like this. Like Harry Knowles.

Anonymous Coward. <—That means you. Not my signature.

It’s obvious what has happened here, right?  One of the contestants in the Butterfinger contest saw that I was questioning the suspicious voting activity and are pissed that I suggested that they may have been doing something less than ethical to win that contest.

Except….that’s not what happened. Though the comment was left anonymously it was pretty easy to figure out where it came from.  I added a fancy piece of code to this wordpress blog that tells me where visitors are from and how they got here.  I checked the program logs and saw that the comment came from a visitor from Dallas, TX who arrived at the site via a google search for the name “Justin S*****.”

A few weeks ago I did a blog post about a Dallas filmmaker named Justin S***** who flagrantly plagiarized the work of frequent video contest winner, Jared Cicon. Justin copied Jared’s 2008 winning Taxlsayer.com video for a contest held by ForRent.com. He not only plagiarized the concept he even copied the tone and pacing and locations of Jared’s video. I wouldn’t have even mentioned it on the site except that Justin’s rip-off actually won first place and 10 grand from ForRent.com. Jared graciously said he didn’t mind the plagiarism but Justin S. never bothered to get his OK until other people called him out on his theft.  All around it was just a very uncool thing to do.  To see Jared Cicon’s original Taxslayer video, click here and to watch Justin S*****’s ForRent.com video, click here.  To read the blog post that got Justin S***** so angry, click here.

So it looks like Justin S. found the post about him while googling himself. He got angry and needed to unleash his venom (he also unleashed in a rather ugly way on the people on the ForRent site who also accused him of plagiarism.) But if Justin left a comment on my post about him then everyone would realize it was he who was obsessed with the size of my “ding-dong.” So he left the comment on the Butterfinger post to make it look like someone from that contest was the anonymous jerk. And that’s the part that really bothers me. Not only did he say a bunch of ugly (and wildly incorrect BTW) stuff, he also tried to frame one of the butterfinger finalists.

If Justin thought that what I said about his ForRent.com winning video was incorrect or unfair, he could have just e-mailed me and said so. I would have even been happy to post some kind of rebuttal from him or maybe even take down the original post. But instead, her spewed out a bunch of weird bile.  Just for fun, I’ll address some of Justin’s points:

“Wow. Talk about someone who is bitter about being fat and having a small ding-dong. You think anyone really wants to listen to some fat, red-bearded turd ramble on about how disgruntled he is over video contests? They don’t. Loser.”

Not actually a photo.  Not pictured, a cartoon ding-dong

Not actually a photo.

Do you see what’s going on in this guy’s head? He doesn’t seem to realize that the mascot of this website isn’t an actual photo of me. I don’t look anything like that guy. I just thought it was a funny piece of clip art so I picked “beardy” as The Video Contest News’ mascot. The thing that really speaks volume’s about this person’s maturity level is his obsession with “ding dong” size. Why is Justin S***** so hung up on penis size? I’m no psychiatrist but I’ve seen enough episodes of Frasier to make an educated guess.  Also, I am not disgruntled.  I am totally gruntled with video contests!  I don’t want to give an exact number but I have won A LOT of money thanks to video contests in the last two years.  Also, Beardy’s beard is really more brown than red, isn’t it?

“And, better yet, why don’t you make your own videos and actually compete in these contests. Then someone might actually care about what you have to say..”

Why would someone be into video contests enough to start a blog devoted to them and yet never shoot entries themselves? For the record, I shoot maybe 3 contest entries a month and as I said, I do win….a lot.

It’s always the fat guys with little ding-dongs who start sites like this. Like Harry Knowles.

How does Justin S***** know how big Harry Knowles’ penis is?  I don’t know and I don’t want to know.  Wait a second, they are both from Texas.  Maybe…um, never mind.

At the end of Justin’s comment he slams me for writing this blog anonymously….and then signs off anonymously with the name “Douche Pumper.”  (Why would he call himself Douche Pumper??)

Ok….so, I understand that the irony here is getting pretty deep.  I write a blog under a pseudonym where I call out cheaters, bad sports and crappy contests and Justin S***** criticizes me for doing that and then tries to make it look like some innocent contestant from the Butterfinger contest did it.

This is a good time for me to explain why I do things the way I do here on VCN.  I’m very, very proud of my video work and it’s been very tempting to post about my latest wins here. This site could also be a great tool for building a personal fan base and for getting votes for videos when I need them.  But I’ve decided that I should keep my work out of this blog, at least for now. The reason? I am worried about retribution from people like Justin S*****. Like I said, I want to see video contests cleaned up and so I’m going to be bringing attention to people who are making video contests less fun for the rest of us. Now imagine if my name and a list of my work was available on this site. Many video contests are basically popularity contests. If a guy like Justin S***** is so bitter and angry that he has to make fun of a cartoon mascot’s beard and penis size then it’s not a giant leap to assume that he might also try and sabotage a stranger’s contest entries in retribution for them pointing out his inappropriate actions.  Long story short, if you act like a jerk I am going to call you out on it. But I refuse to give bad people the tools to wreck my chances in whatever contests I’m currently in.

Video contests are awesome but guys like Justin S***** make them less awesome.  These are the guys that aren’t just satisfied with getting their friends to vote for their entries, they also have to get their friends to give bad scores to their competition.  These are the guys that create fake youtube accounts so they can make it look like “the people” all agree that your work sucks.  These are the guys start fights in the comments sections of a contest’s website.  These are the guys that make us all look bad and these are the guys that convince companies that video contests are just not worth all the hassle.  Guys like Justin S***** are the ones that want to wreck a good thing.  But you don’t need to let these angry people get away with it.  If someone is harassing you in a contest, let us know and we’ll try and give them some of the attention they obviously crave so badly.

Conan’s car contest: Something is rotten in the state of California

I had planned to just do a short little post about this but the more I look into it the more suspicious this whole thing gets. Something shady seems to have happened with the “Conan, please blow up my car” video contest. Let me start from the beginning before I lay out the case….

Shortly after taking over the Tonight Show, Conan O’Brian decided that there had to be a more interesting way to dispose of a “clunker” than just trading it to the government for some cash. So he announced the “Conan, please blow up my car” video contest. If you had a really crappy car you were supposed to create an interesting, creative video explaining why your car sucked and why you deserved to have it blown up and replaced by Conan with a brand new Lexus.

Since this contest was promoted on the Tonight Show for a few weeks they got a flood of entries. In all, 951 videos were submitted. Earlier this month, this video was selected as the winner:

Grand Prize Winner. Prize: A new Lexus Hybrid

Sure that’s a really crappy car but the video is as simple as can be. The rules of the contest encouraged participants to create over the top videos though. Judging was supposed to break down the score like this: Originality (50%) and Creativity (50%).

So was that video original and creative? No…not one bit. It was just a guy talking about his suspiciously crappy car. Commenters on the Tonight Show’s website are pretty upset that this video was chosen as the winner. Some even charge that some kind of fix was in. And you know what, as much as I love Conan I have to admit that I think something shady did occur. Consider these points made by commenters on the Tonight Show web site:

1. One poster points out that the entry should have been ineligible because the video features a business’ logo (A “Pizza Pirates” logo on the hood of the car and on the guy’s shirt) and that was prohibited by the rules.

2. Another mentions that he car is also totally illegal to drive because the seat-belts don’t work and apparently the car had to be a drivable clunker.

3. Yet another poster asks a question so brilliant it would make Columbo proud: “If this guy drives with one lft arm holding the door (oh pity me, could of said you used bungies mr. wizard). Can you imagine the right arm making gear changes and turning the steering wheel at same time. People this whole thing was preplanned to appear as a clunker. Aha!!!” (While that move might be tough it would at the very least make the car illegal to drive.)

4. The most astute observation came from a poster that suggested that this particular car was chosen because it was so wrecked that its make and model are a complete mystery. In the video, the owner of the car refers to it only as a “1980.” So instead of blowing up a crappy Ford or Toyota or whatever, Conan got to keep the car companies happy by destroying a completely anonymous car.

The damage to the car also seems kinda suspicious too. As the guy says, he intentionally cut the roof off because it would get hot while he was making his Pizza deliveries.  But who wants to eat a pizza that’s been wind-cooled by a ride in a homemade convertible?  Near the end of the video the guy shows of a bunch of mysterious dents in his driver’s side door. He said that one day at work someone threw eggs at his car and shot paintballs at it.  But look at those dents! Were those eggs shot out of a 44 Magnum? And listen, I have played paintball before and I don’t think they could do that to a car door. If paintballs really could dent metal, would it be legal to shoot them at fleshy human beings?  Most suspicious of all though is the guy’s front license plate.  It looks like someone took a hammer to that plate. And even if he didn’t, how can it be legal to drive around with a license plate that is so bent that it can’t be read?

But forget all that stuff. Here is the biggest red flag of all; The guy in the video says he delivers Pizzas for a place called Pizza Pirates. I googled Pizza pirates and guess what? They have several locations but the guy with the clunker works in Ontario, California…..a mere 52 minute drive from the Universal Studios lot where the car was blown up by Conan.  The winner lives in Chino, CA which is basically a suburb of Los Angeles.

Wow, how convienient

Wow, how convenient

I hate to do this but I officially call “shenanigans” on Conan O’brian. Can you imagine how much money NBC would have had to spend if the winner of this contest was from New York or Florida? By picking a guy who lived in the LA area they probably saved at least $10,000. Besides paying for a trip for two and a hotel room for the winner, NBC would have had to get the clunker to LA! NBC lawyers would never let someone drive the winning “clunker” to the west coast so the chosen vehicle would have had to have been shipped inside a big ass truck. That would have cost thousands of dollars if the winner was from the East coast. Oh! And then NBC would have had to get a new Lexus Hybrid to that guy! The actual car that the guy won was presented to him at the Universal Studios lot after his car was exploded. If the guy lived 2,000 miles from LA would he have had to drive the Lexus all the way home? Of course not. NBC probably got 1 free car in exchange for all the publicity and they again would have had to ship it to the guy’s house. After all, how many Lexus Hybrid dealerships do you think there are in the middle or Georgia or Montana? Not many I’m guessing so they couldn’t just make arrangements with a local dealer if the winner lived outside of the LA area.  Because the winner lives in Chino he would have been able to drive that car right home after the taping.

While googling I found the Pizza Pirate’s Facebook page and they seem very proud of their employee and the death trap he drove while working for them. Several “fans” of Pizza Pirates have commented on the company’s wall that they have seen that beat up car driving around Ontario, CA many times. One girl says….

“haha dude that’s awsome. my school is like right by there and we use to walk by and see that car all the time,lol. so when we heard in was going to be blown up on tv we were like omg..haha.”

Kids say “dude,” “OMG” and “LOL” in every internet comment they make….right? That might be a little suspicious but like I said, a number of people on facebook have said that they will miss seeing that crappy car drive around town. So it probably was a real car at least.

So what’s the final verdict? After looking at all the evidence I believe that:

1. The car that won the contest was real and was a total mess.

2. The winner of the contest might have done a few things to the car to make it look even crappier.

3. The winning video should have been deemed ineligible to win because the car was not legally drivable and because it featured a company logo. (Pizza Pirates isn’t just one store, it’s a small chain with 3 locations.)

4. The judges of the contest that picked this clunker totally disregarded the judging (Originality/creativity) criteria outlined in the rules and picked this car as the winner because:

a. It was funny looking
b. No potential advertisers would be offended that one of their cars were being called a “clunker” since only an expert could decipher its make and model.
c. NBC would be able to save thousands in transport costs because the winner and his car were located just across town from the studio.

In conclusion, here’s what I think happened: The contest was announced and someone at the Tonight Show remembered seeing this beat up Pizza Pirates car driving around the LA suburbs. The car was easy to track down of course and someone contacted Pizza Pirates and the owner of the vehicle got a discreet call. Someone from the Tonight Show encouraged the owner of the car to create an entry so that they could pick a local winner with a really funny-looking car. Conclusion: Shenanigans abound!

To add insult to injury, the actual blowing up of the winning car was really lame! It didn’t EXPLODE at all. It just kid of popped and then was engulfed in flames. Here’s the video of the “Explosion:

For the record I should probably mention that I am not a disgruntled contest entrant. I did not enter a video into the Conan Contest and I have no stake in this unsavory affair.

  • Having Contest Problems?

  • Video contests can get pretty ugly. Organizers do not always want to play by their own rules, other contestants flagrantly cheat and poorly run competitions cause frustrations for everyone. Wish you could bring a problem to the attention of a contest’s organizers but you’re worried that you might be branded a no-good troublemaker? We can help. Let us know about your problem and we’ll try and kick a little ass on your behalf. E-mail us at Videocontestnews@gmail.com.
  • Posts of the Past

  • Designed by: Free Cell Phones | Thanks to Highest CD Rates, Domain Registration and Registry Software