Lost in the Viral Fringe

While some feel that Lost is losing more and more of its audience due to continually unanswered questions, writer and producer J.J. Abrams’s new series Fringe is following the Lost blueprint. Fringe, so far, follows FBI Special Agent Olivia Dunham through a serious of mysterious biological anomalies. Similar to Lost, the series has been planting various numbers and symbols which will likely come to have greater meaning as the episodes continue.

One of Fringe’s major players is a corporation called Massive Dynamic. The show implies that Massive Dynamic is a huge company with great influence and impact on the daily lives of the general public, similar to Lost’s Hanso Foundation. Massive Dynamic appears to be involved in various aspects of aerospace, transportation, computing, communications, energy, and biological and medical research and production. The latter seems to be of greatest importance to Fringe thus far.



Producers have gone to great lengths to develop a realistic and convincing website for Massive Dynamic, as well as commercials during FOX’s air of Fringe to draw viewers to the site. This is again similar to the incorporation of the Hanso Foundation commercials and website for Lost. These websites may give avid fans clues into the story line and a greater understanding of the characters and happenings of these shows. The commercials and websites have been a very intriguing way for J.J. Abrams and others to extend beyond the TV screen to bring the experience online for the viewers. Through the four seasons of Lost, there have been various websites providing clues and insights into the mysteries of the show, some of which gained the cooperation of American Express by requiring an AmEx card to access information in the site (at no charge to the user.) One mysterious Fringe-related website that has popped up is 1.61803398874989484820458683436563811.com (This number is Phi, which refers to the golden ratio and Fibonacci sequence which seem to have some relevance in the show.)

Fans created a user-generated encyclopedia (or wiki) for Lost called Lostpedia, and surprisingly, a wiki has already been created for Fringe, Fringepedia, after the air of only two episodes. These wikis help fans to sort through multitudes of information provided through the show and various websites, many of which take a good bit of digging to find. Additionally, many viewer blogs and podcasts have been created in order to cultivate a following for Fringe among fans. A list of these can be found here on Fringepedia.

The transition from offline to online experiences within these series has enabled much higher engagement among fans than most other standard television series. The buzz created around these shows is extended far beyond the typical viewing and interactive space and into the blogosphere, where viewers can interact for continuous research and dialog between episodes keeping the show on the forefront of their minds.

Donuts, Scarves and Rachael Ray: Viral Marketing Ploy?

Dunkin Donuts didn’t know. However, their new online campaign with Rachael Ray went viral. But, was it their intention or not? I think not! Their online campaign starring Rachael Ray as the spokeswoman for Dunkin Donuts’ iced coffee caused controversy among the conservative bloggers. The controversy had nothing to do with Dunkin Donut’s coffee, but simply over Rachael Ray’s attire. Last weekend, Dunkin' Donuts decided to pull the online ad after conservative bloggers suggested the scarf she wore in the ad looked like a keffiyeh, a traditional headdress worn by Arab men that some associate with jihad. Margie Meyers, senior VP-communications for Dunkin’ Brands stated in an article, "Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by the stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended."


Many people can argue that Dunkin Donuts intentionally used the scarf as a marketing ploy. These days advertisers and marketers are known for using more controversial ways to get their message across to audiences. However, I highly doubt that Dunkin Donuts’ intention was to cause uproar over Rachael Ray’s scarf. Was it successful? From a marketing standpoint, I think it was very successful because the controversy caused more people to visit the website and as a marketer, you want brand awareness for your product. So, Dunkin Donuts should be thankful to those conservatives who caused curious viewers to visit their website. I just find it funny how the conservative bloggers nitpicked a scarf’s design in a commercial. Seriously? Aren’t there more important things to worry about than a scarf?