CASE 117 / HP / 2017
The Wolf
A cybersecurity thriller made overlooked office devices feel consequential to the entire organisation.
AI-assisted research and analysis for the SNS Creative Fieldbook; published by SNS Media Tech. No named human reviewer is claimed.
Sources reviewed 2026-11-05
Campaign credits belong to the original creators. They did not write or endorse this analysis.
Credits: HP Studios with Giant Spoon and Park Pictures, as credited by The One Show; directed by Lance Acord and starring Christian Slater.
Recognition: 2018 One Show Merit, Branded Entertainment: Online / Long Form - Campaign.
Launch / edition: 2017. Award years: 2018.
The problem. The idea. The experience.
HP wanted businesses to recognise security risks in devices that could be overlooked, including printers and PCs. The contemporary launch framed security as a responsibility extending beyond network boundaries. The marketing challenge was to make an unglamorous product category relevant to business leaders as well as technical specialists.
How the idea came to life
Launched on 14 February 2017, The Wolf cast Christian Slater as a hacker exploiting weaknesses across a fictional company. The film moves through different organisational settings, making security consequences visible through a dramatic character rather than a list of specifications.
How it reached people
HP published a trailer and web series through its campaign destination and introduced HP Secure as the broader call to action. The award entry describes a subsequent The Fixer instalment with Jonathan Banks. This brief treats those connected elements as one campaign family, not separate entries.
Supporting sources: Primary brand launch announcement → Primary award archive →
Read the data in context.
The numbers below describe different kinds of outcomes. Their date, scope and reporting source are part of the result.
The campaign received a 2018 One Show Merit in Branded Entertainment, Online / Long Form - Campaign. The entry also claims revenue growth, but does not supply enough period, market or attribution detail to isolate the film’s contribution. No sales-effect figure is adopted here.
The creative mechanism.
An antagonist’s journey turns an abstract infrastructure vulnerability into an organisational story
Make the neglected object part of a system
A printer becomes important when the story shows what its failure could affect. For a technical brand, map the real dependencies around a product before writing the drama. This can help non-specialists see why the issue matters without requiring them to understand every implementation detail.
Give tension a practical resolution
Fear can command attention while leaving people helpless. Build an achievable next step into risk communication, such as an authorised inventory review or expert consultation. Avoid implying that buying one device makes an entire organisation secure or that a dramatised scenario proves the probability of an attack.
Use entertainment to open the conversation
A recognisable actor and thriller structure can make a specialist topic approachable. They cannot replace technical documentation, procurement evidence or an honest discussion of limits. Plan a separate layer for people who want to validate the claim rather than forcing the film to carry every detail.
Keep the scenario credible and safe
Security specialists should review the causal chain, even when scenes are compressed for storytelling. Show consequences and prevention principles without publishing actionable intrusion instructions. An exaggerated villain may be memorable, but implausible risk claims can damage credibility with the very buyers the campaign needs.
The intended behavior loop
- 01Notice a fictional breach scenario
- 02Recognise an overlooked device risk
- 03Seek a practical explanation
- 04Evaluate authorised protective steps
Growth job: Expose an overlooked risk → make security relevant → prompt informed product evaluation. This is an interpretation of the mechanism, not an audited attribution model.
A direction to take into the room.
Original editorial interpretation and proposed adaptation. This is a proposed adaptation, not historical campaign execution or a forecast.
The transferable principle
Make a hidden operational risk understandable through an accurate chain of human consequences and a proportionate next step.
Keep these boundaries
Do not reproduce the hacker character, publish exploit instructions or use fear to promise complete protection from a single product.
Turn the lesson into a test.
Illustrative adaptation, not a historical campaign fact
A small-team experiment
A managed IT provider creates a fictional office vignette about a neglected device, followed by an approved review checklist.
Build the test
- Have a qualified security reviewer validate the scenario without exposing real systems or credentials.
- Use actors or consenting staff, synthetic screens and a clear dramatisation label.
- Offer an educational asset-inventory worksheet; conduct any real assessment only with explicit authorisation.
Measure the right thing
Measure understanding of the overlooked risk and relevant consultation requests, not alarm or total views alone.
Know when to stop
Stop if the scenario overstates likelihood, implies guaranteed security or reveals a usable method for unauthorised access.
How this reading fits your brief
Start with the useful part.
Best for: Expose an overlooked risk → make security relevant → prompt informed product evaluation
What to adapt: Make a hidden operational risk understandable through an accurate chain of human consequences and a proportionate next step.
Prerequisites: Technical fact-checking; Fictional production environment; Clear product-claim substantiation; Practical education and expert follow-through.
Smaller-team route: A managed IT provider creates a fictional office vignette about a neglected device, followed by an approved review checklist. Constraint: Do not reproduce the hacker character, publish exploit instructions or use fear to promise complete protection from a single product.
Budget: Unknown; no verified historical campaign budget in the cited sources. No cost-fit claim is made.
Trade-offs and evidence: Read the limits below before choosing a test. There is no guaranteed reach, sales lift or ROAS.
Questions for your next brief
- Which routine object conceals a meaningful operational dependency?
- What safe, specific action should follow the tension?
Sources & further reading.
Brand and award-entry results are attributed claims, not independent causal audits. Source links open the original third-party pages.
- HP: HP reinvents security with global campaign starring Christian Slater →Primary brand launch announcement · Supports: 14 February 2017 launch, story, star, director, distribution destination, HP Secure framing and qualified security claims.
- The One Show: The Wolf →Primary award archive · Supports: Agency/production credits, printer-security objective, The Fixer extension and 2018 Merit; unscoped revenue claim excluded.
Independent educational analysis of external campaigns. These are not SNS client projects, endorsements or claims of involvement. Campaign facts and reported outcomes are attributed to their sources. Explanations, adaptations and test plans are original analysis and hypotheses, not proven causal findings.