Here is what performs in a Canadian feed, why the French-speaking side behaves differently, and how the advertising rules apply here.
The French-speaking feed behaves differently
Three observable differences.
Formats age more slowly there: a trend already worn out elsewhere still works, which leaves time to produce.
Advertising competition is weaker, so the acquisition cost is often lower at equal quality.
And loyalty to people is stronger: a regular creator builds an audience that comes back, rather than a passing one.
One production consequence: treat the two feeds as two markets, with two content plans and two sets of measurements. A single video published everywhere underperforms on both sides.
The audience is wider than people think
Three facts changing the casting.
The audience is not only young: middle age groups are very present there, notably on practical content, home, cooking and do-it-yourself.
Purchasing power follows age: expensive categories sell better to an older audience, which watches without commenting.
And comments do not represent buyers: a video can sell a lot with few visible reactions.
One direct consequence: choose creators whose age and situation resemble those of your buyers, not those of your marketing team.
Do not republish a finished advert
Four reasons, all verifiable.
The pace of a classic advert does not match that of the feed: the opening is two seconds too slow.
A recropped horizontal format is spotted immediately.
The professional voice-over sounds like an interruption, not like content.
And the logo at the opening announces an advert before the content has had a chance.
What works instead: one person, a real setting, an opening sentence describing a concrete problem, and the product appearing in the gesture rather than in a presentation.
The format that holds in both feeds
Five elements, valid on both sides.
An opening showing the result or the problem in the first second.
One single argument, developed, rather than three listed.
Subtitles burned in, in the language of the version.
A short length, between fifteen and thirty seconds, unless the subject demands a demonstration.
And an ending with no aggressive call to action: saying what the person will find, not ordering them to click.
One economical practice: shooting the same idea in both languages on the same day, with two creators if necessary. The marginal cost is low, the gain in coverage large.
The advertising rules apply fully
Four points, and they do not change because the medium is an app.
The commercial relationship is disclosed inside the video, visibly, in the language of the version.
Regulated claims follow the category: health, food, financial, childhood. The list of permitted sentences comes from the brand, and is approved with a lawyer.
The image rights of the people filmed are documented, including for recognisable passers-by.
And the published version is archived with its date: that is what will count, not the approved script.
What the format imposes, second by second
| Moment | What must happen | Common mistake |
|---|---|---|
| Before the first second | Movement in the frame | A static, silent shot |
| Second 2 | The text announcing the subject | A decorative title |
| Last second | A reason to watch again | A full-screen logo |
What is prepared for a bilingual market
Two subtitled versions, one per language, edited from the same shoot. Layering subtitles over others shows, and drives completion down.
What is checked before posting
The area covered by the interface, the readability of text on a small screen, and the presence of the ad disclosure in the language of release.
What to measure
Three indicators, separately for each language.
The three-second retention rate, which judges the opening.
The cost per purchase, which judges the whole video.
And the number of creatives still profitable after two weeks, which judges the batch.
One last marker, useful for arbitrating a budget: in this market, the performance gap between the two feeds is often larger than the gap between two creators. Testing the language before testing the creativity costs less and teaches more.
Sources
Checked on 4 September 2026. Thresholds and rates change: where this guide and the official source disagree, the official source is right.
