Note the way the title of this post was written. Now, take a look at this New York Times Ad called “Viewers Fast-Forwarding Past Ads? Not Always“. The key factoid in the article is that users of digital video recorders (like TIVO) don’t always time-shift their viewing and don’t simply skip past the commercials … to the tune of 40%.
I suppose that’s ONE way of looking at it (40% commericials are watched). But, the MUCH more significant perspective …€” at least from an advertiser’s point of view …€” is that a whopping 60% of the commercials are NOT being watched!
Like it or not, the world is changin’ … and right quick! Are you an advertiser? If so, what are you going to do about this?
Dig deeper into the article and you find out about tactics like;
Running ads while fast-forwarding is taking place
Running ads as marquees at the bottom of the screen
Asking viewers if they would like to see an ad after the show is over
I understand WHY these attempts are made, but can’t the advertisers see that these tactics are just bucking the specific efforts of the viewer to NOT see their interruptive commercial in the first place?
The world of commercial advertising is going to have to get VERY creative … in a hurry … to overcome this trend…. Embracing relationship building, evangelism and great customer care are just a couple of steps in the right direction.
This has nothing to do with marketing or branding. BUT, it’s about a squirrel, so I couldn’t pass it up! From the Metro UK online edition; “Rogue Squirrel Forces Down Plane“
I see a movie in the making … Starring Paris Hilton, with love interest Dustin Diamond and Erik Estrada as the courageous pilot!
Charging head first into the new millennium with the ferocity of … of … of a poodle with a bad haircut. Ford unveils their plans to revive the Taurus line. Don’t get me wrong (too much), I used to own a Ford Taurus … back in the late 80’s, early 90’s, raising young kids. But, with a new tag line of “BoldMoves“, you have to expect something more than THIS from Ford, don’t you?!
Not too surprisingly, this news has already been the target of a lot of press. Some from the industry (see this very funny post from Autoblog) as well as the world of brand strategy (from none other than Laura Ries).
I guess this means I need to break out my old cassette version of Lipps, Inc./Funky Town. Hmmm, maybe the new Taurus will come with a CD player! ….. NAHHHHH!
They’re clever, to the point, humorous, tight and entertaining … BUT, they’re more “Pepsi-like” than “Coke-like”. Here’s another commercial to compare to my last post.
Arguably, one of the longest standing, hardest hitting, most brutal of all brand battles; Coke vs. Pepsi.
Coke: Generations of brand power. Tapping into the “Innocent” or “Angel” archetype, we’ve all enjoyed a lifetime of wonderfully warm and fuzzy ‘feel good’ advertising that dips into a deep sense of nostalgia (overlooking that whole New Coke debaucle, of course). Take a look at this fabulous example of Coke in it’s hay day if you need a reminder of why Coke is the powerhouse brand that it is.
Pepsi: Laser focus on the “Jester” or “Trickster” archetype allows this brand to be funky, wacky, funny, playful, bold and brazen. Take a look at an older Jimmy Fallon commercial, as well as the new pinball campaign. It doesn’t get any more “jester” than that!
OK, NOW take a look at THIS commercial and tell me who you think it should be? Wild car rides, edgy CG effects, guys in leather jackets, chaotic action. The lyrics “…you give a little love and it all comes back to you” could be seen as a continuation of brand history, but the overall effect is just too close to the Pepsi brand.
I hope they don’t decide to call it “Newer New Coke.”
OF COURSE it was going to happen after publishing something like my last post. Heavy sigh. Joan writes;
Your points on this are well taken BUT consider if you lost your mother, father, son, daughter, wife or husband to suicide via a bridge jumping. Would you feel entertained by such an advertisement? Since 32,000 Americans complete suicide each year and each of these suicides guinely effects a minimum of 6-8 people, that is a huge group of people to offend…not to mention all of the mental health practitioners, physicians and researchers who are working to save lives.
PLEASE don’t think of me as an insensitive brute! I think you missed my point. I’m not endorsing what GM did … I would probably not have done the bridge-jumping thing. BUT, I would have definitely gone far enough to upset some OTHER group!
Consider the Nationwide Insurance commercial with Kevin Federline that heated up the Restaurant Industry to the point where they too asked to have the ad pulled. Before getting all wound up, I’m NOT comparing “rapping in a restaurant” to “suicide”. However, you can’t discount the fact that this group of restauranteurs were truly upset by the commercial! Did the Nationwide marketing team purposely try to tick off people who work in restaurants OR did they simply play on the idea that everyone has dreams … some dream BIG … let’s call it “the human condition”. If you can imagine a kid working as a fry cook dreaming of being a rap star you can then actually picture in your mind the commercial happening in real life. The play on the idea comes when an actual rap star (and I use that term VERY loosely) is caught in the act. FUNNY STUFF!
More on the Human Condition:
This was a topic of quite a bit of discussion/debate in our office today. The effectiveness of all three of these ads is based on; observation of the human condition and of stereotypes. The human condition of the GM ad is; how do people in an automobile plant feel when they worry about the quality of their work? Do they fear for their jobs? If they lose their job, how will it affect them? THAT’S the “human condition.”
So, if the GM ad doesn’t work, WHERE did they go wrong? I would say they tapped into the wrong emotion - too much fear and sadness! There are VERY few people who will walk away from watching that ad with the feeling that it was “funny” … or they could “relate with it” … or that “GM really cares” … or “GM must understand quality because I too have those fears”. Why? Because the visual of a robot waking from a suicide dream is STILL on the topic of suicide, it’s almost impossible to get the viewer focused back on any other emotion. Yes, emotions are powerful and HUGELY important in the development of great brand/advertising.
Back to the KFed fiasco…. what’s the human condition? It’s the reality that people have dreams beyond where their jobs are located. If the marketing team for Nationwide would have instead picked garbage truck drivers, or dental hygienists, or dishwasher repairmen, or hotel bellhops, or, or, or …. I’m sure we would have somebody else up in arms instead of restauranteurs. That’s not really the point though is it? The point is that KFed put himself out there in a self-deprecating display that was intended to be funny.
Final Words:
Again, my last post was NOT to defend or endorse the GM ad. It was to point out that emotions are powerful things and when you use them in your brand development (AND YOU SHOULD), you run the risk of polarizing the world. To this I say “GREAT!!” If I can polarize the world with my own brand and only get 1/10th of 1 percent of all the people on the planet to be true, die-hard, dyed in the wool, evangelists for my company …€” and the other 99.9% think I’m looney …€” I’ll be MORE than happy to provide services only to those 6 Million people on my side. This is a MUCH better strategy than to be completely bland and safe with nobody on your side.
1) The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention has asked that GM pull it’s ad that features an assembly line robot jumping off a bridge.
2) The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) AND the Human Rights Campaign have similarly asked Masterfoods (makers of the Snickers bar) to pull their most recent ad, claiming it is offensive and defamatory to gays and lesbians.
Let me begin by stating that creating an ad campaign that potentially endangers lives, offends the majority of viewers or severely degrades corporate brand value is just plain bad. Consider the recent Cartoon Network “Bomb Scare” ad campaign in Boston … definitely not good for sales.
HOWEVER, when you create a campaign that is edgy, bold and differentiates you from your competitors, you should expect some people to get a little T.O.’d. If that doesn’t happen at all, you probably didn’t take the idea far enough. Water down your ads to the point where nobody even comments, and you also water down your effectiveness.
What really gets my goat is the kinds of reactions the above ads got. Let’s take them one at a time….
1) The GM ad DIDN’T show the robot jumping off a bridge, it showed a robot dreaming about jumping off of a bridge. Minor distinction, for sure, but it’s important. If you’re going to create an ad that portrays a robot with anthropomorphic qualities of fear, depression, loss and sorrow, you might show it having such a terrible dream. This commercial is NOT an endorsement of bridge-jumping … it is simply the portrayal of something totally unexpected …€” a robot thinking like a human. It’s this unexpected idea that makes the ad powerful.
2) Although stereotypes are generally “bad”, they can’t be ignored and they can sometimes be the basis for a wealth of ad ideas. The stereo-type of two manly-men working in a garage, head down in an engine compartment (right or wrong), is something most people ‘get’. The unexpected event is when one guy leans over to eat the candy bar out of the other guy’s mouth (a la The Lady and the Trampspaghetti scene). YOWZA! If that were to ever actually happen in the real world, what would you expect these two testosterone-laden guys to do?? I’m bettin’ a bit of macho, chest hair pulling is in order! This isn’t defamatory against gays and lesbians any more than the Jack McFarland character’s (Will & Grace) comments about straight guys was defamatory to heterosexuals. Both cases are simply portraying a character doing pretty much what you’d expect them to do.
Lesson to be learned; If you’re in the process of creating brand, don’t let these kinds of events instill ANY kind of fear in your decision-making. BE BOLD! Don’t be afraid to differentiate!
Charging head first into the new millennium with the ferocity of … of … of a poodle with a bad haircut. Ford unveils their plans to revive the Taurus line. Don’t get me wrong (too much), I used to own a Ford Taurus … back in the late 80’s, early 90’s, raising young kids. But, with a new tag line of “Bold Moves“, you have to expect something more than THIS from Ford, don’t you?!
