Participatory Advertising

2012-01-17T06:22:00.000-08:00

This Old Spice commercial featuring Terry Crews, a professional athlete who we might consider hypermasculine, features the tagline "Smell is Power." If that is the case power in a masculine or in this case hypermasculine world is rather ephemeral. After all, linguistically, how can smell equal power? So, what is this commercial saying to its target audience? That you don't have any real or actual power, so you need to substitute some symbolic form of power instead? If that is the case, then what does this commercial also say about the status of males in U.S. society?

This is NOT what is meant by seamless integration

2010-11-16T05:43:00.000-08:00

Product placement is a technique--perhaps trick--to get an advertising message across to a distracted audience. In other words, while members of a TV audience may turn away physically or mentally when the commercials appear on the screen, or when viewers choose to do something else like go get something to eat, product placement is offered as an antidote. Because the "ad" shows up in the context of the program, viewers cannot escape it (at least theoretically they can't). The product placement above is a really bad example. Here's a link to the full article with two more examples of how not to do this.

Advertising and Social Responsiblity in Network Television

2010-11-15T08:42:00.000-08:00

To paraphrase the infamous Jerry Lee Lewis song, “there’s a whole lotta’ cusin’ goin’ on” in broadcast television, at least that’s what the Parents Television Council claims. The PTC just released a report detailing what they believe is an increase in foul language in scripted network television during the 2010 season. What might be of interest to students of advertising is that the PTC believes advertisers should exercise their power over the networks as purchasers of commercial time to, as the report says, “encourage greater responsibility in programming…” Well, ain’t that calling the kettle black. Advertising, which isn’t exactly known as the cornerstone of social responsibility itself, is being called upon to influence network television to be socially responsible. The report acknowledges these two “institutions” are tacitly in cahoots, as the only thing advertisers want is to reach a targeted audience, and the PTC believes that the only way broadcasters can attract those audiences is by pushing the edge of the envelope. Now let me be clear, I’m not a fan of the PTC, but there is a germ of truth to the point that those airwaves used by the networks are public and therefore subject to government rules and regulations. The question for you is: should the TV space be a free-for-all no holes barred arena, or do we as a society need to go beyond the “turn it off if you don’t like it” mindset to establish clear parameters in which broadcasters can operate?

Lady Gaga and the Illusion of Intimacy Video

2010-11-10T18:16:00.000-08:00

When we consider the ways in which new media impact imaginary social relationships, the illusion of intimacy becomes more intense, as social media require such a high level of disclosure. Beyond disclosure, social media require celebrities to directly address their fans. In this way imaginary social relationships, a term John Caughey coined in the mid-1980s, are amplified. The 24/7 nature of new media suggests that such amplication may lead to greater volatility. Think about how quickly Tiger Woods lost some of his key endorsement deals as we learned of his gross infidelities. Lady Gaga, along with Kim Kardashian and several other celebrities are now masterfully utilizing new media in order to manage their public personae.

Emotions and Celebrity Endorsers

2010-11-09T11:48:00.000-08:00

So, I’m really upset--that is to say I’m emotional--right now, because I read this morning that Baltimore-based Under Armour signed New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady to a major endorsement deal that includes a owning a piece of the company. What? Tom Brady owns a piece of Baltimore? As a Baltimore Ravens fan, I think that sucks. Moreover, I don’t like Tom Brady on so many levels, and that brings me to the topic of my blog post. I’m speaking tonight about Imaginary Social Relationships we conduct with media figures. Sometimes these relationships are based on liking or love, sometimes on extreme admiration, and in this case it’s out and out hate. There’s an advertising connection here, because I buy Under Armour products, or at least I used to. Now I understand perfectly well that I am not the target audience for the line of products that Brady is going to be hawking for Under Armour. However, throughout the history of advertising endorsers were supposed to be those we admired, those we want to emulate. In fact, emulation is the basis for using famous people as product endorsers. So, what happens when someone like me learns that a nemesis is endorsing “my” brand, or for someone else who may have used a product endorsed by Tiger Woods before his fall from grace, or any number of celebrity endorsers for whom we have over the years changed our opinions from positive to negative. My point here is that using celebrities in advertising is always risky business. If there is a consistency between the celebrity, the product, and a set of values that are shared with the consumer, then perhaps it makes sense to use a celebrity as a spokesperson. But Under Armour just made a Nike fan out of me. Take that Tom Brady.

Calvin Klein is up to their old tricks again

2010-10-28T09:05:00.000-07:00

Thank goodness Australia has an advertising standards bureau with the power to ban offensive advertising. In this case Calvin Klein has done it again. This time the offending ad depicts what some might interpret as a woman being raped while one man stands by looking rather nonchalant. In the past CK has been called down for their Heroin Chic campaign featuring super model Kate Moss, and “kiddie porn” campaign that depicted what looked like underage models in sexually suggestive poses. Turns out, after a U.S. Justice Department investigation, those models were not underage, but you get the point, I think. So why do advertisers have to go to such extremes in order to gain our attention, and is it worth it from either a marketing point of view or from a societal perspective? I really enjoy much advertising, but sometimes campaigns like this really make me wonder. Maybe David Potter was correct way back in 1954 when he described advertising as an institution of abundance that, unlike some other institutions, lacked social responsibility. Although this is not the first ad campaign I’ve seen that depicts women in an intolerable situation, it doesn’t make it okay. I find the return to such a tired, old, and totally inappropriate advertising image, depressing. I hope Calvin Klein doesn’t try those ads out in the United States, although based on passed performance, I wouldn’t put it past them.

Super Bowl 46 Sells Out

2010-10-28T06:20:00.000-07:00

You have to be impressed that it isn’t even November and the 2011 Super Bowl commercial inventory is already sold out. Just the other day the remaining two spots were sold at their retail price of $3 million each. The 46th Super Bowl will be played on February 6, 2011 at the new indoors Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas. It will be televised live on NBC in the United States and by various other broadcasters around the world. Historically, the worldwide audience hovers around 110 million viewers. Given the state of the U.S. economy, a sell-out is pretty spectacular in my humble opinion. I wish Super Bowl advertising served as a barometer of the economy’s future, however most of the ads are for familiar brands – Pepsi has purchased 6 advertisements. After being absent from the spectacle for two years General Motors is likely to return; that’s a very encouraging sign. But they have a good story to tell and a new tag line “Chevy Runs Deep” to sell. And of course we know there will be some consumer generated advertising (CGA) opportunities to ensure fan engagement. I’ll have more to say about Super Bowl advertising as we move closer to the event. But I’d say that selling out the entire inventory of spots, and these last two at full price, makes me feel very optimistic about the future.

Hope you will attend the lecture...

2010-10-20T07:52:00.000-07:00

How much does that ad cost?

2010-10-18T09:58:00.000-07:00

It's always interesting, I think, to consider how much one 30-second television spot costs on prime-time television. Advertising Age published an article today with the cost per spot for the programs listed above. Which program is the most expensive on which to advertise? American Idol. One 30 second spot on American Idol costs more than $400k, and of course one would never just purchase one spot, as repetition is an important part of the advertising game. By the way, the $400K does not include the cost of producing the commercial, which could easily double that figure.

How do you advertise a commodity?

2010-10-15T14:12:00.000-07:00

While creating difference among razors is becoming difficult as manufacturers go from three to four to five blades and beyond, when it comes to commidities like milk, eggs, and veggies the process of creating difference seems unlikely. The "Got Milk" campaign doesn't brand milk, but rather encourages consumption of the category. There are brands of eggs, like Eggland's Best, but what about veggies? Is there a carrot with a difference? The creative folks at Crispen, Porter and Bogusky have come up with a campaign for Baby Carrots that is off the wall, attempting to align carrots with junk food. Novel idea. But I wonder if, beynd the commercial itself, there is anything in a carrot that will make someone turn away from their favorite chip or other snack food. Nevertheless, this is an interesting case study. I always think it's fun to develop creative ideas around products with no discernable differences. Take two quarters, for example. Do you think you could come up with a campaign that makes one 25 cent piece seem better than the other?

Does Grover Smell Like a Monster?

2010-10-13T18:29:00.000-07:00

I thought this Sesame Street parody of the Old Spice commercials was a hoot. Thought you might enjoy it.

FTC Investigates False and Deceptive Health Claims

2010-09-28T05:49:00.000-07:00

It’s like someone turned the lights on at the FTC and FDA, as these agencies have become quite active in their pursuit of false and deceptive advertising. A current complaint relates to the POM Wonderful Pomegranate Juice claim that it treats or prevents diseases including prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction. Is there research to back up these claims? The FTC says no. Government regulation seems to ebb and flow depending on which political party is in office. As a Democratic administration is presently in charge of the White House, we would expect government regulators to be quite active. What is disturbing to some is that in the pursuit of truth and justice, the government is spending the public’s money during a time of fiscal crisis. Consider the FDA’s investigation of Lance Armstrong, the American athlete and winner of the Tour de France. The FTC’s investigation of POM contends that their advertising is misleading, because there is no scientific evidence that the product prevents any disease. The FTC, if it proves POM’s claims to be false, can issue a cease and desist order, which would greatly inhibit the company’s ability to market its products, since the only reason to purchase POM at $3.99 a bottle is because you believe it will prevent or treat a particular disease. Perhaps because of the weak U.S. economy sales of POM, according to one newspaper article, are down 50 percent from a year ago, while advertising expenditures rose 26 percent. This, I would submit, is a good example of the old saw: economics trumps advertising every time. POM executives state on their website they plan to fight, claiming the FTC violated their first amendment rights. While there is no question that the government plays an important role in regulating the marketplace of ideas, it does seem a little odd that agencies lay dormant for so many years (e.g. during the Bush administration) and then become activist when the other political party is in charge, which raises the question: is this regulation or is this politics?

What channel are you watching?

2010-09-22T18:06:00.000-07:00

Watching NBC, CBS, Fox? What about the Old Spice channel on YouTube? Now that’s a new one, isn’t it? Hard to believe that, according to an article in Advertising Age, the Old Spice commercials featuring Isaiah Mustafa and his responses to viewers Tweets have garnered 57 million views—yes, your read that correctly, 57 million views. Not only were the initial commercials creative in their use of Mr. Mustafa and their special effects – shot in one take. (Look at one closely to see if you can see any cuts between scenes. You can’t.) What impresses me is the interactive quality between Mr. Mustafa’s video responses to Tweets from celebrities and everyday people (Are they fake. I don’t know, but I don’t care.). There’s pleasure to be had here, and pleasure is the key to engagement. All of this taking place outside of mainstream media.

Dazed and Confused by Advertising

2010-09-21T08:16:00.000-07:00

Did you ever watch a TV commercial and then say to yourself: “What was that about?” You may not be alone as the trade publication Adweek reported the findings of a poll indicating that “significant numbers of viewers find TV commercials confusing at least some of the time.” This doesn’t surprise me in the least, as my research on advertising related thoughts indicates that we often “get it wrong.” For example, consumers viewing a Doritos commercial, upon being asked to recall the ad may reference it as an ad for Tostitos. That’s an expensive mistake for Doritos. Beyond confusing brands, we don’t pay close attention to advertisements, as there are elements--what I call cues--in advertising that serve to direct our minds elsewhere. I have written about memories and anticipations as the two directions we go in when we are “cued” by ads to think about other things. In other words, while watching an advertisement, or reading one in a magazine for that matter, we may begin to think about something out of our past that has little or nothing to do with the brand, product category, or advertisement. Same thing goes for anticipations. I have described three processes in which consumers either totally blank out when the commercial comes on, fade in and out as the commercial runs, or experience what I call lucid thinking in which the consumer simultaneously watches the commercial and has a thought. All very complicated and perhaps sophisticated activities that I maintain advertising actually trains us to do. But the main point is: no wonder we are confused by the commercials we see; we aren’t paying close attention, and as a result we tend to get it wrong, mixing one brand with another.

New CGA Campaign for 2011 Super Bowl

2010-09-20T06:31:00.000-07:00

Pepsi Max will be joining Doritos for a consumer generated advertising competition in which prize money totaling $5 million will be offered to the winning advertisements that score highest in the USA Today Super Bowl Ad Poll. While Doritos has been participating in this venture for several years, Pepsi, which stayed out of last year's Super Bowl, appears ready to take the CGA leap. According to a news report in USA Today, Pepsi Max has suffered from a "somewhat confusing image." The target audience is males who show disdain for products with "diet" emblazoned on them. Pepsi Max competes against Coke Zero in this category. The campaign, according to the news article, isn't so much about boosting sales as increasing awareness and knowledge about the product.

Gatorade takes social media very seriously

2010-09-14T08:58:00.000-07:00

The marketing people at PepsiCo, Gatorade's parent company, are taking their social media very seriously by setting up a "mission control" center in the middle of their marketing department's headquarters. This control center allows the company to monitor its brand on social network sites on a 24/7 basis. There are a number of interesting screens reported on the Mashable/SocialMedia website. Marketers like Gatorade want to monitor consumer sentiment in real time in order to evaluate the nature and level of engagement; engagement being all the rage in advertising circles these days. Engagement, you might say, is the new metric (measurement) of advertising effectiveness.

The most fun you'll have with a viral ad...

2010-09-13T10:53:00.000-07:00

What do Facebook, Multitasking and Advertising Have in Common?

2010-09-11T07:29:00.000-07:00

A recent study of college students in the Netherlands concluded that multitasking while studying will likely reduce a student’s grade by 20%. You know the drill: you’re reading your class notes on the computer and every few minutes you switch over the Facebook to see if anything’s going on. Well, that model of multitasking behavior is also the same process through which we consume other media content, like advertising. In other words, we may watch TV and then turn away to focus on the computer when the commercials come on, or engage in any number of related behaviors. The implications for students' grades are clear. But what are the implications for advertisers? I would suggest to you that similar or worse issues arise when it comes to advertising while multitasking with multiple media, if for no other reason, advertising is not a significant part of our lives, at least not as significant as studying for an exam. My study on the subject, Living in an Age of Distraction, describes how difficult consumers find switching back and forth from one medium to another. And, just like the difficulties encountered by college students who multitask while studying, consumers find it difficult to recall the advertisements they have seen. There’s a lot of research starting to emerge regarding the perils of multitasking. Advertisers are already attempting to circumvent what I think are consumers resistance to their messages. Product embeds, although rarely done well, are one approach. But the cat and mouse game between advertiser and consumer goes on; multitasking is just one tactic employed by consumers to resist the reach of advertising. As for multitasking while studying for an exam, well, that's another story.

Comparing ourselves to those who are less than perfect: An advertising conundrum

2010-09-10T10:22:00.000-07:00

There is a trend afoot that is worthy of note, I think, because it goes against the grain of the way beauty has been presented--sold--in American culture since the beginning of advertising. The new trend I’m referring to is the depiction of stars without make-up. To date the only time we have been shocked by a make-up-less star is when there is some sort of expose’ in a magazine like People. But now it seems that celebs like Jessica Simpson, who appeared in no makeup on the May cover of Marie Claire, are leading us in a different direction. (Who would have every thought that JS would lead us anywhere?) Turns out those unattainable traits--Angelina Jolie’s lips, for example--are harming both men and women, and may lead to, among other things, eating disorders. But the list of those celebs who appear in advertisements sans make-up are beginning to grow, and advertisers have been led by the use of realistic models like those in the Dove Real Beauty campaign, which stands out as an example of selling against itself in order to sell itself – an interesting contradiction. And, oh by the way, the campaign failed to boost sales significantly. I’ve done some work in the area of social comparison theory—that is the way we use the media in order to measure our own self-worth against what we see in others—and the findings of my research suggest that viewers of TV commercials (the subject of my study) actually prefer more realistic portrayals because the images they see are ones they can identify with. Moreover, the images in some cases are one’s to which they feel superior. That was probably the most interesting finding. My research revolved around men’s reactions to images of the GEICO cavemen, and other what I referred to as “less-than-ideal” images. For the whole history of advertising, emulation was seen as a cornerstone - you know, we look up to the stars. Isn’t it ironic to find in the 21st century that consumers would rather look down at others, rather than up to them. Looking at less than perfect images simply makes consumers feel good and that’s exactly what advertisers want.

A lesson in values-centered advertising from Steve Jobs

2010-08-31T06:29:00.000-07:00

As we begin a new academic year, I think it’s appropriate to attend to this timeless lesson in advertising from Apple’s Steve Jobs. In this circa 1997 video Jobs announces a new ad campaign—Think Different—for Apple computers, he tells us that advertising is not about promoting a product’s features, rather it is about communicating values. That’s a time-trusted vision of advertising’s role offered up many years ago by Albert Lasker, who built the advertising business into what it became in the 20th Century, and it is an approach best exemplified by brands like Coke and Nike. However, with new social media quickly becoming advertising friendly—and new digital ad agencies popping up all over the place—advertising in the 21st Century is beginning to look quite different. Values-based advertising? Perhaps. More likely the instant gratification offered by a message on your mobile phone will more likely rule. Values-centered advertising may be usurped as marketers increasingly employ geo-location, behavioral tracking, SEO and other means and methods to narrowcast a message directly to you when you are in the best physical position to take advantage of an offer. These technical newer approaches, like Facebook Places and Foresquare, among many others, seem to lack the emotional connection Jobs talks about in the video; perhaps these newer approaches are appropriate for the hard economic times in which we live. I don’t know if emotionally driven, values centered advertising is on the wane, but it is clear that new approaches that take advantage of new social media and associated technologies are on the rise.

I'm taking a blogging break...

2010-06-10T07:15:00.001-07:00

I'm off to Europe to present my latest research on masculinity and advertising, and I won't be blogging during the summer months. The blog will resume in September.

Tiger Woods - He's Back!

2010-04-08T08:56:00.000-07:00

Tiger Woods returned to the world of golf this week, and he returned to the world of advertising with this commercial for Nike. The commercial is a strange one as it has nothing to do with the brand, at least there's nothing "brand worthy" that I can discern. It seems to me like a favor one does for a friend who has fallen and needs help getting up. I've utilized the religious metaphor for resurrection for the ways in which we treat some fallen media figures whose stature we want to see restored. Tiger Woods certainly is not the first media figure to have fallen off the proverbial bar stool, only to later see his media persona restored. Well, we'll have to see what happens with TW. The gossip mill still seems to be churning this story, and of course, we'll have to see how well he does in his return to golf. One of these will likely affect the other. By that I mean, if he does well in the Masters, many people will lose their interest in the gossip. Done Deal. If he fails to make the cut, however, there will be a lot of finger wagging. Will other brands join Nike? We'll have to wait and see. Nike is taking a bit of a risk. The last thing they'd want to do is harm the brand. But sticking by a friend is a noble gesture, and the company may score some points for that. Let's hope Tiger does the same.

Behavior Placement - The new product placement

2010-04-08T05:29:00.000-07:00

We’ve recently been discussing the power of celebrity, in particular the imaginary relationships we form and maintain with media figures. Sometimes those relationships provide the motivation to use a particular product or cut your hair in a way that emulates the celebrity, among many other possibilities. NBC television appears to understand the potential influence of television characters and the stars that portray them as they enter into a Faustian bargain with marketers by including politically and socially correct messages in programming, something they call “behavior placement.” Behavior placement, according to an article in The Wall Street Journal, is not unlike something we’ve talked about – product placement. The idea is that by including politically or socially correct ideas, like going green, within storylines the network wants to kill two proverbial birds with one stone: they want to influence behavior, and they want to use these ideological positions to sell advertising. The article describes one scenario where a hybrid vehicle is featured in a particular dramatic context. Including something that subtle may be appealing to hybrid automakers that may, on that very basis, choose to buy advertising time during the program. The network has announced they will include within regularly scheduled programs features on healthy eating and exercise. Again, scenarios are being written into scripts in order to create a symbiotic relationship between what the viewer should do (exercise regularly) and what the advertiser wants the consumer to do (purchase Healthy Choice meals). This sounds a lot like propaganda to me. NBC, I guess, can feel good that they are touting ideas about health and the environment, but their motives simply are not pure. I’m curious to see if I can pick up any of these idea “placements.” But I guess that means I’ll have to actually pay close attention to what’s on the scene; something I really don’t like to do.

Product Over-Placement

2010-04-06T06:19:00.000-07:00

I know that by now you’re familiar with the Lady Gaga video featuring a jar of Miracle Whip. The video is replete with brands, some of which paid for their placement in the video and others who did not. In the case of Miracle Whip, they paid, because the brand is entering into a campaign to reposition the product to reach a younger audience, and Lady Gaga certainly reaches a younger audience.

The recently launched iPad, too, has found its way into television programs, like Modern Family. A Wall Street Journal article reports research by Nielsen indicating that Apple products have found placement “722 times on TV programs last year.” The article goes on to report that Apple never pays for product placement.

The New York Times reports in a similar vein that movie producers are moving in the direction of using more and more product placements. Not that they didn’t use them before, but now scripts are being written with products in mind. Although, product placement isn’t going to go away, from a larger perspective the over-commercialization of the culture is in my opinion not a particularly good thing. Can materialism go to too far? I guess I’m of a mind that we get the culture we deserve, so if consumers are willing to tolerate product placement, then we can expect more of it. That is what the animated film Logorama that I wrote about a few weeks ago was trying to point out. In the case of product placement, freebees or paid, should the marketer participate in this system, which is somewhat symbiotic? In other words, is there a place for restraint and perhaps social responsibility? But writing scripts with products in mind and the over-placement of products in various media, to my way of thinking, may be overkill. Anyone want to start a movement?

Where are you geolocated?

2010-03-26T11:06:00.000-07:00

Geographical location software enabled mobile phones, simply known as geolocation, is the latest rage in social networking. You can be somewhere in the city and let your “network of friends" know where you are located: at a restaurant, bar, etc. It’s kind of like Twitter on the go. And with some of the apps like FourSquare you can earn points toward some sort of reward. There are other services like Gowalla and Loopt that perform similarly. The software is free for your iPhone, Blackberry, and some other mobile devices.

There’s yet a newer twist to geolocation with a marketing twist. Advertising Age reports that companies like Proctor & Gamble, Kraft and Citi have been employing this software since December in the name of charity. In other words, the Ad Age article reports you not only check in with your friends, now you can check in with Kraft salad dressing or Gillette razors by scanning the product codes with your mobile phone. Seems bizarre, but people are doing it, as these companies have given over $200K per month to charity in exchange for consumer complicity. Is this a good idea? I don’t know. But if you project into the future and consider Facebook or Twitter in an anytime and everywhere environment – why not? Keep an eye out for this one, or try it out and let me know what you think. As for me, I think I’ll keep my location private.

This is Stupid

2010-03-24T08:54:00.000-07:00

This is really stupid. I mean really really stupid. Anytime an advertiser in response to criticism of a campaign slogan has to resort to explaining what they mean by that slogan, the campaign is doomed. As Forrest Gump used to say, "Stupid is as stupid does." This is really stupid. Let me know what you think.

Keeping up with The Jones

2010-03-24T07:34:00.000-07:00

There's a new movie that is relevant to recent discussions regarding new ways to market products. The Joneses is a story about a family that really isn't a family. Rather, they are pretending to be a family living in a "normal" neighborhood and acting, well, neighborly, but all the while they are stealth marketers. Turns out the faux family has been placed in the neighborhood in order to sell products. You can watch the trailer for the movie here. Stealth marketing, sometimes referred to as "undercover marketing" takes place when the audience is not aware they are the object of a promotion. For example, you could be walking down a city street and someone comes up to you and asks you to take their photo with a camera, all the while they are speaking to you about the virtues of the camera. It's a form of one-to-one marketing that speaks to an interesting form of consumer engagement.

Social Media is Not a Panacea

2010-03-23T04:45:00.000-07:00

Just because engagement is the new metric in advertising circles, doesn’t mean all the numbers point upward. There is risk involved when companies and organizations embrace new media; social media are no panacea. Take two recent cases in which Nestles and Kmart were attacked for disparate reasons, but attacked nevertheless. In the case of Nestles, the issue revolved around the company’s use of palm oil in its products for which an attack was launched by the environmental group Greenpeace. With regard to Kmart, the issue revolved around an online coupon that consumers thought could be utilized at any Kmart store; turns out they couldn’t, turns out it could only be used at select stores. Perhaps you wouldn’t think something like this would make consumers angry, but it did. I’ve provide a link to an article on The Consumerist so you can read some of the vitriolic comments. What’s the take away? The good news is that social media provide consumers with a direct way to communicate with the company, and in turn a company or organization can evaluate how they are doing in the public’s eye. On the other hand, consumers and other groups can band together to launch an attack on the brand. For professional communicators, the issue is how to manage all of this. As social media a relatively new for many companies and organizations, it’s important to understand fully their implications in marketing communication programs, and remember that measurement is not always in the upward direction.

Warren Buffett creates "wonder" for GEICO

2010-03-18T08:03:00.000-07:00

This one is too good to pass up. Warren Buffett is perhaps the third richest man in the world. He is Chairman of Berkshire-Hathaway, a holding company that owns many other companies, including GEICO. And, he is in his 70s! GEICO has a new phase of its campaign running, featuring Warren Buffet doing an impression of Axl Rose from Guns N Roses. It's a hoot; beats a gecko any day. And, the song isn't half bad.

Thinking about advertising: memories and anticipations

2010-03-15T09:42:00.000-07:00

One of the blogs I follow today reported that water consumption went up dramatically during the end of the second and third periods of the U.S./Canadian hockey game held during the recent winter Olympics. What they were referring to is the proverbial bathroom break. The idea that people use commercial breaks to do things other than watch the commercials is not new. Other researchers have provided similar evidence of such activities during football games in the United States, attributable mostly to beer consumption. Such activities are what I call “routine practices” surrounding media consumption, including bathroom breaks, making phone calls, texting, shifting to another medium while multitasking, or talking to friends or family members in the room, among other social practices.

Other things we do while the commercials are on include thinking, daydreaming, or fantasizing. Think, daydream or fantasize about what? Other things. In my book Advertising in Everyday Life, I write about the kinds of thoughts we have when we consume advertising, mainly thinking about the past (memories) or anticipating the future. There are elements of advertisements (visual, verbal or textual) that serve as cues, sending viewers off to what I like to refer to as “never-never land.”

All of these activities—thinking, talking, texting, etc.—comprise the ritualistic practices of media consumption. It is in this way that consumers are to some extent empowered to do what they want with and through their media experiences. What consumers want doesn’t always go along with what the advertiser desires, which is to have consumers pay close attention to the advertisements. While consumers develop elaborate social practices as a part of their media rituals, advertisers attempt to seek newer ways to contain and control them. This is what I call the “cat and mouse” game between consumers and advertisers. And, with new media coming online, meaning more distractions and the development of additional practices, the system grows in complexity.

It is difficult for some people to get in touch with their thoughts while they are consuming media, but if one practices, over time the skill can be acquired. It’s an interesting exercise through which we learn much about media rituals and about ourselves.

Logorama: life in an overly materialistic world

2010-03-10T09:54:00.000-08:00

Logorama won the academy award for best animated short. Anyone interested in advertising, branding or any aspect of marketing communication should see this short film. The film represents an apocalyptic vision of a world that is over-saturated with logos. The number of familiar characters and brands--there are 2500 logos represented--is simply amazing to see as the film's story unfolds. The film's producer, Nicolas Schmerkin, said in one web-site report, the film is

"not about America. It's about our modern western world. So it also applies to France and Buenos Aires, where I am from, so it's not about Americans. It's about the way we live and the way we react to these logos. The brain can register 14 logos in less than one second. Making the logos characters with sets and props is about what we're living. I'm not talking about what the logos represent. They're used for what they are."

I have to warn you that the language is R-rated. But the film makes an important statement about the overly materialistic world we live in and the consequences of abundance.

The crunch of Cheerios is that of two worldviews clashing

2010-03-02T07:03:00.000-08:00

The FDA, which regulates prescription medications, also regulates health claims made by food manufacturers. In this case the makers of Cheerios have been called on the carpet, so to speak, for claiming that eating the cereal can reduce the risk of heart disease. An opinion article in The Wall Street Journal reports, “their mistake (the makers of Cheerios) was boasting that the cereal could help reduce the risk of heart disease ‘by lowering the ‘bad’ cholesterol.’” While there may be some sound science behind that claim, the opinion piece goes on to report that the main issue was “making specific reference to cholesterol levels, something that’s typically treated by a drug.” In the larger sense the issue is whether to regulate or not to regulate, which is a topic members of our advertising class have been discussing over the past week or so. If you were to read the 38 comments on the Web that were associated with the Journal article you would experience the vitriol of politically conservative readers who think the government goes to far in regulating both food and drugs. But we are presently living in times where the FDA is more activist on such issues and consumers can expect health claims by food manufacturers to be more closely scrutinized than in the recent past. No one would argue that presenting the health benefits of food is a bad thing, especially when it comes to nutrition and diet. But when manufacturers make claims that place that product in the role of medications, conflicts arise – is it a food or is it a drug? Again, in the larger scheme, the issue relates to how restrictive the FDA should be with regard to health claims made by food manufacturers, and it gives students of advertising an opportunity to see the political pendulum swing from the right to the left.

Campbells goes deep for soup

2010-02-17T06:34:00.000-08:00

The subject of neuromarketing first came up in the discussion and assignment on the video The Persuaders. The Wall Street Journal reports today how Campbell Soup is using neuromarketing techniques to get consumers to buy more soup, which it turns out is a slow growing category. The article reports that Campbell has been studying “microscopic changes in skin moisture, heart rate and other biometrics to see how consumers react to everything from pictures of bowls of soup to logo design." This approach is a far cry from the traditional focus group or consumer attitudinal survey. And, it goes beyond the kinds of deep psychological analysis utilized by Clotaire Rapaille. I first became aware of neuromarketing when medical turned marketing researches utilized MRIs to study consumer reactions to television commercials.

Researchers could see what areas of the brain “lit up” as the commercial progressed. This allowed the advertiser to edit the commercial for maximum emotional effect. Clearly, we are going to see more of this as marketers utilize multiple techniques to get inside our heads. This is not about consumer psychology; it’s about biometric responses to marketing issues. Welcome to the future.

Toyota Engages NASCAR fans

2010-02-15T08:26:00.000-08:00

I don’t know about you, but the several feet of snow in front of my house is really inhibiting my lifestyle. I’m spending even more time than usual with popular culture, including lots of unavoidable advertising. Which brings me to my viewing of the Daytona 500 NASCAR race on Sunday, which was a sheer act of desperation. I cannot think of anything more boring than watching automobile racing. Yes, I know it’s the fastest growing sport (is it a sport?) in the United States. But don’t count me among its fans. One of the ads I saw was for Toyota racing, which directed the viewer to their website. It’s a really interactive website, and provides a good example of participatory advertising. In particular, I was drawn to the “Design it. Enter it” link that enabled the participant to do all kinds of fun things to a race car. And when finished, you can submit it to a contest. I spent a good deal of time playing around with this pretty cool feature (you can now tell I’m really stir-crazy!). I bring this to your attention, because I spent a considerable amount of time with this brand, and that’s the goal of participatory advertising: to create deep engagement that is sustained over time. Engagement is the new metric (way to measure) advertising effectiveness. We all know that most 30-second commercials go in one ear and out the other, so if an advertiser can get you to participate with their brand in some form or fashion over a sustained period of time, the likely result is deep engagement. Different brands go about it different ways – Starbucks is the pre-eminent user of multiple engagement platforms. But this Toyota website is a good example of how the “new” advertising works. Check it out and let me know what you think – even if you aren’t a fan of Danica Patrick.

Virtual Goods and the Loss of Touch

2010-02-09T06:44:00.000-08:00

Kinesics is the study of body language and in that gestures. Simply put a gesture is a cultural practice, like greeting someone by shaking his or her hand. But in our postmodern society, gestures take on new meaning as those who frequent Facebook or Second Life or some other on-line “world” that allows for what may be referred to as virtual gestures. Among the many ways gestures, virtual or authentic, are utilized is to show emotion. And, so on Valentine’s Day, one might give or receive virtual flowers--an emotional gesture--through Facebook. You may think this is absurd, but the virtual goods market is now $1.5 billion per year, according to a post on TechCrunch.

I'm bringing this phenomenon to your attention to point out the way virtual gestures connect to postmodern advertising. If the kind of virtual goods that are being sold aren’t about the product—remember the product is virtual—then what else is it about? Well, one thing is the emotion associated with the gesture. I think that emotions associated with gesturing go back before there were such things as virtual goods. In my book Advertising in Everyday Life I write about the loss of tactility that accompanied the development of mass-produced goods. By loss of tactility, I’m referring to our removal from the means of production – we no longer make our own stuff. And, because of packaging, we are unable to see or touch products we purchase, as just about everything comes sealed in a box. So, in my opinion the act of purchasing goods has been “virtual” for a long time; services because they are intangible to begin with, have always been virtual by my definition. So, virtual goods are no big deal in my opinion, just an extension of a cultural practice—gesture—that is more than 100 years old. What has replaced our ability to “touch” products is advertising. Yes, in a postmodern sense we touch advertising through our participation with it. Whether it’s consumer generated advertising or simply voting, which I’ve written about in this blog, these are both gestures. So, I think that purchasing virtual goods is novel, but the ideas upon which it is based are not new. I think, like postmodern advertising, tactility and in that gestures have taken on extended meaning.

Diesel Jeans are Wicked Stupid

2010-01-30T11:36:00.000-08:00

We’ve spent much time discussing advertising that is either rational/intellectual in its orientation, meaning that it contains useful information that is intended to help consumers make purchase decisions, or advertising that is emotional, meaning that it tugs on your heart strings in order to make a connection to the consumer with the idea that consumers are likely to purchase products and services to which they feel the closest and with which they identify themselves e.g. “I’m a PC or I’m a Mac.”

Now comes Diesel, best known for their jeans, with an ad campaign that beckons the consumer to be stupid. In fact, that’s the tag line: “Be Stupid.” The idea behind the campaign is summed up in a copy line from one of the ads: “Smart listens to the head. Stupid listens to the heart.” The implication, I think, is that listening to the head, isn’t much fun. Listening to the heart, however, can be. In other words, feeling is much easier than thinking. The campaign continuously plays on this theme by developing constructs for us: brains vs. balls; what is vs. what could be; plans vs. stories; and no vs. yes. Each of these suggests the same thing – decisions are better left to the emotions. Not a particularly original message, but one that upon review of the campaign you might find engaging.

If advertisers can dislodge us from our rational selves (if you even believe there is one?) they are better able to manipulate our emotions. Feelings are fickle, but rational thought is not. Nudging consumers into an emotional corner is, if fact, the goal of much advertising that seeks to contain and control the consumer.

Toyota and Tylenol Are Not the Same

2010-01-28T11:49:00.000-08:00

A classic case study in the history of public relations is the handling by Johnson and Johnson of the Tylenol tragedy in which capsules laced with cyanide were discovered to be the cause of death of seven people in the Chicago area. Because of J&J’s swift action, pulling Tylenol off the shelves of the nation’s retailers, the company in time was able to bring the product back to market and restore the brand’s image. In other words, they utilized a recall and continuous communication from top management to turn a tragedy into a public relations success story. That was 1983.

Fast forward to 2010 and Toyota, by some accounts, is employing similar tactics in halting production and sales of eight of its vehicles. That action is in addition to the massive recall of several million vehicles. According to one pr case book I consulted, the lessons of the Tylenol incident include: candor with the public, integrity of the brand, proactive leadership by management, and effective feedback mechanisms. So, many companies, including GM, Firestone, Johns Manville and Proctor and Gamble, chose in years past not to follow what in retrospect seems like the commonsense public relations practiced by J&J.

But I don’t think the problem that J&J faced and the one Toyota faces are as parallel as some seem to think. First, J&J’s problem was domestic; Toyota’s is global. Communication media are vastly different now, especially with regard to the ways in which consumers participate in the process. Just do a Twitter search on the word “Toyota” to see what people are saying about the recall. Or go to YouTube and view some of the myriad videos that have been posted regarding this issue. J&J was better able to control the output of their communication, to offer up their corporate leader as chief spokesperson, and to time their communication efforts to their advantage. With Toyota, the media environment is 24/7. And, everyone is or can be a spokesperson on the issue: the president of Toyota doesn’t command any more presence or authority than Joe the Blogger. In an age of participatory media, it will be interesting to see how this issue unfolds and whether or not it will become a model for a world enveloped by social media, and whether like Tylenol, it will find a place in the annals of future public relations textbooks.

Voting and the Super Bowl

2010-01-25T04:16:00.000-08:00

Super Bowl advertising continues to evolve both in terms of who is advertising and the nature of the ads themselves. To the first point, it appears that at least to some extent the old guard is out, as venerable Super Bowl advertisers like Pepsi are out this year. The event is becoming a place where lesser-known brands, well, like Hyundai are choosing to make a big splash. In fact that may be what super bowl advertising is all about – creating an impact that otherwise would be difficult to achieve. Aligning a brand with such an important cultural ritual like watching the super bowl can skyrocket brand awareness. GoDaddy.com is one such brand that comes to mind. But for products like Pepsi, where awareness levels are already quite high, there isn’t much the Super Bowl can do for the brand. Pepsi has, this year, opted for a different route to brand building. To the second point, I’ve noticed the continuation of a trend in Super Bowl advertising that relates to this blog’s title – participatory advertising. There appears to be several if not many opportunities for consumers to vote in and around Super Bowl advertising. For example, in a previous blog post I pointed to Careerbuilder.com as a website where one could vote for their favorite commercial, the winner will air on the Super Bowl. Doritos has been employing this technique for three years and continues with its “Crash the Super Bowl” promotion. Voting is a cultural ritual that we usually think of when considering the election of political candidates. As advertising can also be considered a social practice--another term for ritual which I write about in my book Advertising in Everyday Life--it is perhaps understandable why advertisers want consumers to participate in advertising in a somewhat similar way as another cultural ritual – voting. The ability to step into the polling booth and cast your vote for a political candidate is a form of personal empowerment. This practice – voting – also works in the world of advertising where marketers want to empower consumers, at least on the symbolic level. So, the Super Bowl represents a unique opportunity to step into the polling booth, metaphorically, and vote for your favorite advertisement, becoming an empowered consumer. But to what end, I ask?

Caught with your pants down follow-up

2010-01-22T08:20:00.000-08:00

Who would have thought that guys caught with their pants down or conversely being encouraged to “wear the pants” would be such a vital trend in advertising. As pointed out in my previous blog post, I have kept track of nearly three-dozen commercials over a period of years that depict guys caught in public with their pants down. And, I have described the use of this technique in my academic research as a way of debasing masculinity: masculine gender identity becomes like raw skin irritated by a dull razor and no shave cream. Just as the trend looked like it was picking up steam again—see the two ads in the previous post—Dockers comes along with an about to be launched Super Bowl campaign that encourages men to simply “wear the pants.” So what is a man to do: wear the pants or take them off in public? Metaphorically, wearing the pants is aligned with traditional masculinity as in the male “wears the pants in the family.” Wearing the pants would assign the male the role of breadwinner; chief wage earner. But we know that is not based on fact given what the recession in the late-eighties/early nineties did to men’s ability to obtain gainful employment; same for this current recession where men have been displaced from their jobs at a greater rate than women. In fact a recent Pew report says 22 percent of men with "some college" are now outearned by their wives. So the message expressed in the Dockers ad campaign in based on a myth. But much advertising is mythic in quality; myth being another word for a lie. The Dockers ad theme is based on a male fantasy and the idea is consistent with what Susan Faludi wrote in her book Stiffed about men becoming “ornaments.” No longer are many men the sole or even major breadwinner in their families, so the only way they can recoup their virility is to, in this case, wear Dockers. While the phrase “wear the pants” may be strong in tone, it is offered to a weakened male consumer. The advertisement in this way offers recompense for the male consumer’s lost status in society. Advertising, and in that purchasing Dockers, in this instance becomes the solution to his personal problem – loss of status. Furthermore, the counter messages offered by the sum total of all this advertising—pants off/pants on—is to send a message of confusion to males – which is it? In this way masculinity becomes problematic for the consumer as these and other advertisements raise the question: who am I? The only way to answer is to purchase the product. As Faludi might suggest: men have become mere ornaments.

Caught with their pants down: Men in advertising

2010-01-15T18:17:00.000-08:00

This blog is titled Participatory Advertising because consumers are taking a more active role in the advertising process as demonstrated by consumer generated advertising (CGA) and myriad opportunities via dedicated web sites and social networking sites to interact directly with brands. Careerbuilder is one company that is “pre-gaming” the Super Bowl with a campaign that asks consumers to view three commercials and vote for the one they like the best, which will appear on the Super Bowl. In this way, the company empowers consumers, allowing them to participate in the construction of meaning and experience. This is a direction that advertising has been following for a short while and one that I have been documenting in my blog. But I also want to point out Careerbuilder commercials that represents a trend that I have been following for several years; that is, commercials that literally depict men in public without their pants.

Careerbuilder is the latest brand to join use this tactic. I wrote an academic paper on this subject in which I deconstructed more than two-dozen commercials that depicted men in public without their pants. I concluded that the tactic was an opportunity to strip men of their masculinity—literally and figuratively—and rebuild them (metaphorically) into the consumers advertisers wish them to be. In my paper I write critically of this approach, which I think serves as an irritant that diminishes masculinity and makes it problematic. When you look at the commercial, I’m certain you’ll think it’s humorous. But if you can get past the humor, consider that commercials like this one are aired several if not many times, and if you consider the number of commercials that utilize this among other emasculating tactics (see the Identity Guard commercial below), perhaps you’ll understand where my criticism comes from.

Oh, and to reinforce the issue check out this American Idol audition. As we begin our course this semester, we will be considering issues regarding the depiction of gender, race, ethnicity and sexuality in advertising. The treatment of males is as good a place as any to begin.

As the Domino's fall, so goes advertising

2010-01-08T06:52:00.000-08:00

I have to admit that I was absolutely appalled by this advertisement for Domino’s pizza in which members of a “focus group” talk about the shortcomings of the product. Of course, the commercial resolves this dilemma by declaring that Domino’s has changed for the better. But whatever happened to the logic of “don’t ever let them see you sweat”? In other words, why would any company air their dirty laundry—in particular the shortcomings of their product—on national television and beyond? But in the new world of advertising there is no place for logic. While some advertising is interested in creating meaning for consumers, other advertising is simply interested in creating a visceral reaction – an experience. Whether or not that visceral reaction is positive or negative doesn’t seem to matter, because in this age of distraction, you first have to get the attention of consumers by whatever means you can muster. In my book Advertising in Everyday Life, I write about a three-step process--wonder leads to consent, which leads to participation--that extends beyond the kind of cause and effect reasoning of earlier advertising processes, sometimes referred to as the hierarchy of effects. What interests me about the Domino’s advertising campaign isn’t just the television commercial, the 897 comments (to date) the ad received and the 200,000 hits the commercial received on YouTube have to be considered as a form of engagement. And, beyond the commercial and the buzz it created through “new media,” we must consider the almost five minute segment that the campaign received on The Colbert Report.

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

Alpha Dog of the Week - Domino's Pizza

www.colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

Political Humor

Economy

Even though Colbert’s segment is a snarky attack on the logic of the ad campaign, I don’t think that offended Domino’s executives in the least. Having said that, I would love to have been a fly on the wall when the advertising agency convinced the Domino’s brand manager that this was a good way to go. The approach simply defies logic, but the new advertising dictates that logic be thrown out the window, replaced by attention getting ploys that are intended to engage consumers through their own participation with the ad campaign. That's the way the new advertising works.

Ethical and Legal Aspects of Comparative Advertising

2009-11-22T15:14:00.000-08:00

The last section of our course deals with advertising ethics. When it comes to making claims, advertisers historically have gone overboard. In advertising parlance, we call this “puffery,” which refers to the exaggerated claims advertisers make for their products and services. Some scholars refer to advertising as “the permissible lie.” The New York Times reports this story regarding how advertisers are now suing one another over claims made in their ads; the issue is that an advertiser may lose market share as a result of a particular claim made by a competitor. Consumers have learned to accept that advertisers overstate their claims, even though to some this may seem unethical. Advertisers have the opportunity to take their issue to the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division, or they can directly sue the competitor to either get the offending ad withdrawn or for compensatory damages when they can prove market share has been affected, and of course that the claim is unsubstantiated.

When it comes to comparative advertising, the FTC has actually encouraged advertisers to directly compare the attributes of their product or service against a competitor's. The government passed a regulation back in 1978 to that effect, and as a result we’ve seen over the years campaigns like the Pepsi Challenge, among others.

The Times reports that a number of brands are going after competitors--Campbell and Progresso to name one--and that this is a response to a weak economy. In other words, no one can afford to lose market share. Read the article and look at the accompanying video to consider whether you think comparative claims are an ethic issue or a legal issue?

Coke Ties into new Movie Avatar

2009-11-20T10:53:00.000-08:00

In early November I blogged about augemented reality as a tool for marketers to more deeply engage consumers. Advertising Age reports that Coke has an augemented reality tie in with the upcoming movie Avatar. I've provided a link to the commercial here. It's interesting to see AR grow so rapidly as the AdAge article reports that it's not only Coke that's employing the tactic, but McDonalds too is joining in the virtual reality business. The article raises questions regarding whether or not consumers will quickly tire of this because it will be viewed as a gimmick. I think not, at least for some consumers. Kids who are under the age of 15 are users of virtual worlds and games moreso than older teens or young adults. So, there is a generational wave that is coming foward that not only is used to these kinds of technologies, but expects them to be there for them. Savvy marketers need to be invested in augmented and virtual reality platforms or they will be missing out on an important opportunity to engage this younger cohort. So, while you may think this stuff is lame, my guess is that younger consumers think it's cool and it will remain cool as the technology gets better and better with time.

The way advertising works in a postmodern world

2009-11-13T04:39:00.000-08:00

I’m thinking about the ways in which media content bleeds into other media content. In this case I was watching a commercial for the Sony Vizio television set, and I’m focusing not on the product (I’m not in the market for a TV set), but on the song. Impressed with the music, I set out on a search. The website adtunes.com informs me that the song is by the electronic group Empire of the Sun and the title of the song is We Are the People. I do more research and find the song on MySpace.com and on Last.fm. Having located the song, I can download it and add it to my music collection for replay on my iPod. This is an unintended use of advertising and it exemplifies, to use a phrase out of cultural studies, the “intertextual web that we weave,” as one form of media content, in this case an advertisement, becomes interconnected with a popular song. This is certainly not the first time I’ve done this. It’s feels like a journey of discovery. I see an ad that attracts my attention because of something that unrelated to the product appeals to me, and I set out to find more about that "thing." On my journey I did visit the Sony website to see if the commercial was playing there, and in the past I have noticed that sometimes companies will “give away” the song on their website. So, perhaps this represents a fair trade-off: on my journey I learn something about the TV set, and I also get a song that I like. From a cultural perspective this represents the "work" advertising does on us, and the "work" we do with it.

Imaginary Social Relationships and Advertising Part II

2009-11-10T05:30:00.000-08:00

In part one I described the most basic elements of an imaginary social relationship based on extreme admiration, but it’s important to recall that those relationships that endure must be based on something deeper, more significant. In my case, two years ago I was stricken with cancer, from which I was not expected to recover. Obviously, I did survive, and I believe part of my will to survive was in “knowing” Lance Armstrong. When I became ill, one of the first things I did—in addition to seeing lots of doctors or perhaps because I was seeing lots of doctors—was to read Lance’s book which in great detail described his ordeal, but also the book described how he managed his health care and how he handled his recovery. In other words, he prescribed a method to deal with exactly what I was going through. Cancer: he’d been there; done that. I was just going through my personal ordeal and needed help. And, because it was Lance and because he was a survivor, I took his recommendations to heart.

As I recovered I became involved in Livestrong his charitable foundation that seeks to eradicate cancer. I never ever take off my yellow wristband that is imbued with meaning and significance. During this year’s Tour de France, Lance’s comeback had me glued to the TV screen even more than in the past. The fact that he did so well, placing third overall, moved me deeply, and I hate to admit it, but during the race I followed him on Twitter. Okay, I hate to admit this too, - I still follow him on Twitter.

Lance currently advertises for Clear2Go water bottle, and he was hawking an energy drink whose name escapes me. I think he’s done ads for Oakley sunglasses, and I think he’s advertised for several other brands that I just can’t recall. I’m aware his new team sponsor is Radio Shack. Ironically, when I see him in advertisements I can’t say that my imaginary relationship is enhanced in a positive direction, and his appearance in those ads does not endear these brands/products to me. To be truthful, his association with advertisements kind of sullies my image of him. Often times when media figures appear in advertisements, changes take place in the imaginary relationship that corresponds with changes in the ways consumers perceive the brand. I guess if products that Lance Armstrong promoted were relevant to me, I’d probably give them a try. And, I do think it was a very strategic move on the part of Radio Shack to align itself with the “Armstrong brand.” I will look more favorably upon that brand and likely shop at their stores.

I’ve only scratched the surface of my imaginary social relationship with Lance Armstrong. I don’t maintain such imaginary connections to very many media figures, but there are and have been others. I think I could write many more details that would provide even greater understanding of how this process of engagement with media figures works and the role that media figures play in our lives and the implications for advertisers. But because blogs are not books, I’ll end it here.

Imaginary Social Relationships and Advertising Part I

2009-11-10T05:17:00.000-08:00

An interesting area of media research, according to John Caughey, author of Imaginary Social Worlds is the subjective social experience that people have with media figures. One significant avenue is the “smarm of bees” in the guise of media figures with which people surround themselves beyond their actual relationships. These pseudo relationships with media figures provide a false sense of intimacy.

Okay. So here it goes: I have an imaginary social relationship with Lance Armstrong the 7-time Tour de France winner and cancer survivor. He is someone that I greatly admire, and he is someone with whom I have much in common. On the one hand, I’m a big fan of bicycle racing, and I am glued to the TV each summer during the entire month of July when the Tour de France is broadcast. When Armstrong retired from the sport several years ago, my love for the sport was severely deflated. But he came back this year, and I was riveted to the screen every day for hours, intently engrossed in this rather esoteric sport, at least by American standards. In fact, that’s one of the reasons I like bike racing, it’s not very popular in the States. In that way I can “own” it, and therefore be different in a way that adds to my individuality. It’s interesting to consider that I use Lance Armstrong in order to help craft my own individuality. Liking football or baseball puts one with the masses, but liking a sport that isn’t widely appealing and you’ve got the ingredients of a meaningful relationship.

But it’s more than me being a fan; I use to race bicycles myself – sometimes riding 8,000 miles a year when training. I was a proficient stage racer, which is what the Tour is – a stage race. So, the fact that I raced bikes and Lance Armstrong is the best stage racer there ever was provides the basis for an imaginary social relationship based on deep admiration. And it is through Lance Armstrong that I can have a vicarious relationship with the sport.

I have “known” Lance Armstrong for many years, as I became aware of him when he was a young rider, known as a brash and arrogant American and therefore not too likeable. He came up on the heels of the first American to win the Tour, Greg Lemond, who unfortunately was shot in a hunting accident that ended his career. Lance Armstrong as I recall rapidly moved up through the ranks of American cyclists, and for those of us American fans of a European dominated sport without Lemond there wasn’t anyplace else to turn – Lance had to me our man.

Irony of ironies at the height of his career, he was stricken with cancer that had spread throughout his body. Reading news accounts—all of this took place prior to Facebook and Twitter—was the only way to follow his journey through the maze of healthcare and eventually to the road to recovery. When he made his comeback and went on to win the Tour de France multiple times after being stricken by such a dreaded disease, my admiration knew no bounds. Remember that the root of the word fan is fanatic; yes, I was a fanatic when it came to Lance Armstrong. But the imaginary social relationship doesn’t stop there. Stay tuned for part two.

Participating in Imaginary Social Worlds

2009-11-05T06:05:00.000-08:00

Imaginary social relationships are relationships we have with media figures that parallel actual relationships. They comprise just one stop of the wheel of imaginary social worlds. First, a media figure can be a sports figure, celebrity (meaning actress or actress), newscaster, politician and it also might refer to people who are thrust into the news, like Octomom, for example. Anyway, because imaginary social relationships parallel actual relationships, media figures may play important roles in our lives as father or mother figures, mentors or teachers, friends, and lovers, among other roles. Sometimes the imaginary relationship is based on hatred, for example I cannot stand Rosie O’Donnell. I don’t know her, but I simply cannot stand her. From time to time imaginary social relationships tip over too far as was the infamous case of John Hinckley who attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in order to impress the actress Jody Foster. Unfortunately celebrity stalking has become all too common in our culture. Putting such extreme cases aside, I think it is fair to say that anyone who grows up in a mediated culture such as ours is likely to engage in imaginary social relationships with media figures. For some people the relationship may be on the level of liking, but for others the relationships may be enduring and quite complex. It is on the basis of deep and meaningful imaginary relationships that savvy marketers consider using media figures in their advertisements. Selecting the appropriate media figure for the right product and communicating with the right audience can produce “magic” for the marketer. The use of such media figures can invoke the wonder-consent-participation process that I have described as a hallmark of postmodern advertising with the result being the ever-coveted deep engagementof the consumer. Imaginary social relationships are just one part of multiple realities in which we exist that extend from the authentic outward to mediated worlds and inward to imaginary social worlds. Each of these “worlds” feeds off one another, as is the case with dreams whose content feeds off our everyday life (day residue) and whose content informs our everyday life (dream residue).

Living in multiple realities: a marketer's dream

2009-11-04T09:32:00.000-08:00

Living in multiple realities is a concept that is difficult to grasp. Let me try to explain: Consider the world of media as one reality; and, our own imaginary inner world of day dreams and such as another reality. Couple those realities with our authentic reality (what we might call the really real), and perhaps now you can see that we live in multiple realities. There are more realities that we might include, like the world of nocturnal dreams. All of these realities are intertwined, feeding off one another. Marketing communication plays an important role in this process, and some new technology is pushing the envelope further. Consider the idea of augmented reality. Augmented reality refers to elements of the authentic world mixed with computer generated images. In this well, as the name suggests, reality is augmented or extended. Well, first perhaps look at the video above to see how augmented reality can be applied to marketing problems. Mind blowing. Right? There is a company Total Immersion that has developed the technology used in the Molson beer campaign. When we talk about interactivity and deep engagement, it seems to me the use of this technology as an advertising medium is spot on.

What it costs to reach a TV audience

2009-10-31T06:33:00.000-07:00

Advertising Age recently reported costs for 30-second network television commercials (see chart). As consumers of advertising we rarely think about what it costs to advertise. This TV season, Sunday Night Football leads the way at almost $400 thousand per thirty-second spot. And, as we have learned, you can’t just run a commercial one time; it has to be shown a minimum of three times in order for it to register with the consumer. The figures displayed above are based on audience size, after all media exists to sell an audience to an advertiser. A program like American Idol, that may have an audience of 30 million viewers (their numbers have been going down in the past couple of years from a peak of around 34 million viewers), can charge upwards of $700 thousand per 30-second spot. And, don’t get me started on Super Bowl advertising, which is likely to come in this year around $2.3 million per 30-second spot. We’re talking about the cost of time alone, not production costs. Production costs for a network spot would be in the area of $350,000. When you add the cost of production with the cost of the television time to run the advertisement and multiple the per spot cost by at least three, you can perhaps see why advertisers seek alternative ways in which to reach consumers. This high costs associated with network advertising have to be considered within an audience that is distracted, often multitasking perhaps even with multiple media as we shift from the TV screen to the computer screen.

Men at Work

2009-10-29T15:40:00.000-07:00

I have written before about the negative depictions of men in television advertising. Indeed it has been a central topic of my research over the past five or so years. My perspective comes out of several research studies that I have conducted on the depiction of men as wolves and lower animals, men as cavemen, and men caught in public literally with their pants down. For the latter study, I collected twenty-seven examples of television commercials depicting men caught with their pants down. One of the better-known commercials featured comedian Dave Chappelle, in an ad for Pepsi, who has his pants sucked off by an over-active vacuum cleaner. While watching TV last evening, I noticed a new commercial for a company, Identity Guard. You can see the commercial above. Notice that the guy in the commercial is, well, depicted in public wearing only his underwear. While on the surface, I agree, this is humorous, and from a creative perspective, the image deviates from the norm and therefore is likely to garner attention. From a cultural perspective, however, I think more is at work. To be “caught with your pants down” is a humiliating experience associated with public embarrassment. The fact that the individual in the ad is oblivious to his situation drives home the point. If it’s okay to be stripped of your manhood, then there’s nothing left to loose. Considering the loss that many men have experienced during this current recession, there is consolation in the fact that there is, well, nothing left to lose. Maybe we can use such depictions to measure the state of the economy: if there’s nothing left to lose, then maybe the economy is at bottom and will begin to turn around. I have no idea if there really is a correlation; in fact, I doubt it. But when the economy does turn around many of those men who lost their jobs will not be getting them back. I wonder how will advertising treat them when times are good?

Dreaming of Oprah

2009-10-28T05:04:00.000-07:00

I had a dream last night that I want to recount to you. It took place in Chicago, a city where I have never been, but with which I am familiar because of its depiction on TV and in movies. In the dream I lived in a high-rise apartment, but I had moved from the side of the building that featured a view of the city to the other side of the building where there was no view. I was walking down a boulevard with one of my colleagues who I invited to my home to work on a research project. I was trying to write down my phone number for her so she could contact me, but the color of the ink in the pen and the color of the paper on which I was trying to write were similar, so it was difficult to see what I was writing. Additionally, I had difficulty remembering my phone number. Walking along the boulevard (I think I was on the median strip) who did I spot in her green Porsche convertible? It was Oprah Winfrey who was on her way home from work. It was about six o’clock when I spotted her; that’s how I knew she was on her way home after work. I recall that the Porsche was not a new one. It was a 911 and about 9 years olds. It was a warm sunny day, which might explain the convertible top being down, making Oprah so easy to spot. Oprah – that’s interesting, I think. I have to admit over the years I have had successive dreams of Oprah, some of which I have recorded. I recall when my book was about to be published that I dreamed Oprah and I met at Sara Beth’s a restaurant on the Upper East Side of New York to discuss my appearance on an upcoming show. It was kind of a pre-interview. I don’t know why Oprah Winfrey repeatedly shows up in my dreams. I’m not a fan, although I admire her greatly. I’ve seen her television program, but I don’t watch it regularly. In fact I probably haven’t seen it in a year. I know enough about dreams to realize that Oprah is a metaphor; she’s standing in for something or someone else. I won’t go into a deep analysis of my dream, although over the years that I have been doing dream research, I’ve learned much about dream analysis and can usually apply it to my own dreams with some success. It’s important to point out that even though Oprah appeared in my dream, she appeared as an expedient substitute for someone or something else. Like all media figures that appear in our dreams, she is convenient. And, that is one of the roles that media figures play in our dreams, as a replacement for something or someone else that is perhaps more meaningful. I also want to point out that when celebrities appear in our dreams, according my research, they invariably are our friends. In other words, while we recognize them as celebrities, they lose their celebrity status in our dreams. Oprah. A green 911 Porsche. A well-known NYC restaurant. These are the things from our everyday lives—what Freud called day residue—that show up in our nocturnal world.

Brands as Immersive Environments

2009-10-26T18:06:00.000-07:00

This past weekend I participated in the Nike Human 10K Race – a virtual race for runners from all over the world. As we have been discussing ways in which consumers engage with brands through immersive environments like NikePlus.com, I thought it might be beneficial to attempt to recount my experience to you. From the outset, I want to emphasize just how strange it was to run a race (I use the term loosely) all by myself: no one to run with; and, no one to cheer me on. When I passed other runners in my neighborhood, I wondered whether they were doing the same thing I was. But all I could do was nod in acknowledgment. It was a rather strange feeling, I must say. I could have joined a “community” online, but that would have been a virtual experience, not a real community of runners to actually run with. I guess I could have attempted to locate local runners who were participating in the Nike Human 10K and run with them, but that seemed kind of like a weird thing to do. So, I ran a race alone. What place did I come in? 5,421. Doesn’t sound so good, does it? Five thousandth place. But then again there were tens of thousands of runners. So, it was only when I uploaded my run to the NikePlus web site that I was able to get a feeling of some satisfaction. I could locate my place at the finish, and I could compare my time to people from all over the world. I walked away (metaphorically speaking) from the event with a pretty good feeling about the whole thing. But I can’t say I felt connected, socially networked. It wasn’t a bad experience, and since I use this website on a regular basis, running in a virtual race—in the end—was just an extension of what I already had been doing in this immersive brand environment.

There's an app for that?

2009-10-15T05:47:00.000-07:00

Pepsi seems to be catching some flak for an Apple iPhone app for its Amp Energy drink. The app is aimed at guys who want to pick up girls. A story was reported in the 10/14 issue of The Wall Street Journal that raised the criticism of the app because it is, well, tasteless. There was critical buzz on Twitter, and blogs like Adfreak.com regarding how the app objectifies women. Is Pepsi going to pull the plug on the app? Maybe and maybe not. At this time, it isn’t clear as I think they are measuring whether or not such product positioning and the accompanying critique actually helps the brand or whether public pressure will force them to withdraw the app. All of this--the app and the criticism--speaks to the issue of engagement. Multiple channels are at work here: there is the app, then there's the Twitter feed, then there's the blog response. Creating controversy is a means to activate consumers, and serves the role of making advertising more interesting, and by that I mean engaging.

So, you want to be a buzz agent?

2009-10-05T11:43:00.000-07:00

You might want to think twice if you are considering blogging on behalf of a brand and receive some kind of payment or freebie. As new media become mainstream, it is incumbent upon the regulators, like the FTC, to revise their guidelines governing such changes in arenas where media and marketing converge. In fact, this is the first time since 1980 that the Federal Trade Commission has revised those guidelines on endorsements and testimonials; they guidelines will now cover bloggers who get paid to promote products and services. I think it’s good to see government regulators moving on this issue as consumers become more complicit in the marketing of products and services. Not only are word of mouth marketers like Buzz Agent involved in this newer form of communicating, but so are sponsors who are taking advantage of Twitter, compensating some consumers for plugging their products for a fee. The October 15 issue of Time magazine, includes an article on paid tweeting, which is controversial, as consumers don’t know if the endorsement is authentic or paid. When the advantage goes this far against the consumer, it’s incumbent upon the government to step in and do something to level the playing field. In this case, the FTC has updating its guidelines. I think it’s odd, however, that consumers themselves are participating in this new practice. Maybe this is just the ugly side of participatory advertising.

Some new buzz in Ad biz...

2009-10-04T09:30:00.000-07:00

I came upon some new and interesting forms of participatory advertising that I thought might be of interest. The first comes from the people that brought you the Got Milk? Campaign. This is an update of their White Gold campaign of last year aimed at the youth market. This updated version has a website milkquarious.com that launches October 5, 2009. According to Shootonline, for the current campaign, “White Gold goes beyond music videos to star in his own 20-minute online rock opera, Battle for Milkquarious…White Gold is billed as the star, writer and producer for the rock opera which chronicles his quest to save his hometown of Milkquarious from a devastating milk shortage. The villain Nasterious steals the town's milk and kidnaps White Gold's love interest, Strawberry Summers. White Gold travels across the galaxy to rescue her and return the stolen milk to the townspeople.”

The next campaign was written about in Online Media Daily. This new campaign is for Coca-Cola, which has “signed on as the first sponsor of "Sounds of Buzz," an online community launched by pop-culture blog publisher BuzzMedia offering live concert coverage from top bands, photos, video, news and show reviews.” The article reports that “Coke is partnering on the effort with BuzzMedia's music-focused blogs Buzznet, Stereogum and Absolute Punk. The SoundsofBuzz.com site, which will be up through Oct. 31, features ample Coke branding throughout. As part of the broader campaign, Coke and BuzzMedia sponsored Katy Perry's recent show at the Hollywood Palladium in Los Angeles. The full concert is now available at the Sounds of Buzz site.” Check out the Katy Perry concert – pretty cool, if you’re a fan.

Finally, there’s the buzz created around Arby’s, which was recently rated by J.D. Power and Associates as the most talked-about quick-service restaurant online among "early careerists" (those between the ages of 22-29). This was at least in part due to this summer's Wednesday Freebies promotion. The J.D. Power and Associates report was based on several hundred thousand conversations on social networking sites. This is a good example of how marketers are utilizing “engagement” as the new measure of campaign success.

Pepsi and Will.i.am team up for a social networking experience

2009-09-26T11:08:00.000-07:00

Pepsi is providing us with a really good example of consumer generated advertising (cga) with its new campaign from Will.i.am and LMFAO that allows consumers to remix different music segments and to post them online. While the general concept of participatory advertising is no longer new, we can see that the levels of engagement continue to increase as marketers find more creative ways to bring consumers “into” the brand and to place the brand “inside” consumers. In the process of creating their own mixes, consumers also join a community through collaboration and sharing; yet another twist on Web 2.0, social networking. The level of complicity on the part of consumers—in other words, their willingness to participate in marketing schemes—is unprecedented. Check it out on YouTube and let me know what you think!

Social media: Nobody doesn’t like it

2009-09-22T06:11:00.000-07:00

Sara Lee has made a foray into social media with a series of webisodes that utilize real moms hawking Sara Lee products. The use of “real moms” lends an air of authenticity, which we know is important for believability. Beyond that, the web series is posted on Facebook, YouTube and Metacafe. Social media are the cornerstone of the “new advertising.” Added to the appearance of the video series on social media websites are blogging and tweeting. Who would have ever thought that advertising would come to this? But these are the tactics of the moment and fit nicely into the rubric of Participatory Advertising, with engagement being the measurement of success. Perhaps it’s these difficult economic times that are driving marketers like Sara Lee toward the use of social media. The use of social media websites with their interactive qualities should provide a good lesson in marketing economics. This is especially important given new tools to measure engagement in the marketplace. While traditional advertising may work well at establishing awareness and it may serve as an important reminder, brands that want to engage deeply with their target markets much utilize social media.

Advertising: It's Everywhere, It's Everywhere

2009-09-17T10:47:00.000-07:00

The insidiousness of commercial communication is so rampant that we no longer notice it, and we no longer think about its intrusion into our daily lives. Whether it’s supermarkets tracking our purchases as we swipe our cards, or the innocuous selling of magazine subscription data to marketers, consumers do not see the process of selling data—there is no transparency—and so they don’t know to care. What has seemed innocuous has turned uglier in my opinion. Behavioral tracking or behavioral advertising as it is sometimes called allows a website to collect information about you and then sell it to potential advertisers. A good example was offered up by a student who said, after purchasing something from American Apparel, she noticed the next day that an ad for American Apparel showed up on her Facebook page. Any organization that collects data—in all possible forms—is in the position to sell that data to others. Data mining is big business for politicians and for marketers of products and services. For the consumer, the playing field has again become uneven. Consumers don’t stand a chance, because they aren’t even aware this is going on. At the beginning of September, ten consumer advocacy groups appealed to Congress to do something about this growing problem. Today, it was reported the FTC would take up the issue in a series of public discussions that will take place in December. What may come out of those discussions are answers to questions regarding our right to privacy. Why the discussions are limited to behavioral advertising on the web and do not extend to other database marketing tactics is beyond me. To the extent that people care about their privacy, this is a huge issue. But I’m not sure people even care that much; we live in such an over-exposed society. Awareness is a good first step, as you cannot respond to an issue unless you know it’s going on. Many people don't mind this at all; they don't perceive it to be an intrusion. For those consumers would prefer to keep their purchases to themselves, some guidelines and perhaps regulations by the FTC may be in order.

Doritos "Crash the Super Bowl" Consumer Generated Advertising Campaign

2009-09-10T08:59:00.000-07:00

This blog is titled Participatory Advertising because it follows a trend in which consumers are, well, generating their own advertising messages and disseminating messages in new ways. Take Doritos, for example, which just announced its newest contest for consumer generated advertising (CGA). The winner will have her or his commercial shown during the February 7, 2010 Super Bowl. Moreover, the winner could earn $5 million, according to an article in today’s USA Today. The contest has its own website Crash the Super Bowl where contestants can upload their commercials and others can view the entries and vote on them. We’ve become familiar with the notion of viral marketing of which this is a great example – the expectation being that through social networking friends and friends of friends will be directed to the website where they can view and vote for what they think is the best commercial. Last year’s prize was $1 million, so the ante has been upped. It will be interesting to see if the amateurish nature of much consumer generated advertising, given this year’s prize, will give way to more professional involvement. At base, I think this is what we’re dealing with regarding consumer generated advertising: the work of amateurs vs. the work of professionals. There’s an interesting book by Andrew Keen, The Cult of the Amateur that speaks to this issue. There is a certain sense of authenticity to amateur production that must be acknowledged, but the nature of these things is that over time they become slicker and slicker, replicating what was there prior to the advent of consumer generated advertising.

Gardasil for men? Oh, I can see the ads now!

2009-09-08T11:28:00.001-07:00

On September 4 The Wall Street Journal reported that the manufacturer of Gardasil, the vaccine that is suppose to prevent HPV in women has now been approved by the FDA for use by young men. I know you could not have missed the prolific advertising campaign for Gardasil, so can you imagine the onslaught of commercials you’re about to see for a male version? I can just see the ads now: young man standing with a beer in one hand and syringe in the other with the tag line “Party On.” No seriously…The subject of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising is the subject of my current research. You can see the data from my most recent study of 18-24 year olds here. Part of what concerns me is that pharmaceutical manufacturers are aiming their messages at younger and younger consumers. Gardasil is a product for use by women 9-26 years of age, and while the ads may be directed at moms, those messages are also reaching younger women. Now Gardasil will be advertised to parents of young men, but we all know that young men will see the ads too. This is what I’m calling “ad creep” where direct to consumer prescription drug ads are directed toward younger consumers. Prescription drug advertising has a generalized effect on young people’s attitudes toward prescription drugs. Young consumers don’t think they can be harmed by prescription drugs and are more than willing to share them with friends. Think about the people you know who are taking Adderall, and think how easily such a medication gets circulated among students for whom it is NOT prescribed when they have to study for an exam. Therefore, the prescription drug pump is already primed, and advertisers couldn’t find a better target audience, as Generation Y represents the largest in history. If Gardasil prevents genital warts on young men, then by all means they should be able to learn about it from their doctor. But do we have to advertise it? You can see my video on this subject here.

Desperately chasing the audience

2009-09-08T08:35:00.001-07:00

Jay Leno’s new (old) show is about to premiere on NBC the network, his home for the past 17 years. This event dovetails with a discussion we’ve been having about audiences. In the case of NBC, the network where the Leno program will air, the number of viewers has been steadily dwindling from the era of “must see TV” when programs like Seinfeld garnered millions of viewers. The network will be happy if Leno can pull an audience of 5 million, which is more than their lack-luster late prime schedule of the past couple of years. If you understand that television is merely a vehicle to deliver an audience to an advertiser, perhaps you can understand why the defection of the network TV audience to cable stations or the Internet is cause for concern. Yes, there are some “reality” shows, like American Idol, that can still pull 30 million viewers on a good night, but even their numbers have been trending down (for myself: no Paula, no watch). But there are no more late prime-time dramas that seem to have the kind of pulling power to which the networks had become accustom. Mainstream media have been writing about Leno’s new/old show as if it were the death-knell for the network; the best hope is that this program becomes the new model for late prime-time network programming. Like reality programs, this one is cheap to produce, especially when compared to an hour-long drama. And, you know how ads are weaved into American Idol in a somewhat seamless manner? Well, Leno will be doing live commercials as a guard against the Tivo effect. At a certain price-point a low-cost variety program could be profitable to the network, and it might also satisfy advertisers looking for a moderately sized audience of 50-plus middle Americans – not exactly the group many advertisers wish to reach, because they just don’t buy the way younger consumers do. On the other hand, that older group is 96 million strong, so I wonder if we’re likely to see the program peppered with ads for erectile dysfunction, high cholesterol, incontinence and the like. Is the future of network TV doomed? Or can we just take a pill to cure what ails us?

Living in an age of distraction

2009-09-03T08:38:00.000-07:00

One of the reasons why advertisers have shifted away from traditional approaches to advertising and traditional advertising mediums is because consumers—particularly young ones—are so distracted. One source of that distraction is the simultaneous use of multiple media, what is commonly referred to as multitasking. Media research firm Nielsen confirms in a recent study that, indeed, more than half of American consumers use the Internet and tune into television at the same time. This is nothing to celebrate in my opinion, as each of these mediums “utilizes” the human brain in different ways: television relaxes the brain; and computer use stimulates the brain. While I recognize that many consumers are consuming multiple media simultaneously, I’m not sure—over the long term—how this affects brain development. A couple of years ago I did a study on this phenomenon and the findings suggest that consumers find it very difficult to “get,” that is understand, advertising messages when they are multitasking with multiple media. You can read the study here. So the fact that 57% of us are engaged in this behavior is not good news for advertisers. Living in an age of distraction does not make life any easier.

Art & Copy: An advertising documentary

2009-09-02T04:57:00.000-07:00

There's a new documentary film that debuted at the Sundance Film Festival about advertising. It isn't showing here yet, but I hope it will be soon. In the meantime, you can check out the trailer and visit the film's website. We'll be watching The Persuaders, which is a PBS Frontline documentary on the advertising business. It's getting a little old, but is still quite relevant. You can check out the documentary's website here.

What's your favorite brand?

2009-09-01T08:12:00.000-07:00

A brand is part of the meaning system of a product or service. Brand refers to the value added to a basic product or service. In this sense Starbucks isn't just a cup of coffee, it is the "place" between home and work. It is the latter that refers to the added value. So perhaps it's not surprising that a recent survey identified the following as the most trusted brands:
1. Johnson & Johnson
2. Sony
3. Apple
4. Colgate
5. Microsoft tied with 6. Coca Cola
7. Toyota
8. Nike tied with 9. Bank of America
10.Target tied with 11. Dell

How does this list gel with your own list of most trusted brands?

Just what is advertising?

2009-08-27T10:44:00.000-07:00

I have to admit I’m confused…I’ve been studying advertising for a long time, but I no longer seem to know what it is. If you “Google” the term advertising there is consensus that it refers to the promotion—informing and/or persuading consumers--of a product or service through paid announcements. But when you consider, for example the “dancing babies” video for Evian bottled water, how might we square it with that definition of advertising? The video’s distribution is not paid for, it contains no obvious message (what in advertising, they used to call a selling point), and it lacks persuasive elements and information (product features or benefits). So, how can you call it advertising? What the video does have is an emotional kick, which is intended to provide consumers with a vague association between those positive feelings the video evoked and the brand or product/service. Those feelings may be strong enough that consumers want to spread the word to other consumers.

In this way the advertisement is the consumer herself or himself. And, that is how products and services are being promoted in the 21st Century. This position is confirmed in an August 27, 2009 Wall Street Journal article in which Sir Martin Sorrell, chief executive of WPP Group, the world's largest (by revenue) advertising firm, who says, “it’s not going to be in 30-second TV ads; it’s not going to be in newspaper or magazine ads; it’s going to be…digital.” So, perhaps a good starting point this semester is to reconcile the traditional definition of advertising with this newer form. Do we even want to call it advertising?

And, what skills do you think it takes to create successful advertising of this kind? I’ve always said that confusion is a mark of intelligence, so it is my hope that through this confusion that you will comment below regarding how you might explain the Evian dancing babies, Cadbury eyebrows, or T-Mobile dance viral videos. I think that would be a good place to begin our semester.

Anyone hungry to learn about advetising? Double Down or Double think

2009-08-26T10:57:00.000-07:00

KFC has given us, perhaps, a good place to begin our Introduction to Advertising course. The story goes that KFC is testing a sandwich they call Double Down that places two fried chicken filets on a single sandwich. Oh, and it includes bacon and cheese as well as some secret sauce. Yum, right? If this were a calorie contest the KFC Double Down would probably win over other fast food chains. But this isn’t about calories, fat, cholesterol and salt – all that rational stuff. This advertising campaign is titled, “Unthink,” because KFC is asking consumers to “unthink” what they know about sandwiches. So, perhaps the first place to start this semester is to consider the difference between thinking, which in advertising parlance refers to rational decision making, or as in the case of KFC, unthinking, which is another term for feeling. In advertising parlance behavior based on feelings is non-rational. The difference between the two—rational decision-making and emotionally based behavior—will guide you for the remainder of this course. Check out the commercial and let me know what you think. You can read the article here.

Don Imus: where the cultural and financial economies converge

2007-04-12T05:35:00.000-07:00

Cultural theorists have written about two economies, one financial and one cultural. But I wonder as with the current controversy surrounding shlock jock Don Imus whether or not we can really separate the two. Within the financial economy at least three advertisers have announced intentions to withdraw their advertising support from the Imus program: Procter & Gamble, Bigelow Tea, and Staples office supply chain. As MSNBC decided to suspend airing of the program we could also say that General Electric owner of MSNBC also has for the time being withdrawn its economic support. The economics of syndicated radio are more complicated than this simple scenario for advertiser withdrawal suggests; there are plenty of advertisers, for example, including General Motors that have not as yet withdrawn their advertising from the program. Sometimes pop culture transcends the financial economy as controversies like the one Imus finds himself involved in enter the cultural economy. Think Calvin Klein Kiddie Porn, Heroin Chic. Think Benneton. One could suggest, perhaps, that within a capitalist economy there is a self-correcting mechanism: if demand for Don Imus remains strong then he will probably survive either over the airwaves or on satellite radio. However, if his listenership wanes or if the intensity of his current fan base lessens continuing interest on the part of advertisers may also become depleted. When it comes to culture we can see the cultural economy play out like a marketplace, although instead of trading shares on the New York Stock Exchange, trading in the “cultural shares” of Don Imus take place in the Blogosphere, talk television like The Today Show, among others as well as traditional media like magazines and newspapers. Day after day we can see in these various venues trial by pop culture. However, I do not think the financial economy operates separately from the cultural economy. Rather, I think they work together, not necessarily in tandem, but they reflect the complex nature of the players in this game of culture both corporate and political.

Seamless integration of advertising and prime time sitcom

2007-03-07T06:19:00.000-08:00

Have you heard the news? The GEICO Cavemen are going prime-time. ABC announced that the commercial characters will become the basis for a sitcom. This represents, I think, a great example of “seamless integration,” which refers to the ways in which advertisers work their products into movies, music and television. Think BMW Minis and The Italian Job. From a theoretical viewpoint the intertextual nature of this shift between advertising and prime time television represents the ways in which texts and images bleed as media cross contaminate. I think this would also qualify as an example of convergence culture where the text (advertisement) from one form converges with that of another form (the prime time sitcom). I have written elsewhere about what I think is the importance of the depiction in advertising of men as cavemen (along with the depiction of men as wolves and men caught in public with their pants down) and the implications of this depiction for American culture and society. From a critical perspective, I’m not too thrilled with this latest move. But the lighthearted side of me can’t wait to see those crazy cavemen make their way through all the social awkwardness that prime-time television can muster. This isn’t the first time commercial characters have made the leap into prime time as "Baby Bob" and The California Raisons both of commercial fame, for a brief time, entered the hallowed halls of network television.

Shock and Awe Advertising

2007-02-23T09:44:00.000-08:00

Advertising, along with other forms of popular culture, promotes public discussion. The Super Bowl ads that were perceived by some viewers as anti-gay, anti-restaurant worker, and pro-suicide took a lot of heat in the public forum; so much heat that the ads were pulled from rotation. Suicide apparently has become a theme in contemporary advertising as the GM robot's demise was followed by a Volkswagon spot that featured a depressed man teetering on the ledge of a building. Then there is a Washington Mutual bank ad that also depicts a man who threatens to jump off a roof if the bank doesn’t stop offering free checking, and there is a current CareerBuilder.com spot that depicts office workers diving off a cliff. That’s a lot of suicide, don’t you think? And, no doubt the various groups out there concerned with the prevention of suicide have advertisers directly in their sights. What’s going on in these ads must be more than “shock and awe,” a trend we have seen of late: you know those VW ads where two guys are driving down the street and suddenly a car crashes into them? The ads are meant to demonstrate the automobile's ability to withstand such a crash, but the startling way the advertiser accomplishes it is a little over the top for some. I suggest that these “suicide” ads may also be considered within this current trend, but they are much more. As I wrote about in a previous post, ads that get talked about are considered successful. And, in advertising as in show business, it’s not what they are saying about you that matters, but that they are saying anything about you at all. In an world of multi-tasking and inattentiveness to advertising, ads that get talked about are those with which we are engaged. Conversation extends the life of the ads. It is in this way that such extended conversations make advertising a part of participatory culture. But participatory advertising is such that meanings are extended beyond the advertiser's intended message through public discourse and individual deliberation of the rightness or wrongness of such depictions. This is high risk business on the part of the advertiser; somewhat calculated, however. But this newer leap--excuse the pun--into the dark side of life raises the question what is advertising today competing against? Are ads like this necessary to distract people from real events, like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? As a spectacle advertising does draw our attention from the important and redirects it to the less important aspects of life. I guess talking about two men kissing while eating a Snickers or watching a group of people jump off a cliff (especially when you know it isn’t real) provides a diversion from all the misery of daily life. Plop. Plop. Fizz. Fizz. Oh what a relief it is! Advertising, that is.

Advertising is an ideological forum in a participatory culture

2007-02-09T05:40:00.000-08:00

When we consider the concept of participatory advertising, it is important to acknowledge there are myriad ways in which to participate. Mostly we talk about the Web 2.0 social networking of commercials that takes place via YouTube and the like. But there are other ways of participating. In the case of this year’s Super Bowl, groups concerned with gay rights, suicide prevention, and even restaurant workers used the opportunity to publicly react to three commercials in particular and to use the opportunity to engage the public in discourse concerning what is right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate. This social use of advertising allows competing ideologies to be presented and it is through this unintended use of advertising that “we” get to make sense of our world. The group GLAAD, took offense to the depiction in a Snickers commercial of two men kissing who then declare that they need to something manly. The group claims the ad is homophobic. The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention criticized General Motors for using a perfectionist robot who jumps off a bridge because it dropped a bolt during the assembly line process. And, the National Restaurant Association reacted to the KFed depiction as a fast-food worker as insulting to the nation's almost 13 million employees in the restaurant industry. From time to time the American Family Association will launch an attack as they did some years ago against Calvin Klein who at the time was running what some have dubbed the “kiddie-porn” campaign. Needless to say, the Super Bowl is an opportunity for groups that otherwise wouldn’t be heard to have their voice included in the public discourse. I’ll bet that you never thought about advertising playing such a role in American culture and society. What we are witnessing is certainly an unintended effect of advertising. But in a participatory culture it makes sense that there are any number of ways to participate with advertising; this is just one.

The Super Bowl Spectacle is About to Descend Upon Us

2007-01-29T14:27:00.000-08:00

I read this week that "If people don’t watch the Super Bowl"…"they are not part of the American culture." This statement gave me pause to considerjust what is American culture and is there even such a thing as one American culture. Before addressing those issues, I want to point out that just about half the U.S. population views the game; gender is split 60/40 in favor of males. The Super Bowl is not only an American festival, but it is a media spectacle. Media spectacles like the Super Bowl become a means for the mainstream media, which are beholden to mainstream corporate interests, to distract citizens from the issues that really affect us. As a spectacle, therefore, the Super Bowl takes us away not only from the mundane quality of everyday life, but also distracts us from the serious political issues of the day. Even the Army Bowl, which this year was sponsored by Bell Helicopter, provided a way to combine--and therefore integrate--the experience of sports and war. I offer this brief critique as an introduction to the ways in which ideology is managed in American society. It is through spectacles like the Super Bowl that we celebrate commercialism. By the way, Christmas and several other religious holidays have been elevated to the level of spectacle. In the end, I’m wondering where are the other 160 million citizens of the United States, many of whom may be elderly or below the age where they are likely to be interested in the spectacle of sport. If the elderly and very young are not part of American culture, who else isn’t a part of it? And, even for half the country that does engage with this spectacle, it seems to me the nature of their engagement is quite varied: some people come together to watch the game (with varying degrees of interest depending on the teams that are playing), others watch for the commercials, others may not watch at all, but want to participate in the intimacy of the celebrations which themselves will vary greatly depending on age, income, ethnicity, among other factors. Is there one American culture? I think not. If you don’t participate in the Super Bowl celebration, don’t feel bad, as I maintain you can still keep your membership card in American culture. Invariably, even for those who watch, the game is likely to be disappointing, and in studies following the game, many people can’t even remember the products that were advertised, or worse, they confuse one product for another as in one study a respondent described a commercial for Doritos as being for Tostitos.

Attention getting cultural excess

2007-01-26T10:43:00.000-08:00

What do Clearblue Easy pregnancy testing kit and the Philips Bodygroom have in common? They are both examples of culture excess. We normally associate this term with taking culture to the edge of acceptability or beyond: the new film starring Dakota Fanning is an example out of pop culture; so is Borat. In marketing, I associate the term cultural excess with products like the Burger King Texas Double Whopper, and the Hummer SUV, among many other products that are inherently excessive. This notion of culture excess is associated with a postmodern culture in which products are a reflection of an image that may symbolize something greater than the product per se - a hamburger or a car. Marketers like Clearblue and Philips adapt this postmodern approach to fit their own needs. The Clearblue Easy viral spot (which you can find on YouTube.com) has a number of masculine markers, even though the product--one would think--is directed toward a female audience. What do I mean by masculine markers? For one, excuse my frankness, but the pee stream in the commercial is more guy-like as it takes accurate aim at the Clearblue Easy pregnancy testing device; something women tell me is not typical of the way in which women urinate. In other words: guys take aim; women merely pee. And because of the “Star Wars” quality of the visual and the “movie trailer” announcer’s booming voice over, this ad is gendered toward the masculine. And, so we might expect that it is male YouTubers that will circulate this ad; their wives and girlfriends are likely to be secondary receivers of the message. Furthermore, I sense a certain infantile anger at work behind this ad if for no other reason then peeing as a public act is considered lewd behavior (excessive). Indeed in most places (Amsterdam not withstanding) it’s illegal. Peeing in a commercial, a public act, may be considered an infantile way in which to gain attention. Ah ha! Attention - gaining and maintaining it. That’s the ticket to successful advertising for a distracted generation.

In the Philips Bodygroom viral spot, when male viewers see themselves as a reflection of what appears on the screen, such depictions raise questions regarding what it means to be a man. Making masculine gender identity problematic--in other words, forcing male viewers to question who they are--is a way for advertisers to nudge male consumers in the direction of the advertisement’s message. Grooming one’s body--feminizing the male body--may be a way in which a male may recoup his lost social standing - depending on the type of male viewer one is talking about. I say this because a hyper-masculine male is likely to reject or psychologically deflect such images and the message of the advertisement. If you think of masculine gender identity as points on a continuum--with the hyper-masculine male at one end, and the feminine male at the other--you can begin to locate the type of male to which this ad might appeal. I have been writing about this issue (the depiction of masculine gender identity) for several years now. In particular I have been focusing on the depiction of men as wolves (Honda, Quiznos), the depiction of men as caveman (GEICO, FedEx), and the depiction of men caught in public with their pants down (the list is too long). Each of these advertisements represents in its own way cultural excess. Cultural excess encourges consumer participation as these ads are distributed virally through Youtube.com.

User-generated Super Bowl Ads

2007-01-12T12:21:00.000-08:00

The consumer-generated advertising--what I have been calling participatory advertising--lends an air of authenticity to the commercial form which has to a great extent lost its ability to gain and maintain consumer attention. During the holidays, BMW utilized an older video they found onYouTube.com in a commercial; this represents a hybrid form. Other marketers haven’t been quite as successful with consumer-generated advertising. Chevy’s Tahoe and Wal-Mart are among them. Anheuser-Busch will launch its own Budtv.com at this year’s Super Bowl. It will feature videos created by Budweiser that consumers willing to click on the budtv.com website can view. Yesterday, the NFL announced the winner of its consumer-generated Super Bowl ad contest featured on the website pictured here. Some advertising pundits claim this newer form--I’m not convinced it really is all that new--represents the loss of control on the part of ad agencies. As I reported in my earlier post, allowing consumers to become producers within this system of symbolic consumption is nothing more than a negotiation between the advertiser and the consumer; a way to engage core consumers utilizing a newer approach based on Web 2.0 social networking. But make no mistake; advertisers are not really giving up control, only trying to management the process and the outcome to their advantage. That’s the way advertising has always worked (or not). The consumer-generated advertisements appearing on the Super Bowl are special because of the size of the audience that will see them and the amount of money advertisers are willing to plunk down to have them shown. Just like last year’s ads and the year before, the marketers are only trying to break through the clutter and sustain the amplitude of the commercial beyond its 30 second appearance on television. In other words, “water-cooler” talk is a major objective - ads that get talked about the next day and beyond are considered effective. These consumer genderated ads will make their way onto YouTube.com where they will further be circulated by Bloggers, among others. What media convergence provides advertisers is an extended opportunity for consumers to experience the advertisements, if those consumer so choose.

What is participtory advertising?

2006-12-29T06:04:00.000-08:00

I've chosen for the theme of this semester's class, grassroots or consumer produced advertising. The image from the Dove soap web page serves as a current example where consumers are encouraged to create their own advertisements with the hope that they might be shown on network television or distributed virally via the web. There are myriad other examples from the upcoming Super Bowl to those consumer produced ads that now routinely appear on YouTube. We would expect mass marketers to be reluctant to give over so much power to consumers. However, by allowing consumers to produce commercials, marketing are creating potential allies, and while they may accede a certain amount of control, they maintain the power to negotiate the relationship with the consumer. Consumers who participate in such activies are considered "core" audiences because of the level of involvement required.