It's funny because it's true. While this is a perfectly good strategy for search engine optimization, advertising is more than popular keywords and random images strung together. It's an art form. Storytelling. And it's supposed to actually mean something.
At least that's what I thought until I went on Facebook...
I've been doing public transit advertising for many years now, and it's become a real passion.
When I was a kid, my Mom didn't have a driver's license. But fortunately, Kingston did have a public transit system. Service was infrequent back then (before they were a client:) but I learned early that it's just a question of knowing your routes and schedules. Once you're a "bus person", it all just becomes second nature.
Now I live in Ottawa, and I still take the bus to work. It has allowed us to be a one-car family, and I relish the chance to get some work and reading done on the way.
But I realize that not everyone loves transit. That's why I'm so keen to do whatever I can to make it less of a mystery to people. If you can get the attention of non-riders, show a transit benefit, and get them to check out the online info, you can at least start to put transit on their consideration list.
That's why I loved working on this campaign. York Region Transit is a large system that connects with the TTC and gets people all over a large suburban and commercial area. We won the account last year, and ever since we have been enjoying one of those great client relationships that some ad people only dream about: a client who has great creative (as well as business) ambitions, and the means to let us bring them to life.
ACD Vernon came up with the concept. The messaging is mine. And Javier did most of the Art Direction heavy lifting. Chris from Photolux shot the originals.
Here's the cutest thing you will see today. But it's also a great case study.
Adland reports that PBS HQ received this letter from a 5-year-old viewer:
Note the dollar, to cover production costs.
Adorable, isn't it? And it's also a golden opportunity.
I once wrote to Kenner toys, with diagrams for new Star Wars toys inspired by my recent viewing of The Empire Strikes Back. I actually got back a typed letter, on letterhead and everything, thanking me and assuring me my designs would be forwarded to the people who made the toys.
I never forgot that. I still have the letter somewhere, and that bit of goodwill pleased my parents and impressed my friends. But that was it.
Times have changed. Now, when an organization gets a heartfelt fan letter, they can respond in public, like on their web site:
"Dear Noah: Thank you for your dollar. We are glad you love PBS KIDS so much! The good news is we have two super hero to the rescue shows that we think you will enjoy, Super Why! and WordGirl. Love, PBS KIDS"
Not only have they made Noah's freaking YEAR, but they got great earned social media by both letting people know about it, and by making this wish fulfillment a collaborative process, online.
(The fact the PBS guy calls himself "AdmiralBallsack" is also awesome!)
So what was once a random act of kind outreach becomes an epic feat of brand loyalty building. (Plus a good plug for the shows!)
Now that's a superpower any marketer would love to have.
"The 20 nominees this year show us a remarkable evolution in social advertising. When I started blogging about this niche industry in 2005, most of the campaigns where print-only. The majority of the campaigns in 2010 are driven by online video. Digital and real-world interactivity, and social media, are growing fast. My prediction for 2011 is that these two will be the leading campaign instruments."
I wholeheartedly agree. If you look at the campaigns that really capture public attention these days, most of them are about making you part of the story. And it can happen in the real world, the digital world, and between both.
For example, just today on Osocio I covered the most recent phase of an Israeli campaign by Woman to Go. The first part was a real-life installment in the shop window of an upscale mall in Tel Aviv. Real live women, who appeared to be scared and abused foreigners, were offered for sale like products or pets.
Clients are constantly looking for broad coverage, and trying to buy it through traditional media. Instead, Woman to Go created newsworthy real-world content in a single location, and ended up being talked about globally.
In the latest installment of Woman to Go, they posted an online video of an anonymous man actually buying a woman from the storefront, and encouraged people to interact online by pressing a "dislike" button on the YouTube page.
It's a very simple formula, and one which combines the very oldest form of advertising — live performance — with the newest media channels. You see it in the (now tiresome) trend of flashmobs that are recorded and put online. Or when an actor brings the commercial to a bunch of unsuspecting victims. Or even when an advertiser pulls some really weird shit like this:
The important thing is that what used to be called a "publicity stunt" now often becomes viral content. And if you're only trying to raise awareness for a cause people can really care about, their automatic interest makes it all the easier to get out there.
Even traditional media can work this way, when you start thinking about focussed impact rather than direct reach.
This interactive bus shelter for Amnesty International Germany could actually track the eye movements of a person sitting inside, presenting the violent domestic abuse scenario only in the peripheral vision.
Could they afford to do this more than once? Did it function perfectly? Did it get vandalized?
Who cares? It got the message out, and made headlines around the world. And that happened because it was novel technology, and used a strong concept to draw attention to an important issue. If you document it and seed it correctly, it only really needs to work once.
So as I face yet another year of trying to help clients with shrinking ad budgets and great expectations for "social media", I hope I'll be able to do something different. Something shareworthy.
He's back! Maybe a little less toned. Maybe a tad rushed in his delivery. But "Old Spice Guy", the meme that more than doubled sales of Old Spice Body Wash last year is back. And he's a bit of a tease.
But can he bring back the magic, after Raven Ray Lewis failed to bond with YouTube viewers, and after so many parodies? (Some awesome, and most awful.)
Old Spice is betting on it. And I'm sure it will get a lot of initial attention. But sequels are always tricky. Besides which, when you start at "over-the-top", where else can you take it?
High technology and the arts share a burning passion for creativity. So should it come as any surprise that a tech company would want to tap into popular music for inspiration?
That's exactly what Intel has done. According to The Drum, the processor giant has appointed Black-eyed Peas frontman (and hip hop solo artist) Will.i.am as its new director of creative innovation.
The article says that will.i.am "will collaborate with Intel on many creative and technology endeavors across the 'compute continuum' that may include such devices as laptops, smart phones and tablets."
Whatever that means.
“Nearly everything I do involves processors and computers, and when I see an Intel chip I think of all the creative minds involved that help to amplify my own creativity,” said the artist, real name William Adams.
“Teaming up with the scientists, researchers and computer programmers at Intel to collaborate and co-develop new ways to communicate, create, inform and entertain is going to be amazing," he added.
Well, okay then.
This isn't the first time someone has made the crossover from music to high tech. One of the most interesting examples was when former Iggy and the Stooges Guitarist James Williamson quit the music business in the late '70s, went back to school, and quietly rose up the ranks to become Vice President of Technology Standards for Sony.
Iggy Pop with James Williamson, in the glory gory days. (source)
I'm not talking about the kind of fraud that runs up your credit card, destroys your reputation, and gets you on a watch list for your apparent love of dead puppy porn. No, this is even worse in some ways.
Adrants today posted about an anonymous woman from a convention whose pic he took and used on a post from some time ago.
Well, today this shot of an unknown woman came back to haunt him — quite unexpectedly — in a cheap PPC ad.
He points out that neither the woman, nor he (the photographer) consented to this use.
This isn't the first case of stolen identity showing up in the digital world. In 2007, The Smoking Gun reported that a British teen's online "sexy" picture (taken when she was just 14) ended up on the cover of an American porn DVD.
The fact is that unscrupulous designers and fly-by-night ad scammers frequently steal images to save time and money.
Or not, as the internet has a way of uncovering even the most obscure intellectual property theft, like this Missouri family whose picture ended up in a retail ad in Prague.
How can you protect yourself and your family from becoming the unwitting spokespeople for some bizarre cult or flavoured personal lube? You can't really. Not completely, anyway.
Every photo you post to Facebook, Flikr, etc. that is publicly available can be downloaded or screen grabbed by anyone. Even profile pictures in forgotten online groups, or old shots scanned and posted by former friends and lovers, can be stolen and reused. It isn't legal, it isn't fair, but it is possible.
You can start by cleaning up your old albums and tightening up your security settings. But to be quite honest, the genie is out of the bottle. You might as well accept that you are only protected by your anonymity, and try not to do anything to get the scammers' attentio....
This holdover from the "moral corruption of youth" anxieties of a more innocent era, the Code was established as a means for the comic book industry to self-regulate rather than be regulated.
In the 1960s and '70s, when underground stoner comics just ignored censorship, the Code was especially concerned with depictions of drug use. In 1971, Stan Lee of Marvel comics famously published a trilogy of Spider-Man issues that were not code-approved, because they dealt with the negative effects of hallucinogenic drugs.
In another post, Cracked unearths some of the comic book industry's most unfortunate attempts to become more inclusive:
*facepalm*
And if you think that guy looks like a "bad motherfucker", you don't know just how twisted comic books can be. In yet another Cracked post about disturbing comics, they lay on us an Avengers storyline that has a guy raping (and impregnating) his own "mother"...
You thought I was exaggerating?
I was not.
Another site called "Superdickery" specializes in posting out-of-context frames from old issues of mainstream comics to expose their pervasive sexual undertones:
It's okay to come out of the cave, Batman. We're okay with it now.
This is also okay now, Jimmy. Be proud.
Wonder Woman, by the way, is all about bondage...
And more bondage...
... with a little voyeurism thrown in.
Ummm... WHAT?
If you don't get it, don't ask.
This is probably another example of slang not aging well, but DAMN!
Farewell, Comics Code Authority. You will not be missed.
Try to think back to the first time you ever went to McDonald's. What did you have?
My earliest memories of the old one in Kingston have me eating a hamburger, a chocolate shake and small fries in the early-mid '70s. And we ate outside on a round, pebble-ized concrete table.
We didn't have a Burger King or a Wendy's in town back then. McDonald's was competing with the well-established brands of A&W and Canada's own Harvey's. But no matter which one you went to, ordering was pretty simple: some sort of hamburger, fries (or rings at A&W) and a shake or a pop. Not health food by any means, but okay as an occasional treat.
As the '70s wore on, things started to change. I learned early that Kingston was a favourite test market for new products, and I watched as McDonald's introduced a breakfast menu, sundaes, McChicken, McNuggets, and various weird seasonal shakes.
Then in the 80s came experiments like the McRib, the ridiculous Whopper-like McDLT...
Yes, pizza. Of course it didn't work out. But that didn't stop McDonald's from expanding its menu in even more unexpected ways. (Deli sandwiches, anyone?)
From a marketing point of view, it's easy to understand why McDonald's corporate and regional franchisees keep coming up with new menu items. They believe that they need regular product novelty to bring consumers through their doors more often, and to convince them to eat more when they do.
But the fascinating industry blog Burger Business reported that "participating McDonald's restaurants" are starting to balk at the complexity of the current menu, which slows down their famously efficient kitchens:
...it’s interesting to note that a majority of operators he spoke with said that the McDonald’s menu has become too big, slowing service times and brand momentum.
When Ray Kroc first brought his industrial vision of fast food to McDonald's, his plan was simple:
Ray Kroc wanted to build a restaurant system that would be famous for food of consistently high quality and uniform methods of preparation. He wanted to serve burgers, buns, fries and beverages that tasted just the same in Alaska as they did in Alabama.
But McDonald's official history also uncovers the seeds of this system's downfall:
Ray Kroc believed in the entrepreneurial spirit, and rewarded his franchisees for individual creativity. Many of McDonald’s most famous menu items—like the Big Mac, Filet-O-Fish and the Egg McMuffin— were created by franchisees. At the same time, the McDonald’s operating system insisted franchisees follow the core McDonald’s principles of quality, service, cleanliness and value.
Two of the innovations mentioned — the Big Mac and the Egg McMuffin — did indeed revolutionize the industry. The first introduced a mysterious specialty burger that could be eaten nowhere else. The second was — in my humble opinion — the greatest thing to happen to breakfast since sliced toast.
However, these items opened the era of McSperimentation, and we know where that can lead...
I wouldn't be the first person who has written that McDonald's is a confused brand that is letting its core product get away from it. But with chains like Five Guys arguably making much better fast food burgers, perhaps even thinking of McDonald's as a plain old hamburger place is old fashioned.
You could even say that the McDonald's brand outgrew its product offerings long ago. When you can order a McBeer in Italy, and you can't order beef at all in India's Mcdonald's, how can a single brand represent all that diversity?
The answer, of course, is the experience of going out for cheap junk food. Of any kind. And somehow equating that with having good times among family and friends.
You don't see these very often. ACW Grey, Tel Aviv, Israel, created this for the Tzabar Travel Agency to promote packages to see Roger Waters in Paris.
If you have been reading this blog for some time, you may have realized I'm a man who is dealing with an inner conflict. And that inner conflict is, I think, something most modern men have to come to terms with: In a society of equality, can images of women be "sexy" without being "sexIST"?
For example, you've probably seen me rant about American Apparel, and how in their ads they make their employees look like kidnapped teens in homemade porn. Or how PeTA uses the passionate conviction of their young members and celebrity endorsers to sexualize animal cruelty and dietary choices.
Just in case you aren't in advertising, and haven't heard of Ads of The World, it's a collection of campaigns from all over the globe. Agencies submit their work to share, brag, get industry critique, and get exposure for themselves and their clients.
Ads of The World has also become the "go-to" place for ad bloggers to find the latest and greatest campaigns. Look at the source links for many posts by Osocio, AdFreak, Copyranter, Adrants, and others, and often it will be "AOTW". (It goes both ways — AOTW syndicates Copyranter's posts on Twitter.)
Seeing a video like that, by someone who probably has one of the broadest perspectives on international advertising, I wondered what he was trying to say. Is advertising too sexy? Is it sexist? Is it stupid?
But this being 2011, I stopped wondering and just messaged Ivan up on Facebook. (Ad bloggers love to network there.) Here is our instant interview from this morning:
Tom: What is the overall message you are trying to convey?
Ivan: No message, just a showcase of sexy ads.
Tom: Do you think overt sexuality in ads is good creative strategy, or is it lazy?
Ivan: I think it's a good strategy to use sex for products that are related to sex— for example lingerie, condoms, beauty products, even certain alcohol products. But it's lame to use it for real estate or industrial companies, as it looks desperate and irrelevant.
Tom: Do you think ads sexualizing women are more effective with men, or women? Why are there so few "sexy man" ads?
Ivan: Sex is a major driving force for men. Women are comparatively less nudity-oriented, so they can be turned on by a man even if he isn't naked. Also, women like to look at other women for a different reason: They look at them for inspiration, how the hair is done, how the eyebrows are done, what colors they wear, etc.
Tom: As curator of AOTW, you must see the trends from a macro level. Is it possible for an ad to be sexual without being sex-ist? What is the difference?
Ivan: How do you define sexist? It doesn't mean anything to me. Sexy is sexy, sexism is when you discriminate based on sex. I don't see how it applies to ads. You mean ads that imply that woman or men are less capable of certain mental tasks?
Tom: Some people believe that sexualization of women in ads makes men objectify them more as physical things, and makes women feel inadequate if they don't have toned — and photoshopped — bodies.
Ivan: I think ads just visualize what some men already think to be true. You can't really generalize about men — some men objectify woman with or without the ads. Others don't. It's not a matter of ads, it's a matter of the mental state of a specific man. More intellectual men do not see women as objects because they enjoy their company intellectually as much as physically. When they look at a "sexist" ad for them it refers to woman's physical being without demeaning their intellect.
Tom: Do you think overt sexuality in advertising has peaked? Can it go any further? Does it have to keep getting more intense, to shock and awe cynical viewers?
Ivan: You can see sexy ads peaking in Russia — everything is sexualized, and it's boring. They have no shock value anymore. The next frontier is religion. That still has a shock value.
An interesting exchange, both professionally and culturally. (Ivan is Hungarian, I am English Canadian.) I found his opinion logical and confidently sex-positive in that particularly European manner, while at the same time realizing that there are many conflicting ways of looking at the issue — philosophical, sociological and otherwise — that my readers may want to add below.
Mostly, I just love the fact that it's so easy to share these opinions.
