Who owns "Adland"?

If there's one thing that advertising people actually value, it's a brand. Especially if it's one of our own.

So it's no surprise that Åsk Wäppling, the Swedish owner of the advertising blog adland.tv, doesn't want other people using the term "Adland."

Adland is absolutely ancient in internet terms, having been established in 1996 when most ad people were still trying to figure out if the web was good for anything except free shock porn. A young Ms. Wäppling, under the pseudonym "Dabitch," instead saw the opportunity to create an online global ad archive and professional forum, which in this decade Brand Republic, Business Insider, and Fast Company have listed as one of the most influential in the industry. She even trademarked the name, several years ago. And he's been a mentor as I've fumbled my way into the ad blogosphere.

So you'd think it would be pretty clear that "Adland" = adland.tv. Especially among ad industry bloggers.

Apparently not. As you can see from the Google screencap above, venerable industry magazine Ad Age uses the term "adland," in a generic sense, to refer to the industry in several posts. I have no idea if they used it this way in print, years back, but online it definitely infringes on Dabitch's intellectual property. And she's let them know, many times.

Now other people are letting them know. When Ad Age posted "Adland seeks to hire veterans," Dabitch says she started getting resumes. After finding out they didn't mean THAT Adland, one vet let Ad Age know what he thought about the avoidable confusion:

Courtesy Dabitch

(adland.tv ended up helping the guy get some job leads anyway.)

Dabitch has written directly to Ad Age's legal heads, but after receiving what she characterizes as "nya, we won't" replies, she has taken to the court of social media.

She told me, "Now I tweet at them every time they use the word in a headline and I hope the responses take off."

Here's a recent example:

Here's our best tattoo @adage #adland pic.twitter.com/uQyUzuCDnl

— Adland (@adland) May 6, 2015

Cheeky. But will it get Ad Age's attention now? (More importantly, will it get the attention of its readers and advertisers?) We'll see. Because there are a lot of important ad pros watching that little red TV.

Weren't we supposed to stop using captive great apes in ads, Google?

Business Insider just published Ace Metrix's list of top-performing ads in 30 categories for the first quarter of 2015. Among them is Google's "Friends Furever" spot for Android:

Wait a minute here: Didn't the US Ad Council announce that it no longer supports the use of great apes in ads back in 2008?

PETA has been lobbying the ad industry to stop using apes as props for years. As a result,  Omnicom Group's BBDO, GSD&M and Merkley & Partners; Interpublic's McCann Erickson, DraftFCB and RPA; Havas' Arnold and Euro RSCG; WPP's Grey Group, Ogilvy & Mather, Young & Rubicam and JWT; and Publicis Groupe's Saatchi & Saatchi and Leo Burnett all agreed to stop using great apes in ads in 2011. The Google ad was created by Droga5, who apparently didn't get the memo.

I'm not PETA's greatest fan, but as a human (and having the Jane Goodall Institute as a client) the exploitation of our closest cousins by my industry troubles me.

The challenge with using any animals in advertising is their treatment, since they are not willing performers. The most intelligent social animals, such as great apes (chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans), elephants, and whales/dolphins, are wild animals that suffer from anxiety and depression when removed from their peers — even if captive bred. (Dogs are domestic animals, so they're a little bit of a different issue.)

The Google ad has representatives of all three of these animal groups performing for your amusement, and that of 16 million of your closest friends.

Jane Goodall is asking people like us, who create ads and entertainment, to sign a pledge not to use captive great apes in our work. I think it's time we stopped treating our cousins like props.

The "tiny" world of the 1961 housewife

This 1961 Boston Globe ad by BBDO stars a certain Pat White as the saddest housewife I have ever seen in an ad:



The weird part of it is that she's supposed to be fulfilled by this isolated existence, but when she says "I wouldn't change a single peanut butter and jelly sandwich of it" you expect her to head for the medicine cabinet for some phenobarbital.

Instead, she pours a cup of tea and opens the Globe, to be reminded that there is a great big world out there. One she can only read about, briefly, before returning to the soul-deadening housework.

Sure, times have changed. But not for everyone. Jezebel just ran a post today about some place called "Fix The Family" that thinks women should not go to college/university because "If we look COMPREHENSIVELY at the Catholic doctrine, we’ll see very little that promotes a woman working outside the home" (ALLCAPS not mine)

You've come a long way, maybe?

Tip via AdAge

#agencylife is way more fun than agency life

Yesterday, my friends at Adland started a fun hashtag thing on Twitter. Called #agencylife, it was inspired by one Adlander's complaint about a typical agency problem. Soon, everyone was doing it.

It became a thing. So much so that AdAge reported on it, asking "are folks just having a laugh or sharing some harsh truths about the industry?"

the answer is, "both". The hashtag brought together creatives and suits, large and small agencies, from countries all over the world. There are no secrets being shared here, just the kind of in-jokes that any industry breeds due to the day-to-day demands of trying to please everybody and manage a stable full of clashing egos.

I was really happy to see one of my contributions make the AdAge post:

Creative Director uses the non-words "virality" "sharability" and "memification" in the same sentence. With a straight face. #agencylife
— Tom Megginson (@CreativeTweets) April 11, 2013

Even better was the response I got from Noise Digital:

Challenge accepted RT @creativetweets: Creative Director uses the non-words "virality" "sharability" and "memification" in the same sentence
— Noise Digital (@NoiseDigital) April 12, 2013

To which I responded:

@noisedigital #Vine it or it didn't happen. :)
— Tom Megginson (@CreativeTweets) April 12, 2013

And then this happened:

@creativetweets BOOM! Proof that virality, sharability and memification are real. vine.co/v/btYri5F69hD #agencylife
— Noise Digital (@NoiseDigital) April 12, 2013

There's nothing like a Twitter support group to make another week in advertising worthwhile.

Was the politicization of "The Most Interesting Man in the World" intentional?

Dos Equis is facing a veritable shitstorm of social media controversy on the Facebook page, simply because Jonathan Goldsmith, the actor they hired for their hugely popular campaign, "The Most Interesting Man in the World," is hosting a fundraiser for US President Obama:

There are some positive comments too, and both types of posts inspire similar low-level flamewars that degenerate into name-calling and some casual racism. (On a side note, up here in Canada we find the claim that President Obama is a "socialist" to be risible.)

This is probably just a minor headache for the American importer of Dos Equis, Heineken USA. They told Ad Age: "Mr. Goldsmith's opinions and views are strictly his own, and do not represent those of Dos Equis" but don't appear to have made any effort to address the issue on their Facebook page.

Maybe they are just sitting back to see what happens. Other brands have waded in to politics, which is a high-risk strategy. But with risk comes the possibility of above-average rewards. Especially if you know your target audience.

Last August, ABC news reported on the correlation between brand preference and political views on Facebook, as reported by Microstrategy's Wisdom application.

Here is one of the findings:

Dos Equis, the Mexican lager known for its "Most Interesting Man in the World" commercials, may be a better choice if Obama is looking to show camaraderie with his 27 million Facebook fans. 

About 24,000 of Obama's Facebook supporters in the Wisdom database, which represents about 3 percent of all Obama's Facebook fans, are also Dos Equis fans, making Obama supporters about 6 percent more likely to like Dos Equis than the average Wisdom Facebook user. Obama fans are only 4 percent more likely to "like" Bud Light.

Could Heineken USA have secretly condoned the appearance? The Obama/Biden fundraising site actually calls Goldsmith "the actor who portrays The Most Interesting Man in the World." And while Jonathan Goldsmith can do what he wants as a citizen, professional spokespeople are usually contractually obligated to avoid any public behaviour that can bring negative attention to the brand. 

Could this have been a strategic piece of off-the-books political marketing? Now that's an interesting thought.

Thanks to Copyranter for the tip.

"One Million Moms" are against married sex now, too

"That's a weird way to kiss..."

I don't like jarred tomato sauce. Tastes like ketchup.

I do, however, love this ad:



My friends at One Million Moms, however...

In the newest Ragu commercial, a young boy barges into his parents' bedroom without knocking. We don't see what he sees, but the cringe on his face and wide eyes tell us enough. This boy catches his parents in the act and walks away in shock. 

"Parents in bed, but it's just eight o'clock; that's why they taught, you should always knock," a singer tells us. "He needs Ragu, 'cause growin' up's tough. Give him Ragu, he's been through enough." The parents then give him a plateful of spaghetti to calm him down. The Ragu is supposed to make him feel better. It's all part of Ragu's "Long Day of Childhood Calls for America's Favorite Pasta Sauce" campaign. 

This entire ad not only makes someone lose their appetite, but Ragu is also being irresponsible in their new campaign. Instead of being helpful, it is harmful to children in the name of so-called humor. The Ragu commercial is inappropriate and tacky. The commercial has aired during the Olympics when families are likely watching.

I'm not really sure how this ad is "harmful" to kids — seems like pretty good advice to me.

Mike Dwyer, U.S. foods director for Ragu-owner Unilever, told AdAge "We didn't want to come out with another utilitarian food ad."

That's for sure. These ads appeal to me both as a parent and as a former kid. (Note to self — buy lock for bedroom door.)

Check out the other ones in this great campaign by BFG9000:

Two more reasons for women to hate Hooters

AdAge reports that breastaurant chain Hooters is "executing a three- to five-year plan to revitalize the brand, and part of that plan is to appeal to a broader, younger audience that includes women."

Bafflingly, they are launching this appeal with ads directed by Eastbound & Down writer/director Jody Hill, placed on male-oriented TV programming, that... make fun of older women's bodies?



The campaign, by Fitzgerald & Co., introduces two goofy owl finger puppets that do the "angel/devil" dichotomy of human nature thing.



Sort of.

I'm still not seeing the appeal to women. Perhaps that's another part of the strategy, the one where they're adding about 30 new salads to the menu. Although, as Eater pointed out: "Maybe all those ladies out there who really like salads and also looking at boobs while eating salads will be into them?"

Here's a totally unnecessary behind-the-scenes vid:

Boobies and video games: The most obvious marketing partnership of all time

With the rise of in-game advertising already old news, how is it that this only came up now?

AdAge reports that Sports Illustrated will place SI Swimsuit Issue billboards in the virtual streetscape of the newest version of Need For Speed.

The game will aslo introduce two new characters: 2011 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit cover model, Irina Shayk and Sports Illustrated Swimsuit model Chrissy Teigen.



I'm not quite sure what their roles are, but if this teaser video is anything to go by, they lick their lips and shake their rounded bits at the players—presumably before speeding off into unattainability.

Talk about realism!

Not exactly a great leap forward for women in media. But pretty expected for a target audience of guys who spend way too much time fiddling with their controllers.

Thanks to Karen K. for sharing the link on G+.

Dirty minds...?

Did you see the "shiny suds" ad? It was pretty effective at both telling consumers something they didn't know, and going full viral on YouTube.

But according to AdAge, for a few viewers the image of scrubbing bubbles leering at the showering women wasn't really about chemical residue, but something even nastier:

"Little did attendees at the ANA [Association of National Advertisers conference] or most commenters on YouTube and Twitter know, however, that the Shiny Suds were really about degrading women and promoting rape, at least in the opinion of commenters on one blog, Shakesville, which posted the video in its "Today in Rape Culture" section."

Here's one of them:

"I have issues with being seen naked. I even have to turn over books or magazines that have pictures of people looking out on them when I'm undressed because I feel like they are staring at me. So, reading the transcript for that last commercial? Freaks me the fuck out. My skin starts crawling again even thinking about it."

In response to "the sensitive nature of [concerned viewers'] concerns", the advertiser, Method home care and personal care products pulled the official online placement of the ad. But, of course, copies live on forever.

So, what do you think? In my opinion, there was no ill intent in the spot. It fit within Method's cheeky brand, which speaks to "people against dirty", and the perverted bubbles were obviously meant to make people think about the nasty stuff they share their showers with — after using mainstream competitors' cleaning products. It's over the top, for sure, and the woman does look victimized. But this is cause marketing (in support of the Household Product Labeling Act of 2009) — and while self-serving for Method, touches on an important issue of home health.

Maybe the lesson here for advertisers is just to realize that everything out there will be deconstructed to the Nth degree. The shakespearessister online community's reaction to this ad was oddly paralleled by a post on Brand Freak where a poorly-executed Swiss Chalet Xmas commercial that concluded: "The girl seems depressed, and it's heart-wrenching to contemplate what kept them apart so long and why they're so tentative around each other. Did he molest her? Was it divorce? Did the mother die? This is a lot to consider in a 30-second ad."



Some ads just bring out people's inner demons, I guess. But this is a lot to consider in a Friday blog.