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.

Obama creating jobs by putting creatives out of work?

Adland brought to my attention a truly ironic move by US President Obama's 2012 re-election team: unpaid crowdsourcing for a new campaign promoting job growth.

From the Art Works site:

"Obama for America is seeking poster submissions from artists across the country illustrating why we support President Obama's plan to create jobs now, and why we'll re-elect him to continue fighting for jobs for the next four years.


Your poster can address the broader themes of the President's plan or pinpoint a specific aspect, from supporting small businesses to rebuilding roads and bridges for the 21st century. For more on the desired specs, read the creative brief.


We'll pick the 12 best submissions received by November 4th, 2011, then put the finalists to a vote. Three winners will receive a framed print of their poster signed by President Obama and a limited edition of their poster will be sold in the campaign store."

Here are a couple of gems from the "Creative Brief":

"You hereby represent and warrant that all equipment, materials, and facilities used to produce your poster are owned by you and were not provided by a corporation, labor union, foreign national, or federal contractor. Any disposable materials purchased specifically to produce the poster will be treated as in-kind contributions to Obama for America."

I'm sure this one is being violated repeatedly by people who cannot afford to have their own equipment outside of the office.

"All submissions will become property of Obama for America."

And for all that, here's what you win:

"Three (3) winners will receive the following prize: A framed copy of the Poster (defined below) signed by Barack Obama and all or part of the winner's Poster will be used and displayed on Sponsor's website and/or in other Sponsor advertising or promotional material (to be determined in Sponsor's sole discretion) associated with Sponsor's political advertising efforts (approximate retail value: $195)."

When a country's economy goes bad, the marketing industry — including ad and design creatives — is the canary in the coal mine. Companies in trouble tend to cut marketing budgets early on as they struggle to reduce the bleeding. Agencies lose revenue, then lay people off (or even shut their doors).

There is nothing creative professionals hate more than a paid work opportunity being given over to free crowdsourcing. The Obama campaign is well-funded, too — Adland says they have "$60 million cash on hand in campaign funding".

Creating jobs means supporting professionals who depend on a certain trade for a living. But this contest asks ll entrants to give away their work for free even if they don't get any credit for it. By undermining the value of concept and design, the Obama campaign has thumbed its nose at one of the USA's most celebrated industries.

And when you piss off creatives, you can get some very creative responses.

God's Gift of Gay

In a refreshing change from the very un-Christian hate we keep seeing in the USA, Toledo's Central United Methodist Church has decided to show some love instead.

From the Toledo Blade:

The Rev. Bill Barnard, Central’s part-time pastor, said the billboard message will be linked to a four-week sermon series, and the overall campaign goal is “to make a leap beyond tolerance.”

“Members of the congregation have experienced places and times where being lesbian or gay was tolerated — kind of ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell, I know God forgives you,’” Barnard said. “We’re saying, ‘This is the way God created you. There’s nothing to forgive.’ “

You may say I'm a dreamer, but after President Obama's about-face on "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and his refusal to support the insidious "Defense of Marriage Act", plus polls that show support for equal marriage may have reached a popular "tipping point", make me feel like real change is happening down there.

As a smug Canadian, my only concern now is that we could become the ones known for intolerance.

We've come a long way... maybe

Buzzfeed recently circulated a number of early 20th Century propaganda. Today, we'd call it social marketing. But in this case, the focus was not on social progress, but rather on preventing one of the most important human rights advances ever: the enfranchisement of women.

It is interesting to see how these messages played on the fears of men of the era. Education and specialized skills (such as typing, believe it or not!) gave women access to more economic and social freedom than ever before in the modern age. Feminism was on the rise. And it scared the old guard pantsless:

They thought they'd be emasculated by women who could actually operate in the real world.

 

And won't someone PLEASE think of the children?

This was obviously the work of bitter old spinsters.

 

Who were out to corrupt our wives and daughters.

Wow. Fearmongering, hateful stereotyping and demonizing all those who oppose you. I'm sure glad those horrible days of social advertising are over. Right?

See more anti-suffragette ads here.

Chained by Facebook

"No one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day."

The latest grassroots Facebook Status Meme addresses the bitter debate over healthcare in Obama's United States.

Anyone who has spent any time on American internet fora knows how nasty this stuff can get. Something that's taken for granted in the rest of the civilized world — publicly funded basic healthcare — in the U.S. has become the most divisive issue since teaching science in schools.

But why are Canadians getting involved? I got two updates this morning from fellow hosers, good and smart people who I assume did so as a show of support for the American movement. When whoever started this chain-letter tallies up the hits, I doubt they'll differentiate between Canadian and U.S. buzz.

As I snarked to another Facebook friend, "I guess Canadians see themselves as secret agents of change"...

That said, I think the only thing it will accomplish is to further enrage conservative social networking pundits in the U.S. (They're now trying to work up a counter-status update.) Oh well, at least it has them talking.

We've got issues

I just read a headline that made me smile: "Boom in Issues Advertising Could Net Agencies $1 Billion".

Okay, they're talking about the United States with its shiny new government, but it's still nice to have our corner of the market validated. (Coincidentally, I'm actually doing some American social issues work right now, but more about that in a later blog.)

Here in the Great White North, the recession is also driving spending in social marketing. A new Economic Action Plan needs to be explained to the public, and other government priorities like security, health and the environment continue to require outreach. The government has to advertise, no matter what the economic climate.

This is a smart time to be in Social Issues Marketing. We're busy here on a number of government, association, and corporate social responsibility campaigns that will roll out over the next few months.

But it sounds like the U.S. issues advertising boom is not quite like the Canadian one:

"With the ad business the way it is right now and a big pile of money sitting out in the world of politics, there's no doubt traditional agencies will try to jump in," said Vinny Minchillo, chief creative officer of Scott Howell & Co. ... They will fail ... It's not uncommon for political clients to have television production budgets of under $15,000 per spot and a need to be on the air in 48 hours ... The hard-core retail shops probably have the best chance of being able to adapt quickly. Also the shops with employees who don't care much about sleeping."

Yikes! And here I was thinking that work-life balance was one of the most important issues of all...

Of course, the American article is talking about the hardcore world of Washington lobbyists. I see advocacy ads in The Hill Times and on bus shelters in front of Parliament Hill every day (we've even been responsible for some of them), but for the most part our clients are asking us to execute timely campaigns based on long-term communications strategies. We've done our share of crisis communications, but nothing like the dog-eat-dog scenario painted by Mr. Minchillo.

But then again, Minchillo continues to refer to Issues Advertising as "political". Up here, "political" advertising is kind of a hot potato.

I'll stick with communicating Canada's issues with appropriate niceness.

Obama's misplaced product placement

The Telegraph reports U.S. President Obama's (presumably unpaid) product placement for Buxton mineral water at the G20:

Buxton was treated to the world's most coveted endorsement when the US President, who was answering questions with Mr Brown at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, turned down his hosts' offer of a glass.

Displaying the cool demeanour for which he has become renowned, Mr Obama took several leisurely sips from the bottle, displaying its logo to viewers watching the event around the world.

I assume this was done because of security concerns, or else the stubborn independence Obama is known for, but it raises some questions:

1) Although a British brand, Buxton is owned by Nestlé, a Swiss company. Why this brand? Because it was locally-sourced? (He could always claim the 100-mile diet as a fallback.) And why not remove the label?

2) Bottled water? In 2009? David Suzuki will give Obama a talking to next time he's in Canada. Or was his blatant waste of petrochemical products a show of confidence in our ability to develop new recycling technology or find new reserves?

This isn't an Obama bash, BTW. I like him as much as the next leftie. Regardless, the endorsement has Nestlé positively swimming with delight, and will no doubt inspire complaints/lobbying back home from major domestic brands.

Who knows? This could be a whole new revenue stream for Americans to start paying off their massive debts. Perhaps in the future we'll see Presidents dressed head-to-toe in logos, like NASCAR drivers. That would be cool.