How would the French save Gordon Brown?
I'm a great believer in giving my students some difficult tasks. It helps to separate the men from the boys or, very often, the women from the girls. Or, in this particular instance, les dames from les filles, as the class in question came from Sup de Pub - the leading advertising school in Paris.
The brief I gave yesterday morning to a group of would-be account handlers and planners was to save Gordon Brown from catastrophic defeat with just 24 hours of the British election campaign remaining. They only had a few hours to work on a problem that would frustrate even the most seasoned admen and political pundits.
There were a number of interesting ideas for tactical media, including the distribution of Oyster card holders at London tube stations tracked on social media such as Twitter and Foursquare. We had a lengthy debate as to whether such giveaways constituted a bribe under electoral law. To my shame, having stood on a couple of occasions as a parliamentary candidate, I was a little vague on this point, but thought we were probably on dodgy ground.
Creatively the strongest campaign idea was one which used iconic British buildings as a metaphor for the economy. We saw Tower Bridge crumbling, with a warning that you shouldn't dump the architect of the recovery at a critical moment. The argument was that we could change the building to reflect a local landmark in key marginal constituencies, which I thought worked very well.
Strategically, there were even braver suggestions from other groups. Recognising the gaffe-prone Gordon Brown as a source of many of Labour's problems, some suggested creative work which had a strong 'mea culpa' theme. Or we could go a stage further - removing Gordon Brown from the equation entirely by admitting publicly that the election wasn't about just one man. It was about everybody else. Coming hot on the heels of Labour Ministers' calls for tactical voting and a Labour candidate suggesting Brown was the worst-ever Prime Minister, the strategy had a plausible, if rather desperate, feel to it.
One thing's for sure. It's always good to get the impartial observations of outsiders on any advertising campaign. And objectivity is often in short supply when it comes to elections.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Very much liking the current LG campaign in the US which is built around those text messages we ought to think twice before sending. I was discussing it this week in London with students from Maryland's Towson University and making the point that it's beautifully integrated across a number of different media. Traditional TV commercials and posters are linked to the web, Flickr and Twitter. I've even befriended the Ponder Beard on Facebook and he's been kind enough to stop by for a chat.
Campaign site: www.giveitaponder.com
Campaign site: www.giveitaponder.com
Monday, December 28, 2009
A great deal has been written about the way in which charities, campaigns and political movements have borrowed the techniques of commercial marketers and advertisers. Very often, however, the marketing profession would do well to look at the ideas that evolve spontaneously as part of political protests. Many are simple, but ingenious.
Mass movements - particularly those which are denied the right to free speech through conventional channels such as television, radio and the press - have increasingly been using the internet and mobile technology to promote their messages. These newer media are, of course, by their very nature more democratic and difficult to censor effectively. Sometimes, however, activists are forced to think more laterally.
Iran has seen a great deal of turmoil in recent months, with a protest against the bogus election results turning, over time, into a challenge to the theocratic regime itself. Low-resolution video footage on sites such as YouTube has given us a glimpse of the brutality of the government forces, while Twitter has played an important part in the dissemination of news. There are two other developments that have particularly caught my eye though.
The first has been the use of rooftop chanting at night to show the strength of anti-government feeling - a form of protest that was used successfully against the former Shah in the 1970s, prior to the Islamic revolution. The second, reported more recently, is the campaign to deface the Iranian currency with protest slogans. As Iran is a largely cash-based economy, this has even greater impact than it would on the streets of, say, London or Paris.
Perhaps this is the ultimate viral campaign? The medium is ubiquitous, as the currency is in constant use and people can't ignore it. The message spreads quickly via retail outlets and market transactions and the notes can find their way into the hands of absolutely anyone. What's more, there's a constant circulation - at least until such time as the authorities can remove the offending cash.
The government's solution currently is to say that 'defaced' notes will no longer be legal tender from January. I suspect this tactic is doomed to failure by the sheer number in the hands of the public and confusion over the status of individual notes. When exactly does a scribble or a smudge of green ink become a subversive political statement? When does a messy note become an illegal one? Generally, if people receive a 'dodgy' note or coin, they always like to kid themselves that it's ok, don't they? And hope that they'll be able to pass it on. After all, if they accepted it as genuine, maybe someone else will?
Next time you encounter a celebrated viral campaign for a big brand, spread via email or social networks, it's worth remembering that messages are probably travelling more quickly and effectively in Tehran on the back of 1,000 rial note.
Mass movements - particularly those which are denied the right to free speech through conventional channels such as television, radio and the press - have increasingly been using the internet and mobile technology to promote their messages. These newer media are, of course, by their very nature more democratic and difficult to censor effectively. Sometimes, however, activists are forced to think more laterally.
Iran has seen a great deal of turmoil in recent months, with a protest against the bogus election results turning, over time, into a challenge to the theocratic regime itself. Low-resolution video footage on sites such as YouTube has given us a glimpse of the brutality of the government forces, while Twitter has played an important part in the dissemination of news. There are two other developments that have particularly caught my eye though.
The first has been the use of rooftop chanting at night to show the strength of anti-government feeling - a form of protest that was used successfully against the former Shah in the 1970s, prior to the Islamic revolution. The second, reported more recently, is the campaign to deface the Iranian currency with protest slogans. As Iran is a largely cash-based economy, this has even greater impact than it would on the streets of, say, London or Paris.
Perhaps this is the ultimate viral campaign? The medium is ubiquitous, as the currency is in constant use and people can't ignore it. The message spreads quickly via retail outlets and market transactions and the notes can find their way into the hands of absolutely anyone. What's more, there's a constant circulation - at least until such time as the authorities can remove the offending cash.
The government's solution currently is to say that 'defaced' notes will no longer be legal tender from January. I suspect this tactic is doomed to failure by the sheer number in the hands of the public and confusion over the status of individual notes. When exactly does a scribble or a smudge of green ink become a subversive political statement? When does a messy note become an illegal one? Generally, if people receive a 'dodgy' note or coin, they always like to kid themselves that it's ok, don't they? And hope that they'll be able to pass it on. After all, if they accepted it as genuine, maybe someone else will?
Next time you encounter a celebrated viral campaign for a big brand, spread via email or social networks, it's worth remembering that messages are probably travelling more quickly and effectively in Tehran on the back of 1,000 rial note.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
In the past, we'd distinguish between traditional forms of advertising aimed at mass audiences and direct marketing techniques which targeted groups or individuals directly. One of the interesting things about the brave new world of Web 2.0 is that these distinctions are becoming blurred. It's no longer TV campaigns, billboards and press advertising versus direct mail, e-shots and targeted web content. We can take an olde-worlde discipline such as radio advertising and adapt it to the brave new world.
Take Spotify, for instance. I was discussing the brand at a recent CIM course on marketing communications and making the point that the music is interrupted by pretty bog-standard commercials. One minute, we're enjoying virtually unlimited 21st-century tunes streamed over the web. The next, we're being treated to one of those cheesy ads that I grew up listening to in the 1970s on LBC or Capital in London. Unconvincing characters spouting stilted dialogue, dreamed up by the agency B-team.
While it may not be easy to drag the creative work kicking and screaming into late 2009, it is becoming possible to make the advertising more relevant to the listener. In an intriguing twist on the personalised communications we see on social networks, Spotify's Daniel Ek recently announced that his business would target ads based on customers' musical tastes.
Apparently it's possible to tell from my choice of tracks whether I'm more inclined towards BMW or Audi. This sounds intriguing, but as someone who's in the market for neither car, I'm wondering if the potential of the personalisation is likely to be rather limited. There's no doubt we're getting another glimpse of the future. How quickly it will arrive, however, is anyone's guess. In the meantime, my listening pleasure will still be disrupted by British Gas and some company which checks the memory of my computer in a free online test.
Take Spotify, for instance. I was discussing the brand at a recent CIM course on marketing communications and making the point that the music is interrupted by pretty bog-standard commercials. One minute, we're enjoying virtually unlimited 21st-century tunes streamed over the web. The next, we're being treated to one of those cheesy ads that I grew up listening to in the 1970s on LBC or Capital in London. Unconvincing characters spouting stilted dialogue, dreamed up by the agency B-team.
While it may not be easy to drag the creative work kicking and screaming into late 2009, it is becoming possible to make the advertising more relevant to the listener. In an intriguing twist on the personalised communications we see on social networks, Spotify's Daniel Ek recently announced that his business would target ads based on customers' musical tastes.
Apparently it's possible to tell from my choice of tracks whether I'm more inclined towards BMW or Audi. This sounds intriguing, but as someone who's in the market for neither car, I'm wondering if the potential of the personalisation is likely to be rather limited. There's no doubt we're getting another glimpse of the future. How quickly it will arrive, however, is anyone's guess. In the meantime, my listening pleasure will still be disrupted by British Gas and some company which checks the memory of my computer in a free online test.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
A number of my clients and delegates on training courses often wonder whether Twitter can truly be used as an effective marketing platform. Too often, we think of it as a vehicle for conveying a message, whereas actually it's an instantaneous method of anyone conveying a message on our behalf.
US space agency NASA recently invited 100 of its followers to Cape Canaveral for the launch of the Space Shuttle. The enthusiasts were only too glad to act as PR ambassadors for the American space program.
Yet another example of marketing communications passing out of the hands of the 'professionals' and into the hands of the general public. And just one of the many ways in which NASA has attempted to exploit the new technologies.
Watch this space.
US space agency NASA recently invited 100 of its followers to Cape Canaveral for the launch of the Space Shuttle. The enthusiasts were only too glad to act as PR ambassadors for the American space program.
Yet another example of marketing communications passing out of the hands of the 'professionals' and into the hands of the general public. And just one of the many ways in which NASA has attempted to exploit the new technologies.
Watch this space.
Monday, November 09, 2009
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Everything's 4-star, except the hotel...
Earlier this year, budget hotel chain Premier Inn claimed in its UK newspaper advertisements that it offered "everything you'd expect from a 4* hotel".
Having worked in the ad industry, I know there's inevitably a certain amount of poetic licence in the promotion of products and services. Sometimes, however, boundaries get crossed. I protested to the Advertising Standards Authority about the misleading nature of the claim and was pleased to see this week that the watchdog ruled against the Whitbread-owned business, saying that the ads breached three sections of the relevant codes of practice.
As I frequently tell my students, however, the British regulatory system tends to be rather toothless. The ads won't appear again with the same form of words. But the campaign is now over and some months have elapsed since the original insertions. Is there any way we could create a system that works faster and carries more clout?
Earlier this year, budget hotel chain Premier Inn claimed in its UK newspaper advertisements that it offered "everything you'd expect from a 4* hotel".
Having worked in the ad industry, I know there's inevitably a certain amount of poetic licence in the promotion of products and services. Sometimes, however, boundaries get crossed. I protested to the Advertising Standards Authority about the misleading nature of the claim and was pleased to see this week that the watchdog ruled against the Whitbread-owned business, saying that the ads breached three sections of the relevant codes of practice.
As I frequently tell my students, however, the British regulatory system tends to be rather toothless. The ads won't appear again with the same form of words. But the campaign is now over and some months have elapsed since the original insertions. Is there any way we could create a system that works faster and carries more clout?
Monday, July 13, 2009
Driving Fatigue advert from Driving Fatigue on Vimeo.
This film has been put together by two recent graduates of Kingston University. Works very well, I think, at a conceptual level. Also has high production values for a portfolio piece. Hope these guys get some agency work.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Can we turn back the tide of greenwash?
Advertisers have long been accused of brainwashing the public. Over fifty years ago, when Vance Packard published his famous book The Hidden Persuaders, people were already worried about the extent to which we're manipulated by subliminal messages.
Today, the worry is that we're peddled a load of soft soap on the environment by a bunch of skilled PR practitioners and experts in so-called 'corporate social responsibility'. This greenwashing phenomenon has been nicely parodied by two students I taught this year at Kingston University in south-west London. Eleanor Goodwin and Sarah Burnett have created a range of eco-friendly packaging for distinctly unfriendly products such as weedkiller and rat poison. You can now destroy vermin safe in the knowledge that you're doing your bit for the planet.
Advertisers have long been accused of brainwashing the public. Over fifty years ago, when Vance Packard published his famous book The Hidden Persuaders, people were already worried about the extent to which we're manipulated by subliminal messages.
Today, the worry is that we're peddled a load of soft soap on the environment by a bunch of skilled PR practitioners and experts in so-called 'corporate social responsibility'. This greenwashing phenomenon has been nicely parodied by two students I taught this year at Kingston University in south-west London. Eleanor Goodwin and Sarah Burnett have created a range of eco-friendly packaging for distinctly unfriendly products such as weedkiller and rat poison. You can now destroy vermin safe in the knowledge that you're doing your bit for the planet.
Monday, March 16, 2009
You don't have to be mad to use Twitter, but it helps...
On the courses I run for the Chartered Institute of Marketing and University of the Arts London, there's inevitably more and more discussion of so-called 'social' media such as networking and microblogging sites. Twitter has grown hugely in recent months thanks to high-profile endorsements by celebrities. These range from American A-listers like Demi Moore and Willie Nelson through to UK talkshow hosts Philip Schofield and Jonathan Ross.
But how exactly can Twitter and other similar sites actually benefit marketers and advertisers? A clue may lie in the work being done with AMC's Golden Globe winning TV show Mad Men. The series is set in Madison Avenue, New York in the early 1960s and features an array of glamorous but rather unsympathetic characters who populate an ad agency called Sterling Cooper. Viewers in the UK can currently catch the second season on BBC4 and BBC2.
Actors from the show such as Jon Hamm use the site in a pretty typical way, posting about everything and nothing in 140-word bites. What's far more interesting, however, is the way that the characters from the show interact in real time on Twitter. Neurotic housewife and former model Betty Draper, for instance, tells of the meals she's preparing for her husband Don. Recently she posted that the creative director had taken a trip to Austin, Texas and remarked on how far afield businessmen seem to get these days. These days, of course, being 1962 rather than 2009.
When I responded to the tweets of one of the other characters - copywriter Peggy Olson - and told her that she shouldn't forget her roots, she was sweet enough to reply. She'd never forget she came from Brooklyn, she told me, but her career in Madison Avenue was where the future lay.
At one level, this is all completely bizarre. I am a real person in 2009 communicating with a ghostwriter for a fictional character who lives in the era of JFK. Some people might tell me to get a life and perhaps they're right. I can't help feeling, however, that this ability to interact with the characters cements the relationship that the viewers have with the show. And what do the TV producers know? Stronger relationships mean greater loyalty, more viral referrals and higher viewing figures. And higher viewing figures mean greater advertising revenues.
Perhaps when the history of 21st century marketing communications is written, the book won't start at the Millennium. It will reach back to the days when smoking was a mark of masculinity, Vermouth flowed freely during office meetings and the Mad Men ruled the roost in Manhattan.
© Phil Woodford, 2009. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford is a freelance trainer and creative who lectures in marketing and advertising at Birkbeck College, University of London.
On the courses I run for the Chartered Institute of Marketing and University of the Arts London, there's inevitably more and more discussion of so-called 'social' media such as networking and microblogging sites. Twitter has grown hugely in recent months thanks to high-profile endorsements by celebrities. These range from American A-listers like Demi Moore and Willie Nelson through to UK talkshow hosts Philip Schofield and Jonathan Ross.
But how exactly can Twitter and other similar sites actually benefit marketers and advertisers? A clue may lie in the work being done with AMC's Golden Globe winning TV show Mad Men. The series is set in Madison Avenue, New York in the early 1960s and features an array of glamorous but rather unsympathetic characters who populate an ad agency called Sterling Cooper. Viewers in the UK can currently catch the second season on BBC4 and BBC2.
Actors from the show such as Jon Hamm use the site in a pretty typical way, posting about everything and nothing in 140-word bites. What's far more interesting, however, is the way that the characters from the show interact in real time on Twitter. Neurotic housewife and former model Betty Draper, for instance, tells of the meals she's preparing for her husband Don. Recently she posted that the creative director had taken a trip to Austin, Texas and remarked on how far afield businessmen seem to get these days. These days, of course, being 1962 rather than 2009.
When I responded to the tweets of one of the other characters - copywriter Peggy Olson - and told her that she shouldn't forget her roots, she was sweet enough to reply. She'd never forget she came from Brooklyn, she told me, but her career in Madison Avenue was where the future lay.
At one level, this is all completely bizarre. I am a real person in 2009 communicating with a ghostwriter for a fictional character who lives in the era of JFK. Some people might tell me to get a life and perhaps they're right. I can't help feeling, however, that this ability to interact with the characters cements the relationship that the viewers have with the show. And what do the TV producers know? Stronger relationships mean greater loyalty, more viral referrals and higher viewing figures. And higher viewing figures mean greater advertising revenues.
Perhaps when the history of 21st century marketing communications is written, the book won't start at the Millennium. It will reach back to the days when smoking was a mark of masculinity, Vermouth flowed freely during office meetings and the Mad Men ruled the roost in Manhattan.
© Phil Woodford, 2009. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford is a freelance trainer and creative who lectures in marketing and advertising at Birkbeck College, University of London.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Although this is a blog about advertising creativity, the world of marketing communications has been moving at a phenomenal speed in the past few years. If you're interested in exploring some of the newer forms of social and viral marketing, why not sign up for my new online forum?
Friday, February 06, 2009
Follow me on Twitter...
...where I'm posting a selection of corporate taglines and slogans from around the English-speaking world. Some well known, others less so. Every tweat's a treat: http://twitter.com/Tagspotter
...where I'm posting a selection of corporate taglines and slogans from around the English-speaking world. Some well known, others less so. Every tweat's a treat: http://twitter.com/Tagspotter
Monday, January 19, 2009
On the 'ead, son: a simple, but striking poster execution for ITV1.
A belated mention for the ITV1 campaign which broke at Christmas, in advance of the new year FA Cup fixtures. The Cup, of course, is where the part-time, non-league Davids can take on the superannuated Goliaths of the Premiership. It's "where all men are equal". A strong idea, delivered without any fuss.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
Trouble in the Balkans needn't be painful
Spreadbetting company Capital Spreads provides some evidence that the age of intelligent and witty copywriting isn’t necessarily over. In the company’s current campaign on the London Underground, they pose a series of questions to readers.
“The Chinese wrap up mineral rights throughout West Africa,” reads one ad. “Do you (a) Get on the blower and order a 21, two 16s and some butterfly prawns. (b) Start buying copper and enjoy the ride.”
Another execution tells us “There’s trouble down in the Balkan regions. Do you (a) Arrange a private screening with your GP, just in case. (b) Seek temporary refuge and buy gold.”
It’s rare these days to see a textbook piece of advertising that ticks all the boxes. Here, the writer has a clear idea of the central insight and proposition – that potential spread betters pride themselves on their ability to read markets in turbulent economic and political times. They then dramatise the proposition through different dilemmas, which use appropriate humour and are likely to engage the target audience. They achieve consistency across the various executions, by following a recognisable pattern, but giving the creative a unique twist each time. This allows them to take over, say, the Waterloo & City Line and actually encourage passengers to read every single display card in their section of the carriage.
Finally, but significantly, they draw on cultural reference points and language that reflect the milieu of the likely customer. Chinese restaurants, double entendre, the use of the old-fashioned word ‘blower’ to describe a phone.
It's all done with type and the ads aren't much to look at. But I still looked at them. Art directors take note.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford lectures in marketing and advertising at Birkbeck College, University of London.
Spreadbetting company Capital Spreads provides some evidence that the age of intelligent and witty copywriting isn’t necessarily over. In the company’s current campaign on the London Underground, they pose a series of questions to readers.
“The Chinese wrap up mineral rights throughout West Africa,” reads one ad. “Do you (a) Get on the blower and order a 21, two 16s and some butterfly prawns. (b) Start buying copper and enjoy the ride.”
Another execution tells us “There’s trouble down in the Balkan regions. Do you (a) Arrange a private screening with your GP, just in case. (b) Seek temporary refuge and buy gold.”
It’s rare these days to see a textbook piece of advertising that ticks all the boxes. Here, the writer has a clear idea of the central insight and proposition – that potential spread betters pride themselves on their ability to read markets in turbulent economic and political times. They then dramatise the proposition through different dilemmas, which use appropriate humour and are likely to engage the target audience. They achieve consistency across the various executions, by following a recognisable pattern, but giving the creative a unique twist each time. This allows them to take over, say, the Waterloo & City Line and actually encourage passengers to read every single display card in their section of the carriage.
Finally, but significantly, they draw on cultural reference points and language that reflect the milieu of the likely customer. Chinese restaurants, double entendre, the use of the old-fashioned word ‘blower’ to describe a phone.
It's all done with type and the ads aren't much to look at. But I still looked at them. Art directors take note.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford lectures in marketing and advertising at Birkbeck College, University of London.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Winging it with the creative
I’m not sure I can make head or tail of the current British Airways advertising campaign. One poster shows a street vendor rustling up some food on hot plates and runs with the headline “You can’t smell a city from a coach”. Quite why this is an argument in favour of plane travel in general – or using BA in particular – is beyond me. You can’t smell a city from a plane either, guys. In fact, it’s probably necessary to alight from any form of transport to gain full olfactory satisfaction.
The proposition is clearly that travelling by coach prevents a passenger from experiencing everything a destination has to offer. You’re whisked from place to place, with no time to explore on foot. Fair enough. But the dramatisation of the idea fails miserably at a logical level. If you wanted to explore London on foot, you’d be hard pressed to do it from Gatwick. Unless you’d packed a few blister packs and had a couple of extra days to spare.
Same idea done better: we see bewildered people staring out of blurred coach windows as they hurry through bustling city streets. Even now, we still encounter a logical problem. If the target audience decides coach travel is unsatisfactory (and they may simply favour it at the moment because it’s cheap), they can still choose to go by car, ferry, train or some other means of transport.
No, it’s back-to-the-drawing-board time, folks. I’m afraid I smell an ad concept that just doesn’t work.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford lectures in copywriting and creative writing at University of the Arts London.
I’m not sure I can make head or tail of the current British Airways advertising campaign. One poster shows a street vendor rustling up some food on hot plates and runs with the headline “You can’t smell a city from a coach”. Quite why this is an argument in favour of plane travel in general – or using BA in particular – is beyond me. You can’t smell a city from a plane either, guys. In fact, it’s probably necessary to alight from any form of transport to gain full olfactory satisfaction.
The proposition is clearly that travelling by coach prevents a passenger from experiencing everything a destination has to offer. You’re whisked from place to place, with no time to explore on foot. Fair enough. But the dramatisation of the idea fails miserably at a logical level. If you wanted to explore London on foot, you’d be hard pressed to do it from Gatwick. Unless you’d packed a few blister packs and had a couple of extra days to spare.
Same idea done better: we see bewildered people staring out of blurred coach windows as they hurry through bustling city streets. Even now, we still encounter a logical problem. If the target audience decides coach travel is unsatisfactory (and they may simply favour it at the moment because it’s cheap), they can still choose to go by car, ferry, train or some other means of transport.
No, it’s back-to-the-drawing-board time, folks. I’m afraid I smell an ad concept that just doesn’t work.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford lectures in copywriting and creative writing at University of the Arts London.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Sometimes it pays to keep your creative ideas under wraps
I recently spent two days with a group of design students at a London university and set them a challenging brief. Could they come up with an advertising campaign that would reverse the fortunes of US Presidential candidate, John McCain? I asked them to set aside any preconceptions, as if they held opinions about the US elections, I judged it likely that they would be favourable to McCain’s Democratic opponent, Barack Obama.
Behind in the polls, the self-styled ‘maverick’ McCain seems unable to reach out to undecided voters and even has trouble retaining the rock-solid Republican base. He’s battling against the unpopularity of George Bush and a financial crisis on a scale unseen since 1929. Can advertising really make a difference in this kind of context?
Much to my delight – my creative delight, that is – the students came up with range of interesting ideas to boost McCain’s flagging campaign in the dying days of the election. “Nothing comes between me and my country” read one of the lines, showing a picture of former fighter pilot snuggling up in bed with an American flag. Another pair of would-be creatives came up with the slogan “I’ve been there” – demonstrating McCain’s heritage not only as a warrior, but also as a family man and Senator.
Two of the young designers likened the Republican candidate to a trusty pair of denim jeans or the reliable “little black dress” – something that was always there and could always be called upon. Another group changed his name to read McCan, emphasising how his experience could be brought to bear on the problems facing the US today. Perhaps my favourite was line which read “The everyman for everyone”. It was accompanied by a TV storyboard that was plausible enough to be presented to staffers at the McCain-Palin war room tomorrow and reinforced the notion of Obama as an aloof intellectual standing against someone who was just a regular guy.
Enough to turn an election around? Maybe not. But I’d bet my bottom dollar we could knock a point or two off Obama’s lead. My own political leanings mean that I’ve tucked the ideas safely away in a locked drawer until after 4th November.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
I recently spent two days with a group of design students at a London university and set them a challenging brief. Could they come up with an advertising campaign that would reverse the fortunes of US Presidential candidate, John McCain? I asked them to set aside any preconceptions, as if they held opinions about the US elections, I judged it likely that they would be favourable to McCain’s Democratic opponent, Barack Obama.
Behind in the polls, the self-styled ‘maverick’ McCain seems unable to reach out to undecided voters and even has trouble retaining the rock-solid Republican base. He’s battling against the unpopularity of George Bush and a financial crisis on a scale unseen since 1929. Can advertising really make a difference in this kind of context?
Much to my delight – my creative delight, that is – the students came up with range of interesting ideas to boost McCain’s flagging campaign in the dying days of the election. “Nothing comes between me and my country” read one of the lines, showing a picture of former fighter pilot snuggling up in bed with an American flag. Another pair of would-be creatives came up with the slogan “I’ve been there” – demonstrating McCain’s heritage not only as a warrior, but also as a family man and Senator.
Two of the young designers likened the Republican candidate to a trusty pair of denim jeans or the reliable “little black dress” – something that was always there and could always be called upon. Another group changed his name to read McCan, emphasising how his experience could be brought to bear on the problems facing the US today. Perhaps my favourite was line which read “The everyman for everyone”. It was accompanied by a TV storyboard that was plausible enough to be presented to staffers at the McCain-Palin war room tomorrow and reinforced the notion of Obama as an aloof intellectual standing against someone who was just a regular guy.
Enough to turn an election around? Maybe not. But I’d bet my bottom dollar we could knock a point or two off Obama’s lead. My own political leanings mean that I’ve tucked the ideas safely away in a locked drawer until after 4th November.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Friday, October 24, 2008
The credit crunch needn't be a creative crunch
Not a lot of blog activity this year, I’m afraid, due to pressure of work. Exactly how long the work will keep flowing though is something that’s quite difficult to predict. We’re clearly entering a significant period of recession and one of the first industries to feel the pinch is always advertising. In fact, advertising spend is usually a very good barometer for the overall health of the economy.
At the UK Conservative Party’s annual conference earlier this month, Shadow Chancellor George Osborne made an interesting observation: "In the private sector when times are tough you take out the overheads. The consultants are sent packing and the advertising budget is cut. Government should do the same. We are going to put caps on Labour's wasteful consultancy and advertising bills."
At one level, of course, Osborne is right. Businesses do cut back on advertising in a recession. But it’s a mistake to view this practice uncritically and assume that their decisions are somehow based on logic or common sense. In a time of intense competition – when many businesses are fighting for their very survival – effective marketing communications can make the difference between life and death. Some would argue that it’s the time to expand the advertising budget rather than contract it.
Creative agencies and media buyers find that fewer clients are spending. And those who are tend to be spending less. Although this can be disconcerting – perhaps the money isn’t there for that high-profile TV or poster campaign – every creative cloud has a silver lining. We’re all forced to think more laterally about communication strategies. For people such as me who work on behalf of a number of smaller, niche design, advertising and direct marketing agencies, it’s no great shock, as I’m frequently told that budget is non-existent anyway. And that’s in the good times.
The good news for marketing communications professionals is that the landscape of the late noughties recession will be completely different the one we encountered in the early nineties. Seventeen or eighteen years ago, email hadn’t yet become a ubiquitous feature of business communication and the web was something only familiar to computer geeks and nuclear scientists in secure bunkers. These technologies mean that an advertising message can now potentially be sent instantaneously and at virtually no cost. So cutting back on advertising spend needn’t necessarily mean cutting back on advertising.
My prediction (hardly a revelation) is that for the next 18 months we’ll see a further downturn in traditional press and TV advertising, which spells bad news for mainstream media outlets, media buying agencies and publishers. But we may well see an upsurge of interest in the already booming media of email, online forums and social networks. TV and press advertising tends to be based on a tried-and-tested formula, whereas credibility and effectiveness in the newer media demand more inventive and ingenious solutions. Perhaps there will be work for the creatives who can supply them?
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford lectures in advertising and marketing in the Faculty of Continuing Education at Birkbeck College, University of London.
Not a lot of blog activity this year, I’m afraid, due to pressure of work. Exactly how long the work will keep flowing though is something that’s quite difficult to predict. We’re clearly entering a significant period of recession and one of the first industries to feel the pinch is always advertising. In fact, advertising spend is usually a very good barometer for the overall health of the economy.
At the UK Conservative Party’s annual conference earlier this month, Shadow Chancellor George Osborne made an interesting observation: "In the private sector when times are tough you take out the overheads. The consultants are sent packing and the advertising budget is cut. Government should do the same. We are going to put caps on Labour's wasteful consultancy and advertising bills."
At one level, of course, Osborne is right. Businesses do cut back on advertising in a recession. But it’s a mistake to view this practice uncritically and assume that their decisions are somehow based on logic or common sense. In a time of intense competition – when many businesses are fighting for their very survival – effective marketing communications can make the difference between life and death. Some would argue that it’s the time to expand the advertising budget rather than contract it.
Creative agencies and media buyers find that fewer clients are spending. And those who are tend to be spending less. Although this can be disconcerting – perhaps the money isn’t there for that high-profile TV or poster campaign – every creative cloud has a silver lining. We’re all forced to think more laterally about communication strategies. For people such as me who work on behalf of a number of smaller, niche design, advertising and direct marketing agencies, it’s no great shock, as I’m frequently told that budget is non-existent anyway. And that’s in the good times.
The good news for marketing communications professionals is that the landscape of the late noughties recession will be completely different the one we encountered in the early nineties. Seventeen or eighteen years ago, email hadn’t yet become a ubiquitous feature of business communication and the web was something only familiar to computer geeks and nuclear scientists in secure bunkers. These technologies mean that an advertising message can now potentially be sent instantaneously and at virtually no cost. So cutting back on advertising spend needn’t necessarily mean cutting back on advertising.
My prediction (hardly a revelation) is that for the next 18 months we’ll see a further downturn in traditional press and TV advertising, which spells bad news for mainstream media outlets, media buying agencies and publishers. But we may well see an upsurge of interest in the already booming media of email, online forums and social networks. TV and press advertising tends to be based on a tried-and-tested formula, whereas credibility and effectiveness in the newer media demand more inventive and ingenious solutions. Perhaps there will be work for the creatives who can supply them?
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford lectures in advertising and marketing in the Faculty of Continuing Education at Birkbeck College, University of London.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Why social advertising may not be good for your social life
One of my best friends at the age of about ten was a guy called Tom Hodgkinson. We lost touch sometime in our teens, but I kept track of his career from afar. Not only did Hodgkinson follow in his parents’ footsteps and become a top-notch journalist, but he also launched a magazine called The Idler, which celebrates laziness in all its forms. Its founder and editor took the downsizing philosophy to heart and headed out to the sticks, where he now raises a family in some rustic idyll, surrounded by chickens and foxes and other things that country folk tend to enjoy. Hodgkinson also eschews modern technology such as email. Or at least that’s what he claims in articles for The Guardian, which I’m guessing he must deliver by hand on occasional forays into town.
So, the connection between these whimsical reflections and a blog on advertising creativity? Well, a couple of days ago, Hodgkinson wrote a feature¹ on the subject of Facebook – the ubiquitous social networking site. I read the piece as I travelled home from a workshop I’d been running for the Chartered Institute of Marketing and some of his themes had a particular resonance. He was strongly critical, for instance, of Facebook’s “social advertising” strategy that was trumpeted by youthful networking entrepreneur Mark Zuckerberg at a meeting in New York City last November.
In a nutshell, social advertising is a way of getting people to recommend products and services to their friends in the networking space. Johnny buys a camcorder from me at Woodford Enterprises. He then ticks a box that sends his ‘recommendation’ to his circle of friends, along with a helpful bit of promotional puff from the Woodford marketing machine. Initially, the thinking was that Johnny’s friends would have no say over whether they received his product endorsement or not. There’s been such a hullabaloo, however, that this platform (known as Beacon) has been the subject of quite a bit of backtracking and revision.
In Hodgkinson’s view, Facebook’s social advertising represents the “commodification of human relationships” and “the extraction of capitalistic value from friendships”. I fear that this may not be the first time in history that human relationships have commodified, but let’s set that to one side for a moment. There’s no question that people are concerned about the latest developments. The delegates at my workshop – all marketing practitioners and managers – were pretty universal in their condemnation of the social advertising concept too. This might surprise Hodgkinson, who clearly has a pretty dim view of our profession. Although marketers and advertising professionals recognise that personal recommendation can be very powerful, we understand that there’s a big difference between the spontaneous endorsement of a brand and a phoney endorsement that’s been generated by computer and sent to people who aren’t interested in hearing it.
The whole discussion ties in with a broader debate in the advertising and marketing community about the extent to which we intrude on the consumer’s personal space. All-singing, all-dancing banner ads that jump around web pages are now technologically possible, but I’ve yet to meet anyone who really wants to encounter them. I’ve seen students in focus groups react very badly to the idea of marketing via text message, which they see as an unwarranted invasion of their private world. At the same time, however, we’re in a quandary, because we know that many of our target audiences live their lives on their PCs and mobiles and we need to reach them somehow or other. Tom Himpe, a strategic planner at the Belgian communications agency Mortierbrigade, argues convincingly that brands either have to travel to where their audience congregates or, alternatively, entice consumers into their own world through so-called ‘experiential’ marketing². The old days where we used to meet in the middle – perhaps during a TV commercial break viewed by the majority of the adult population – are fast disappearing.
All these issues are brought into sharp focus by social networking sites, which potentially provide an opportunity for marketers and brands to get closer to their consumer audiences than ever before. There’s no doubt that corporate interests will play a big part in the development of these social networks, but the precise way in which they interact with the users is still up for grabs. If the global corporations push their luck, they find that they get a bloody nose.
At the moment, we’re in the early stages of the social networking phenomenon and I’m going to continue poking folk and writing on people’s walls and seeing how the whole thing develops over time. This is anathema to Hodgkinson who worries about the politics of the network’s founders and sees the project as one great big social experiment by neo-conservative libertarians. If it is indeed an experiment, then I think it’s been a rather successful one. And I can say that without too much fear of offending my old school chum, as he tells us he prefers to read a book than surf the net.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford is a member of the Chartered Institute of Marketing’s Faculty of Course Directors and lectures in marketing and advertising at Birkbeck College, University of London. His workshop, The Changing Face of Marketing Communication, runs in Dublin on 28th March 2008 and in London on 9th May 2008.
¹With friends like these… by Tom Hodgkinson, The Guardian, 14th Jan 08
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook
² Himpe T, Advertising is dead! Long live advertising!, 2006, Thames & Hudson
One of my best friends at the age of about ten was a guy called Tom Hodgkinson. We lost touch sometime in our teens, but I kept track of his career from afar. Not only did Hodgkinson follow in his parents’ footsteps and become a top-notch journalist, but he also launched a magazine called The Idler, which celebrates laziness in all its forms. Its founder and editor took the downsizing philosophy to heart and headed out to the sticks, where he now raises a family in some rustic idyll, surrounded by chickens and foxes and other things that country folk tend to enjoy. Hodgkinson also eschews modern technology such as email. Or at least that’s what he claims in articles for The Guardian, which I’m guessing he must deliver by hand on occasional forays into town.
So, the connection between these whimsical reflections and a blog on advertising creativity? Well, a couple of days ago, Hodgkinson wrote a feature¹ on the subject of Facebook – the ubiquitous social networking site. I read the piece as I travelled home from a workshop I’d been running for the Chartered Institute of Marketing and some of his themes had a particular resonance. He was strongly critical, for instance, of Facebook’s “social advertising” strategy that was trumpeted by youthful networking entrepreneur Mark Zuckerberg at a meeting in New York City last November.
In a nutshell, social advertising is a way of getting people to recommend products and services to their friends in the networking space. Johnny buys a camcorder from me at Woodford Enterprises. He then ticks a box that sends his ‘recommendation’ to his circle of friends, along with a helpful bit of promotional puff from the Woodford marketing machine. Initially, the thinking was that Johnny’s friends would have no say over whether they received his product endorsement or not. There’s been such a hullabaloo, however, that this platform (known as Beacon) has been the subject of quite a bit of backtracking and revision.
In Hodgkinson’s view, Facebook’s social advertising represents the “commodification of human relationships” and “the extraction of capitalistic value from friendships”. I fear that this may not be the first time in history that human relationships have commodified, but let’s set that to one side for a moment. There’s no question that people are concerned about the latest developments. The delegates at my workshop – all marketing practitioners and managers – were pretty universal in their condemnation of the social advertising concept too. This might surprise Hodgkinson, who clearly has a pretty dim view of our profession. Although marketers and advertising professionals recognise that personal recommendation can be very powerful, we understand that there’s a big difference between the spontaneous endorsement of a brand and a phoney endorsement that’s been generated by computer and sent to people who aren’t interested in hearing it.
The whole discussion ties in with a broader debate in the advertising and marketing community about the extent to which we intrude on the consumer’s personal space. All-singing, all-dancing banner ads that jump around web pages are now technologically possible, but I’ve yet to meet anyone who really wants to encounter them. I’ve seen students in focus groups react very badly to the idea of marketing via text message, which they see as an unwarranted invasion of their private world. At the same time, however, we’re in a quandary, because we know that many of our target audiences live their lives on their PCs and mobiles and we need to reach them somehow or other. Tom Himpe, a strategic planner at the Belgian communications agency Mortierbrigade, argues convincingly that brands either have to travel to where their audience congregates or, alternatively, entice consumers into their own world through so-called ‘experiential’ marketing². The old days where we used to meet in the middle – perhaps during a TV commercial break viewed by the majority of the adult population – are fast disappearing.
All these issues are brought into sharp focus by social networking sites, which potentially provide an opportunity for marketers and brands to get closer to their consumer audiences than ever before. There’s no doubt that corporate interests will play a big part in the development of these social networks, but the precise way in which they interact with the users is still up for grabs. If the global corporations push their luck, they find that they get a bloody nose.
At the moment, we’re in the early stages of the social networking phenomenon and I’m going to continue poking folk and writing on people’s walls and seeing how the whole thing develops over time. This is anathema to Hodgkinson who worries about the politics of the network’s founders and sees the project as one great big social experiment by neo-conservative libertarians. If it is indeed an experiment, then I think it’s been a rather successful one. And I can say that without too much fear of offending my old school chum, as he tells us he prefers to read a book than surf the net.
© Phil Woodford, 2008. All rights reserved.
Phil Woodford is a member of the Chartered Institute of Marketing’s Faculty of Course Directors and lectures in marketing and advertising at Birkbeck College, University of London. His workshop, The Changing Face of Marketing Communication, runs in Dublin on 28th March 2008 and in London on 9th May 2008.
¹With friends like these… by Tom Hodgkinson, The Guardian, 14th Jan 08
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook
² Himpe T, Advertising is dead! Long live advertising!, 2006, Thames & Hudson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
