by mark February 28th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
An advertising campaign on steroids has been unleashed upon those of us who take the train into Chicago thanks to the marketers of Tropicana orange juice. Maybe someone will write and tell me if this is going on in any other cities around the country.
What makes this effort so interesting is the astonishing mix of ordinary and extraordinary communication going on simultaneously, which tends to support my belief that a lot of well-intentioned clients and agencies just don’t know the difference. So let me see if I can help.
Continue reading ‘“Juiced”’
by mark February 25th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
I’m going to start a collection–not the financial kind, more’s the pity–this is going to be an ad collection, a collection of ads for brands that once had extraordinary advertising, but now must bear the burden of some very, very ordinary ones.
The first ad in the collection should be that Chivas ad I wrote about a while ago, and the next is this Wild Turkey ad I just stumbled across. In fact, now that I think about it, I may have to create a subcategory just for liquor ads.
But first, does anyone remember how extraordinary Wild Turkey’s advertising used to be?
Continue reading ‘Turkey Is Right’
by mark February 24th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
When you come right down to it, that’s all that I am. One guy with a bit of experience in the advertising world and more opinions than Carter has pills. So any hard data I provide should be taken as purely “directional” as all those moderators are so fond of saying. (Directional my foot as anyone who’s ever been in the back room and witnessed the M&M-fueled frenzy of people making tick marks in the margins of their discussion guides will attest.)
What got me going on this was a little discovery I made the other day about a television show I had seen the night before. A discovery that’s quite central to my whole jeremiad about ordinary advertising.
Continue reading ‘A Focus Group Of One’
by mark February 23rd, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
Although it’s kind of gone out of fashion, the word “suave” used to be commonly applied to a man with a certain charming, seductive way about him. And since I firmly believe seduction and the development of extraordinary advertising are closely related, it seems only natural that this sterling example of outstanding work is for the brand Suave.
You must have seen these outdoor posters, too. They all feature a large photo of an attractive woman with beautiful hair and a large, white question mark printed in the center of her face. This is accompanied by the words” “Suave or Pantene (or some other rival to Suave) CanYouTell.com”
Very cool and very smart for a variety of reasons.
Continue reading ‘Suave, Indeed’
by mark February 22nd, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
It sometimes seems like people in this business have terrible memories. And not the kind that can get sorted out with therapy. No, the kind of faulty memory I’m talking about is the kind that allows a brand to recycle the same ordinary idea in its advertising over and over again.
About 15 years ago Reebok had a mercifully short-lived campaign that featured the immortal line: “Reeboks Let UBU.” It wasn’t too successful, so they abandoned it, only to return now with a new campaign bearing the line: “I am what I am.” (hey, it worked for Popeye), which is basically the same old idea.
So what, doesn’t anybody at Reebok remember the UBU campaign?
Continue reading ‘Advertising Amnesia’
by mark February 21st, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
One of the best ways to distinguish between ordinary advertising and extraordinary advertising is when you can find two ads whose communications objective was identical, but the final result vastly different. And I’m indebted to my wife for this excellent example (and many other things she tells me).
She was flipping through Sporting News the other day and called my attention to a very cute ad FedEx had done to announce its sponsorship of a car running in the Daytona 500. Now this kind of assignment, commonly known as a “compliments of a friend” ad, is the bane of many a young creative team’s existence because they’re so hard to do well. After all, the basic message is nothing more than “tell people that we, Company X, are the sponsor of car #00. But look what FedEx did.
Continue reading ‘Side-By-Side Comparison’
by mark February 20th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
The problem with the marketing/advertising industry’s penchant for militaristic language isn’t just a matter of semantics. Because when most of the metaphors we employ indicate we see ourselves as being at war with the consumer, how can that help but color our entire relationship with this audience?
Take the term “targeting”. Usually when you target something you do so a) from a safe distance, b) with a high-impact projectile and c) hoping you will strike the unsuspecting object rendering it incapable of resisting your will. Certainly an unusual path to “customer relationship management”, but I’ll save that for another day.
What got me thinking about this was an article in The Wall Street Journal that, quite by accident I think, made exactly the point I’m trying to make.
Continue reading ‘“You May Fire When Ready, Gridley”’
by mark February 17th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
Is there anything worse that an ad that positively teeters on the brink of being extraordinary only to be hauled back (to mediocrity) by some typographical affectation?
I was reminded of this via a recent IBM ad, the bulk of this brand’s advertising having been pretty decent lately, that had a truly promising headline: “We can turn on a dime. If it’s a really, really big dime.” Very nice. Simple visual and we’re almost home.
Then I took a gander at the body copy.
Continue reading ‘“On Demand” Typography’
by mark February 16th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
One of my all-time favorite partners, Mark Moffett, once told me that one of the more endearing mannerisms of Ed McCabe was to jump up and down in the hall bellowing those exact words to all his teams working to come up with a new campaign.
Not a bad question, nor a bad place to start on the road to extraordinary advertising. However, in certain categories this can be a maddeningly tough question to answer. Which is why we sometimes see ad campaigns that attempt to skirt the issue–by simply telling us what the brand isn’t, instead of what it is. But this short cut typically leads to a dead end, for example in the case of these recent ads for AT Kearney.
Continue reading ‘“What Is It?! WHAT IS IT??!!’
by mark February 15th, 2005
in Daily Thoughts.
Yes, I live in the Chicago area, but this is not about that consomme-thin, but locally beloved beer. What I’m wondering is how are the creators of tomorrow’s extraordinary advertising being taught the craft? And in particular, how is the art of writing extraordinary body copy being passed along?
I know there are lots of ad schools helping kids put their portfolios together, but most of the ads in those portfolios that I’ve seen are short, to put it mildly, on body copy. And frankly, it’s rare these days to see a piece of superlative body copy even in the ads the grown-ups produce.
Obviously, I’m no kid, having exceeded by 40-year limited warranty some time ago, but I’m not on a steady diet of Geritol either. I’m just old enough to remember old style of teaching these things and wondering if that wasn’t the best way to do.
Continue reading ‘Old Style’
