You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'brands' tag.
Apple is letting go of their famous “Get a Mac” campaign, which featured Justin Long and John Hodgman in a verbal battle (Mac vs. PC).
I must admit that I always enjoyed the commercials because they were often spot on about the problems that a PC would have, and a Mac didn’t. It was a clever and quiet way of introducing the Mac to ‘regular’ people that doesn’t really know what a Macintosh is all about. People are now speculating about what’s next in the Apple era of advertising. The actual ‘Get a Mac’ campaign and all the TV ads has been removed from the Apple website, and now there’s only facts and reasons about the world of Macs and why you should get one.
So, what’s next? The problem hereafter for Apple will not be to tell people how good they really are – it will be to create a new, successful, interesting and fun campaign that can bring the essence of the brand further into the future. In two weeks Apple and Steve Jobs will open this years ‘Apple Worldwide Developers Conference’ in San Francisco, which will probably reveal many interesting stories. That tells me that we shouldn’t have to wait too long before the new introduction of Mac takes place. The question is; how creative will they be? In the meantime, you can check out this mash-up clip from all the ‘Get a Mac’ videos we’ve been seeing throughout the years. Enjoy!
I’ve been hearing and seeing a lot of advertising lately that is attempting to be green or to connect with consumers via social media or create community. Too often, my response has been “REALLY?” The idea is somewhat sound… give consumers what they want and like to get them more involved with your brand. Create some love. I get it. The problem is the execution.
Today on my way in, I heard a radio spot for a body groomer for men. The ad highlighted two things: 1) the company will plant a tree for each unit sold and 2) you can go to their website to create an avatar, a virtual shaved you. Honestly, what’s the point? They have a series of humorous videos to both explain the product benefits and drive interest, that makes sense to me. But the social/green aspect feels out of place.
First, if your brand wants to go green, that’s great. But don’t greenwash. If you go green it needs to be related to your product. So if you plant trees but still use toxic chemicals or kill indigenous plants and birds to make your stuff, that’s no good. How could a body shaver go green? Maybe they could make the product more energy efficient or use a high percentage of recycled plastic in making it. Those would both be relevant. Otherwise, don’t bother.
Second, not every product needs or deserves a community. Using a viral video to highlight benefits, drive interest, etc. makes sense. If it’s cheap and you think it will have any impact, do it. The problem is do I really want to be in a community for a product like this? Do I need an avatar just for me? Does any guy really talk to their friends (or strangers for that matter) about grooming and how they look? The answer is not really. So while you might think it’s great for your customers to talk to each other about your product or brand, you still need to understand if they’re actually going to do it.
I’ll give some brands like this credit though. They provided a few how-to videos to let guys escape embarrassment and learn about new ways of using the product on their own.
Green and social were new and interesting and have become “expected.” However, as with anything else in life, they’re only worth doing if you do them well.”
Since everyone else seems to be talking about this spot, I figured I’d throw my two cents in. If you haven’t seen it yet, it’s simple…Tiger stares into camera. Tiger’s dead father provides the voiceover. Cameras flash. Simple.
Most of the comments I’m seeing are critical, to say the least. Take this New York Times article:
“Did you learn anything?” Earl Woods asks. A valuable question, and one that his son has attempted to answer in his no-questions news conference in February; his brief interviews with ESPN and the Golf Channel last month; and his pre-Masters news conference on Monday.
But the answer to the father’s question appears to be that serial philandering and addiction rehab can be positioned as a commodity — and that you can roll it out in phases leading to the Nike amendment to the 12 steps: a TV commercial.
Personally, I like the spot. It’s an apology, a glimpse into Tiger’s conscience, and a return to the spotlight all rolled into one. When I read the criticism, I have to wonder what people expected. Short of keeping one of their marquee endorsers on the bench, or cutting him loose altogether, this was the only thing Nike could do.
Nike frames him as the fallen hero. Anything else would have been an outrage.
The people at ViralBlog.com talk about ’7 solid social media marketing trends’, and it’s quite interesting. For example, according to them, things like Facebook Pages will take a brand nowhere. At the same time, an upcoming trend involves hiring specialized social media content managers that can push your game further and create content and interesting ways to infiltrate the social media scene.
Social media sites like Facebook, Twitter (and others) can help brands integrate with their users, customers, etc., on a continual basis. It gives them the opportunity to combine websites and related audio/video content to their brands, connecting users to each other as well as to the brands. In return they’ll share your interests with their networks. It sounds logical and obvious, and it is.
Another idea brought up in the article is a push for more online stores on social networks (something that makes a lot of sense to me). If people know exactly what they want and can get it online, they will. It saves them time and money.
I also believe that a brand (digital or not) must follow the social media scene in order to survive. If you’re not always engaging with your audience online through interesting and compelling stories, the risk will be that your competitor does. The social media geeks seem to get it while many brands don’t. What do you think? Read the full article, here.
Twitter is what’s social media is becoming. It never stops growing. I have an account but don’t really like updating on-the-go – mainly because I’m terrible at keeping up with it. What I like about it is to follow others – not necessarily people but brands, organizations and even causes. I use it like another type of Google Reader. Very recently, low-price airline JetBlue launched a new promotion for their 10th anniversary, where they handed out free tickets to their Twitter-followers in Manhattan. The location of the giveaways was only announced via their Twitter account. The people chasing the tickets had to bring some JetBlue-related stuff to the destinations in order to get their award, and by doing so; they had to research JetBlue on the web.
At each destination there was over 300 tickets waiting for each crowd. Within minutes each time after the release, they were gone. Clever, I must say. This can obviously be risky business, but I actually like this form of marketing. If you can engage people, make something good, get a smile or two back – you have won so much more than new business. I would argue that your reputation is by far more important than the profit, even in shorter terms. Have a look at JetBlue’s Twitter account, apparently the journey continues. This is exactly what Twitter is for in my opinion – to connect people and to connect businesses, to enlighten us but also to engage us on a daily basis. Give something, and you’ll receive something back.
Most people don’t have a clue what goes into designing a logo, let alone a complex identity system. Pentagram’s Paula Scher has written this little essay that takes on the common gripes and misunderstandings about identity design, specifically, What They Don’t Teach You About Identity Design in Design Schools.
For what it’s worth, this is my favorite passage…
I never knew a designer that got hundreds of thousands of dollars to design a logo. Mostly, designers get paid to negotiate the difficult terrain of individual egos, expectations, tastes, and aspirations of various individuals in an organization or corporation, against business needs, and constraints of the marketplace. This is a process that can take a year or more. Getting a large, diverse group of people to agree on a single new methodology for all of their corporate communications means the designer has to be a strategist, psychiatrist, diplomat, showman, and even a Svengali. The complicated process is worth money. That’s what clients pay for. The process, usually a series of endless presentations and refinements, persuasions and proofs, results, hopefully, in an accepted identity design.
I’m not going to wax philosophical about Diesel’s new “Be Stupid” campaign. I’ll let you all decide for yourselves.
I’l just say that once you get past the initial, well, stupidity of it all, it’s actually kind of refreshing. Isn’t the proposition being made here essentially what every trendy “lifestyle brand” asks of its consumer – to eschew rational thinking and do what they feel. I mean, there’s no purely logical, rational reason to buy $150 jeans. You buy they because you just want them.
For a second opinion, here’s Ken Carbone’s take from Fast Company.
The other night I quickly read Michael Pollan’s new book(let) Food Rules. It’s a quick, easy reminder that we as people should be eating things that look, feel, and act like food. On paper, these rules make sense but today I read an article that really brought the idea of eating real food to life for me (check the great pictures out here).
The thing about Pollan’s rules are that they’re all so simple, they’re easy to overlook but incredibly powerful at the same time. I bring it up because I also read and hear a lot of concern over the consumer. Will they begin to spend again? What will they buy?
Looking at the food pictures from Good Blog I realized, the answer is easy to overlook and powerful. Brands should keep it simple. Consumers don’t necessarily need every variety and innovation known to man. They really want stuff that works well for a reasonable price. So many products don’t live up to this idea while striving to be lower calorie or greener or new and improved.
If you haven’t checked it out, Food Rules is a great, short read (under an hour) and has some good lessons that could be applied to the world of advertising, branding, and product development in addition to eating.
