Reebok launched on August 23 an 18 month, $40-50 million campaign to force feed its vector logo into the minds of helpless consumers who just want a good pair of sneakers and not another round of "Just Do It" - like Logomania. The new tagline for this effort will be "Wear the Vector. Outperfom." Unfortunately, it just doesn't have the same ring to it as "Just Do It".
New York-based Arnell Group is behind the push with spots produced by Ridley Scott's RSA USA production company
Update: Interestingly, the spot that aired during MTV's Video Music Award show verbalized only the Outperform portion of the tagline and was visually more prominent than Wear the Vector. Maybe Reebok realized the idiocy of the double tag.
Pepsi gives Coke a kick in the ass in this week's Ad Age TV Spots of the Week with a hip-hop blasting, wheelie-poppin' monster delivery truck. Nike updates its 'Freestyle' commercial which match music to action with a new version called 'Futbol'. Smash Mouth frontman raps to a class for Back to School Clothes. Has Smash Mouth done anything in the past three years besides commercials?
Also, nearly nude fat dudes jump up and down in a spot for the National Footbal League. And finally, an eerie spot illustrating the effects of ADD for Eli Lilly.
Here's a commercial for a product that every guy wishes he would need.
From the folks over at Japander who catch famous Americans in silly Japanese television commercials comes three new spots featuring our current James Bond, Pierce Brosnan. There is one commercial for Visa and two for Elsereine, a skin care line. Check them out.
Ever buy a car so cheap, you forgot you bought it? Didn't think so which is why this commercial is a stretch. Funny, though.
While I do think suing food retailers and manufacturers is idiotic, lazy and an excuse for the legal profession to make money, the trend towards supersizing everything in food advertising has become equally idiotic. A small is not a small anymore. Try to order a small ice cream cone and you get a tiny cone overflowing with about three scoops. A "medium" Coke is close to 24 ounces.
People who sue because they are fat are just idiots. No one forces you to put anything in your mouth. However, with 95% of the 10,000 ads seen by children in a year consisting of ads for fast food, candy and soft drinks, it's no wonder people are fat. Both manufacturers and legislature need to work together on this one. Some regulation is needed because companies will continue to do whatever it takes to make money even if it makes us fat. That shouldn't stop manufacturers, like Kraft does now, from taking part in the American Fat Watch as well. Parents are not without blame in this matter either. They have great control over what goes into their child's mouth and can educate their kids about healthy eating.
Changing culture has contributed to the fattening of America too. As in the "good old days", Mom's not at home cooking a healthy dinner anymore because everyone is out working. Nobody has any time to prepare a proper meal so we opt for the lazy solution which is fast or prepackaged food that happens to be high in calories and high in fat. Jobs have changed from physical to sedentary.
Of course, we all need to get off our asses and exercise as well. Video games and the Internet certainly contribute to the fattening of America's teens. You can have a long term IM relationship with someone without ever getting up off your ass.
Suing is not the answer. Over regulating the food industry in not either. Common sense is. If your stomach is hanging over your belt, you are fat and you need to exercise and eat less . No one else is going to solve the problem for you.
The LA Times' Crispin Sartwell claims advertisers monopolize public space and people should be able to freely deface advertising images with their own thought.
"Advertising is the public expression of wealthy people and organizations. Graffiti is the public expression of people who are more or less broke. And that is exactly why advertising is authorized and graffiti is eradicated...
What I do endorse is the art of graffiti and the concept of culture jamming. If advertisers feel free to monopolize public space - from highways to the airwaves to the Internet - with their commercial messages, we ought to feel free to deface these messages, critique them and replace them with our own."
So logically, I guess it's OK for an advertiser to respond to that by placing their big-ass logo on the hood of some homey-boy graffiti writer's tweaked out ride?
Let the war begin.
Paul Davia of Chicago's Sun-Times placed a full page ad in Friday's paper asking Sarah Sandberg, who works at Grant-Jacoby Advertising in Chicago, to marry him. Good story.
Following the controversy surrounding the flower arranging bitch, advertisers are backing out of Martha Stewart Living magazine. Unilever, show spent $4.8 million in 2002 has spent only $130,000 in 2003.
This is taking a bite out or parent, Omnimedia, who announced on August 11 earnings fell 86.4% to $931,000 in Q2.
"We stand for quality. We stand for how-to expertise. We stand for value, we stand for affordability, and we stand for style," said Omnimedia CEO Sharon Patrick who took over after Stewart got booted. "Those brand elements are not at question."
Good luck, Sharon.
Right up there with the popularity of hotties and hunks in advertising are monks. Yes, those men in robes who are supposed to be perfect with nary a thought of lust figure promonently in advertising. Monks have always made appearences in ads because they can be identified with as wholesome and honest. This, of course, is used as humor in many cases as in a spot promoting AOL's instant messaging and a spot for Pepsi Blue.
The men in robes lend a good balance to the women in bikinis. Afterall, too much of anything is not a good thing.
Nothing gets a guy's (and some girl's) attention faster than two women kissing. Here's an out take of a commercial for some headphone manufacturer using the tactic to sell their product.