As is always the case, the irrefutable CMO math has bitten yet another ad agency in the ass. This time it's Honda biting RPA. True to form, new Honda CMO, Michael Accavitti, after taking the job last year, said, dumping RPA would be "completely unproductive and unnecessary, RPA is an extension of the Honda family," flip flopped and uttered this mouthful:
"In the face of a changing media landscape and a hyper-competitive marketplace, our challenge is to create dynamic marketing campaigns that connect and engage consumers with our products and our brands. The review we have initiated will lead to a strong, long-term strategic plan for our brands"
If you've watched Mad Men or worked in the advertising industry prior to, say, 1993, you are probably familiar with the concept of the ad campaign. Actually, if you've worked in advertising since 1993, you're familiar with the term, too - although in a different context. Why? In 1993, the Mosaic web browser was launched and it, forever, changed the concept of the advertising campaign.
Prior to 1993, developing an ad campaign boiled down to the most simplistic basics: determining who to reach, how to reach them and for how long. It was a set it and forget it mentality. After 1993, the web and social media shifted the concept of the advertising campaign from "set it and forget it" to "always on."
Read the rest on the Central Desktop blog.
Back in September we shared a story about health provider Health Net which used fake tweets to promote its services. We called the work "a juvenile marketing move and yet another example of testimonials gone wrong."
Now, the brand is doing a bit of back peddling presenting us with what they claim to be the real people behind the Twitter accounts they used in the campaign. The move is laughable as the accounts - NonStopMom2, HealthNut_2 and Biz_Guy1 - have just one or two tweets, all of which read "Thank you for your interest, learn more here" with a link that points to three "testimonials" from the "owners" of these Twitter accounts.
Over the years, the integration versus unbundling debate has raged on within the advertising industry. One side would argue it's best to have all necessary expertise under one roof. Others would argue it's best to create or partner with entities that offer specialized focus. The integration camp would claim their approach provides for better collaboration. The unbundling camp would argue their approach provides better expertise and greater efficiencies. They are both right. And they are both wrong.
Both specialization and integration have their benefits. But what's most important is working together in the best possible way to garner the best possible results for clients. If that's integration, great. If that's unbundling, great. We're not here to debate the finer points of either camp. We're here to offer up some real-world insight into how real-world agencies are tackling real-world problems.
Read the rest on the Central Desktop blog...
This guest article is written by Jim Signorelli is CEO of StoryLab Marketing.
Why do we call them "creative" briefs?
The traditional advertising creative brief, has a history dating back when it was first used in 1863.
That same year, President Lincoln was asked to speak at the dedication of the new Solidiers National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. An unprecedented human tragedy and the product of a war Mr. Lincoln was having to justify would serve as the backdrop for this speech.
To prepare Mr. Lincoln for this challenge, a staffer developed an outline of what needed to be said. This first-of-its-kind outline was so named "the creative brief" because it provided "a focused structure that the President could use for inspiration." Here's how it read:
This guest post is written by Jesse Robson, a freelance writer currently working for Liberty Marketing. When he's not at work Jesse spends most of his free time writing, following pop culture and playing with his golden doodle Max.
Commercials have certainly evolved from the time of your parents and even your parents' parents. If you get TV Land on cable tv, you might have even caught some of the older, retro commercials interspersed between episodes of The Andy Griffith Show and I Dream of Genie.
Yes, things were certainly different back then and all you really needed was a cute mascot, an infectious jingle and an authoritative voice to move product. However, commercials and, really, marketing as a whole have evolved.
So everyone's got their panties in a twist over the BIC for Her pen situation. It's being called a social media disaster, a debacle and, yes, yet another example of a brand asleep at the social media steering wheel. These are all valid points. But, perhaps, not to the degree we inside the inner circles of marketing would like them to be.
Writing in Advertising Age today, B.L Ochman, who is one of the most astute, bright and wonderfully friendly people on the planet wrote, "Judging by their clueless lack of response, BIC richly deserves its place in the anals of online brand goofs."
Pointing out how many missteps the brand took in this situation, Ochman continued, "Despite the fact that the buzz has been growing for weeks, the brand did not have the foresight to secure @BicForHer on Twitter, where a spoof account has already been launched, nor did they buy the URL www.bicforher.com, which is available for $12.99. A Tumblr blog is chronicling the funniest reviews and blog posts. An ad for BIC for Her launched last week, and is fast picking up derisive comments on YouTube. And through it all, BIC is silent."
While we won't likely know for a year or so, Avis' tagline shift from "We Try Harder" to "It's Your Space" will either go down as the biggest ad flop in history or the crucial change the brand needed to pull itself back to the number two spot (Recently, it slipped to third behing Hertz and Enterprise).
The tagline, "We Try Harder" was created in 1962 by DDB. And it worked, pulling Avis out of a decade-long slump and into a position of profit.
While some have said the new BBH-created Axe work - a departure from the agency's brilliant Keifer Sutherland/Susan Glenn spot - is a sad return to the brand's roots where mostly women and sometimes men are reduced to playthings, toys for the horny male middle school mindset.
We say smart move. All the brand has done, and always has done, is celebrate the carnal desire that is ever present between man and woman. It's an innately human desire. It's a fact of life. And no amount of pious, politically correct sugar coating is going to diminish the fact that men and women are, forever, sexual beings that, yes, are sometime vile, vulgar and animalistic in their dealings with one another.
Well, it's over; the XXX Olympics have come and gone. Two weeks of non-stop athletic competition led to Sunday's Closing Ceremony. After watching the Opening Ceremony with its stunning visual and historical festivities, I was not sure what to expect. Would the Queen do another stunt? Would David Beckham fly a helicopter into the stadium with all of the Spice Girls on board? Would Sir Elton John sing with Bono, U2, and Mick Jagger? Would the Olympic flame be disassembled and taken away in a hot air balloon?
Wow; Britain did the Closing Ceremony right. Motor scooters traversing the stadium, singers on Rolls Royce convertibles, dancers gyrating, Eric Idle with angels, Russell Brand and Fat Boy Slim, Super Models strutting their stuff, Annie Lennox singing, and the Spice Girls - all of them. (With Victoria and David Beckham, is this the first husband, Opening Ceremony, and wife, Closing Ceremony, Olympics?) Everywhere you looked there were British flags - the Union Jack in cloth, on uniforms, in electric lights, and in human form. As you watched the Parade of Athletes, each athlete looked happy, having fun, and enjoying his or her moment in the sun. We watched the athletes, and the athletes watched us, and each other.