Archive for January, 2009
Funniest Super Bowl Ads Ever?
FUSING EMAIL AND SOCIAL NETWORKS
Fuser has been around for a while now. For those of you who are not familiar with it, Fuser is a free online tool that allows you to check email and social network messages all from one inbox. Essentially, it fuses everything together.
Though I have not yet allowed myself to be fused, I do see the benefit here. Between Facebook, MySpace, AOL, Twitter, Linkedin and work email, it can be tedious to log into so many different (yet essential?) systems. With the “big bang” of social networks in the last few years, a consolidation tool is sorely needed. After all, the laws of physics declare that a thing can only expand so much before it must collapse on itself (read: the sun, the economy and bubble gum).
Why am I so hesitant to stick my toes in the water? I have a morbid fear that my compartmentalized life will implode if I fuse it all together, leaving me with missed messages and MAILER-DAEMON notices. Man, I hate those things. So in lieu of subjecting my entire virtual life to the fangs of Fuser, I’ve read reviews on the service so I would know where to point you all to find out more.
Joseph Crawford has written a very thorough review on the service, including all of its pros and cons. Check out his article to see for yourself if it’s time to fuse your life.
And let me know how it goes.
Tomorrow on The Side Note: The top Super Bowl ads of all time. Cast your vote!
I have to give the ADCD credit for posting this yesterday. But everyone knows what an IKEA nut I am so I have to post this too. It’s hard to believe this is the third biggest publication ever, but it’s easy to see why IKEA rocks.
Just a quick update on Beth…the animals got tired so I sent them home. Beth is now tied to a chair and I’m making her watch the Jeremy Piven/Good Morning America clip over and over and over.
A full week of neuromarketing is coming in February!
I first heard about the new Tropicana packaging from a friend of mine who is an extremely busy working mother of two. She told me of her weekly trip to the grocery with her two boys (8 and 2 years old) and how her eyes bugged at the OJ cooler.
“They changed all the packaging!” she said. “And it’s not color coordinated anymore. I’m used to just grabbing the blue one (reduced sugar). I have my two-year old with me. I don’t have time to sit and figure out what’s going on with the orange juice, so I bought the King Soopers brand just to spite Tropicana.”
Granted, there actually is still some color coordination going on for Tropicana (who, incidentally has 18 kinds of orange juice to choose from), but it’s very subtle. In fact, it’s only on the top of the box. In the old packaging, the color keys were about five times larger. Look at the picture below and tell me how well you would notice the colors in a giant cooler with a 2-year old screaming in your ear.
I give Tropicana props for the new look, though. Not only is it clean and simple, therefore making it stand out from the clutter, but it also plays to our psychology (um, neuromarketing*) by attracting us with the look of a generic brand. Basically, we will feel like we are saving money, even though we are not.
And yet, this neuromarketing fails the test with moms and other bloggers. Susan Gunelius over at Brand Curve says, “They’re not fooling anyone. The cheap looking 7-11-esque packaging doesn’t make me feel any better about forking over a whole lot of money so my kids can get their Vitamin C in the morning.”
*Speaking of neuromarketing, Beth and I are gearing up for a full week of it in February. We’ll explain what it is, how it works, and why it matters with plenty of examples and insights from industry professionals. We are even running a few tests of our own. I have Beth on a treadmill right now, hooked up to all kinds of machines, and small animals are randomly jumping out of boxes and shrieking at her. Each of those animals has an ad taped to their back so I can measure Beth’s reaction to them. I’ll let you know the results.
By the way, none of the animals are being harmed. They all volunteered for this and I have their signatures to prove it.
Twitter – Bridging a Gap
I ran across a blog posting the other day titled “Will Twitter be the platform that unites journalists and PR pros?” authored by Heidi Sullivan.
I’ll let you read the post and develop your own conclusion. But I think, for now at least, that Twitter can certainly help bridge that gap between the two parties. It does, as Heidi points out, help weed out those folks who give PR a bad name by mass emailing a story idea to journalists and hoping for a hit (the ‘spray and pray’ method!). It forces PR people to research (or follow) journalists before pitching them, which should lead to more relevant pitches.
The comments on the post are interesting, too. One reader brought up #JournChat, a weekly online discussion via Twitter where journalists, bloggers and PR people come together to discuss the media and PR industries. I haven’t participated in #JournChat yet, but I’m reading the meeting recaps and they’re quite enlightening.
So, what do you think? Is Twitter bridging the gap between journalists and PR folks? Do you use a different platform that you think does a better job? Tell us about it.
I am going to get booed here, I know it, but I was never a fan of the Cadbury gorilla playing Phil Collins. It was just too much for me. Creepy in a way. Maybe it stirred some long forgotten and disturbing memory deep within me (one I hope stays forgotten).
And even though I feel I should be equally disturbed by it, I am 100% for their latest ad. Check it out.
A friend sent me an article this morning on neuromarketing from 80percentmental.com. In a nutshell, neuromarketing is the study and evaluation of consumer brain responses to marketing stimuli. Therefore, we can learn how certain tactics affect consumers biologically. Nifty, right?
When used to measure product endorsements by celebrities, there are three categories:
Source Credibility—the more you believe the celebrity knows about the product, the more credibility he or she has earned from you
Source Attractiveness—this pertains to how much you identify with and like the celebrity
Product Match-Up—how logical is it that the celebrity should endorse the product
Now then, let’s apply this.
80percentmetal.com used the doomed Tiger Woods / Buick and David Beckham / Pepsi endorsements for it’s analysis. (Both contracts were ended prematurely.) But here is some content we analyzed on our own:
Brooke Shields and VW
This is a totally credible endorsement. If Brooke Shields were doing this at the start of her career, some 25 years ago, there would be little credibility coming from her. But she is age appropriate for the product and she has kids of her own.
You also have to believe that Brooke has a sense of humor because she pulls the sarcasm off so spot-on that it matches her perfectly with VW branding. And as for attractiveness, who doesn’t either identify with or want to be Brooke Shields? Even guys want to be her. (Stop looking at me.)
Jessica Simpson and Pizza Hut
I don’t believe Jessica Simpson is an expert on any food, especially after the infamous Chicken of the Sea misfortune during her reality stint on Newlyweds: Nick and Jessica. Furthermore, after this aired, Jessica apparently told Elle magazine that she was allergic to cheese, wheat and tomatoes. So, why should I believe her endorsement of Pizza Hut? And no, I don’t want to be her.
Check out the full 80percentmental article here and see how it went wrong with Woods and Beckham. (Thanks Daniel)
I really like the latest from Dunkin’ Donuts. I think they are in the midst of a solid messaging platform and I’m sure it will continue to take them uphill. However, their “You Kin’ Do It” ad kind of reminds me of something else. Check out the two videos below and see for yourself.
Green still lives
This morning Travis wrote about the green backlash and how we must tread carefully through it. Although PR and marketing pros need to be careful about how they market their clients, especially paying attention to credibility, not all green communications is bad these days.
According to Margo Mateas, the media relations maven, “green and eco-friendly stories will be important [in 2009], but only as they show others how to become more environmentally responsible – or demonstrate cutting-edge breakthroughs that will alter the way we do things on a grand scale.”
So it seems consumers don’t want stories that shove “green” in their faces. Unless your organization or client just invented the first car that runs on air, people are looking for practical, real-world solutions to reducing their carbon footprint and living a more sustainable lifestyle.
The Bulldog Reporter’s Daily ‘Dog ran a story late last year highlighting a recent campaign that followed these rules and “capitalized on true, effective green ethics.” It was an integrated campaign by The Rogers Group for Bosch:
“The campaign was a year-long effort that included aggressive media relations, partnerships and promotions—and signature events like the ‘100 Mile Menu,’ an organic, locally sourced meal prepared on Bosch’s latest cook-tops before the eyes of VIP New York media. The campaign garnered 125 million media impressions, including articles in The Wall Street Journal and Newsweek.”
This example proves that green products are still of interest to the media and consumers if positioned appropriately. As PR practitioners, we just need to work a little harder to highlight the stories that provide a benefit to the public.
We love to promote the heck out of something and then tear it down. Britney Spears is this generation’s poster child for such behavior. I admit that I don’t really feel bad for victims of this process. Probably because I tend to dislike everything from the get-go, so I avoid this little dance. However, I like things that are “green.” And what does my devotion get me? That’s right, “green” is now on the chopping block.
Brand Week published an article last week about the inevitability of the green backlash. Here’s how it starts:
“The signature spiral shape of the compact fluorescent light bulb has become, in many ways, a symbol of all things “green.”… but, upon deeper investigation, they are actually far worse for the environment (and the human race), than they are good.”
Here we go. Apparently everyone’s favorite new light bulb is filled with mercury and when we throw them all away in twenty years, they will flood our rivers and poison us and we will die. Okay, that’s a bit dramatic, but you can bet there are people out there who will tell their friends about the situation in just this way.
We have to be careful that, during this backlash, we don’t undo all of the good that has come of our desire to be greener. While we should definitely annex the products and companies that claim to be green but in fact have not done much at all to better our planet, we should also remember that this new drive has prepared us all to move our entire society into an era of new energy and of new thinking.
As far as the light bulbs go, we all know what’s going to happen there…Jeremy Piven is going to claim he ate too many of them and got mercury poisoning and GMA is going to give him air time for it.
Today’s lesson = don’t believe the hype…on either side of the spectrum.
on Facebook
on Twitter
Recent Comments