Dec

Best Buy: Don’t Mess With Santa (You’ll Lose)

Jim on December 19th, 2011

Best Buy’s holiday-sales TV campaign features intriguing tagline, “Game On, Santa” . . . but that’s not the most interesting part of it.

Each of the 30-second spots shows what appears to be a Mom smugly confronting Santa Claus just as he emerges into the family’s living room or, in one case, while he’s still on the rooftop:

I get that these spots are an attempt at humor . . . but it doesn’t quite come off as humorous as it should. Basically, each of them finds its own little way to humiliate Santa Claus. It’s not cool. The agency really could have done a better job of making these moms seem less mean-spirited. And while the editors of this “Great Ads Blog” seem to think the ads “kick it up a notch” (is that a compliment?), click the link below and scroll down to see the 4 (so far) comments on the page:

Great-Ads Blog page for Best Buy “Game On, Santa” campaign

brand building, creative development No comments »

Dec

Tell Me Why I Should ‘Like’ You on Facebook

Jim on December 15th, 2011

With 2011 winding down, maybe it’s time for companies to ask themselves: Is there any point to simply saying “Like Us on Facebook”?

This phrase, usually placed in a corner or bottom-of-the-page graphic containing Facebook’s logo ‘f,’ seems to have become ubiquitous in print: newspaper ads, magazine ads, catalogs and more all seem to have it now. In some cases you don’t even see the words “Like Us on Facebook”; instead there will just be the small blue badge containing the ‘f.’

Granted, it’s always good to let your audience know that your company has a Facebook Page. But doesn’t just about every company have one by now? Announcing that you’re on Facebook now seems like saying “Find us in the phone book” 20 or more years ago (not that anyone ever said that, exactly). It’s generally assumed, so it’s really not news.

More to the point: when logging into Facebook, a social network, most users probably aren’t thinking of tracking down a company to “like,” unless the company has given them a good reason to.

So, marketers, I suggest you give them a good reason to “like” you. It doesn’t have to be all that amazing or costly, just something tangible that is likely to appeal to your audience. Then again, considering the potential for a fan to attract new prospects to your business by sharing her opinions of your product or service, you might want to consider offering something with a high perceived value.

Once you decide on what to offer, it’s time to start featuring that tangible incentive in your “Like Us on Facebook” blurbs, both in print and online. Remember, “Like Us” blurbs with no offer in them (or just the ‘f’ logo) are everywhere now, so most consumers probably have already begun tuning them out. Your job is to get them tuned in again, and motivate them to “like” your brand’s (or product’s) Page.

Facebook marketing, marketing strategy, social media marketing No comments »

Dec

Lowe’s: How About Asking Customers’ Opinions?

Jim on December 13th, 2011

As you probably know, Lowe’s is a major player in the home-improvement category, with retail locations locations nationwide. As a direct competitor to The Home Depot, they presumably have some very smart marketing people on staff.

So why did Lowe’s just shoot themselves in the foot PR-wise?

In response to pressure from a group called the Florida Family Association (FFA), Lowe’s has pulled its advertising from the TLC-network series, “All American Muslim.” The FFA calls the show “propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values.”

For the moment, let’s set aside the question of whether there is any truth to that accusation. As a marketer, I’m much more interested in this question: Whom does Lowe’s consider to be its primary audience?

Is their primary audience a small, aggressive minority of (mostly white, mostly Florida-based) Americans who pre-judge all followers of a given faith based on the actions of a tiny, violent offshoot of that faith? Or is their core audience the much larger, more diverse, less vocal American public who understand that most U.S. Muslims (if/when they happen to think of them) are peaceful fellow citizens?

Now another question: If the people in charge at Lowe’s (and I assume the decision to pull the advertising was made somewhere above the Director of Marketing level) had any doubts about this question, why didn’t they use social media or a phone survey to get customers’ thoughts on their sponsorship of “All American Muslim”? Of course, they probably should have done that before they decided to sponsor the show.

That way they could have gotten a clear, objective view of whether the sponsorship might help them attract and retain more customers. And if the survey had found that consumers didn’t like the idea of Lowe’s sponsoring the show, then Lowe’s could say, “Look, we did our research and found that our customers don’t like the idea of this show, and really don’t like the idea of us sponsoring it, so for the sake of our business, we’ve decided not to sponsor it.”

Instead, by not making the minimal effort necessary to get customers’ opinions, Lowe’s has no tangible basis for its decision. And now, instead of having a relatively small group of anti-Muslim extremists boycotting their stores mainly in Florida, Lowe’s is getting negative publicity nationwide and probably will face boycotts nationwide.

What were they thinking?

brand building, Facebook marketing, marketing strategy, social media marketing No comments »

Dec

Web Designers versus Web Developers

Jim on December 7th, 2011

Do you know the difference between a web designer and a web developer? Most people don’t. The short answer is: a web designer focuses on how the site looks to visitors, while a web developer is concerned with the site’s behind-the-scenes functionality. It’s good to know this before you choose someone to create a web site or think about adding a major new functionality to your existing site.

A more in-depth, tongue-in-cheek comparison of the two species is found in the graphic below, from sixrevisions.com:

Web Designers vs Web Developers, brought to you by Wix.com

Uncategorized No comments »

Nov

Xfinity, Where Did You Hide Glenn Unger?

Jim on November 12th, 2011

Well, this is interesting. Back on November 12, in a very brief post titled, “Coming Soon . . .”, I wrote on this blog that I would soon give my opinion of the Comcast/Xfinity TV commercial featuring the character “Glenn Unger” (or is it Glen with only one ‘n’?), which I had seen repeatedly on several major-network broadcasts in recent weeks.

I delayed my writing about the spot because I wanted to embed a web video of it in my post, but I couldn’t find it anywhere on the Web. So, I figured, wait a week or two and then I’ll be able to grab it off YouTube or another video-hosting site.

Now, twelve days later, I still can’t find the spot anywhere online. In fact, I can’t even find a .jpeg or other still image from the commercial, nor can I find any online articles about the spot. Could it be that Comcast has kept it off the web because they don’t want to be criticized for the stereotypes that the ad presents?

In the commercial, “Glenn Unger” is a short, bald, bombastic fellow in a business suit, with a fu-manchu mustache and beard. On his way out of the office, he stops to tell a woman (presumably his assistant) that he wants a special deal on Comcast’s Xfinity TV service, stipulating certain benefits he expects in the deal, which of course just happen to be part of the current Xfinity offer. It seems a bit odd that he would have his secretary order cable-TV service for him, but that’s beside the point here.

By the way, full disclosure: My height is well above average, hair-wise I am not balding, receding, or thinning, and I have no mustache or beard. And yes, I “get” that the creative is meant to be humorous: the spot ends with our hero back in his office, looking out the window and gently pounding it as he proclaims “Glenn . . . Unger” to the world outside.

But it is absolutely no accident that this grating, self-important, object of ridicule is a short, bald, bearded man. Comcast and its agency are just the latest in a decades-long line of advertisers who cast men lacking height and/or hair as losers or buffoons.

Shame on them for perpetuating this stereotype. And they do it with gusto: Just to make sure we know what Comcast thinks of vertically and follicle-ly challenged men, the commercial includes a shot of Glenn from across the room, lecturing his assistant while only the top of his head is visible above the medium-height cubicle walls nearby. Nice touch.

I can understand that every advertiser wants to associate their product with certain “attractive” body types. That’s been going on so long that most people who aren’t physically gifted probably aren’t bothered that “their type” never shows up in ads.

But no one chooses to be short or bald (I’m not counting men who shave their heads here), so making them the butt of jokes used to sell products is not merely wrong and hurtful. It is just plain stupid marketing, because it alienates a significant number of people who might have considered buying the product being advertised.

brand building, creative development No comments »

Jul

Another Ooops on Yahoo’s Login Page

Jim on July 28th, 2011

Big companies, or at least companies we’ve all heard of, attract the best talent . . . right? That’s what I’ve always assumed. Would you say that’s a reasonable assumption?

And would you also say that Yahoo is one of those big, or at least well known, companies?

So why when I went to log into my AT&T Yahoo homepage tonight did I find this very bizarre photo on the login page? Please be sure to click the image below to see it at its full size, and notice the woman’s eyes:

I’m not going to bother asking, “Is it just me, or . . .?” There’s no doubt, this woman looks like a stereotypical “psycho” from a horror movie. It’s a combination of how very wide-open her eyes are, the excessive eyeliner around them, and the odd shade of red (maroon?) in her hair. Oh, and the fist, too. Why didn’t they just go all the way and put a bloody carving knife in that fist? It’s already perfectly poised to stab.

Is this supposed to be funny, or at least ironic? Of course not — the copy couldn’t be more straight-faced: “You win again with exciting auctions and Daily Deals . . .” So why didn’t anyone at Yahoo notice that the woman looks deranged?

Could this be one of those all-too-frequent cases of everyone in the ad-approval process not wanting to offend the creative team or creative director who developed the ad?

Whatever . . . with this ad, Yahoo has now earned another “dishonorable mention” in this blog for creating an ad that is seriously flawed (see “Vague Headline, No Payoff for Clicking” below).

Uncategorized 1 Comment »

May

Hey AT&T, Why You Calling Everyman ‘Marcel’?

Jim on May 24th, 2011

If you have been watching some of the same reruns I have (ooops, I mean TV shows–but these days, what’s the difference?), you might have endured the AT&T U-verse commercials.

Those would be the ones in which your TV appears to change channels rapidly from one (fake) program to another, and in all of them, a different character in each one looks straight into the camera and says, “Hey, Marcel, watch this!” Just to amp up the annoyance factor, in the last couple of faux programs in the series, we get a close-up of the character, even more agitated than those in the previous scenes, simply yelling, “HEY, MARCEL!”

What a difference one word can make. But first, yes, I get the idea that every TV program is competing for our attention, and that with U-verse the viewer doesn’t have to pass up one show to watch another. I also get “Marcel” is supposed to be “everyviewer” (or “everyman” if you’re a more literary type) out there in TV-audience-land. Just one question: Do you know anyone named Marcel?

Hey Marcel, why would AT&T want to remind us of you?

More to the point, can you identify with the name Marcel? Even a little? I’m going to guess that like me, most Americans (a) aren’t named Marcel and (b) don’t have any relatives, friends, or acquaintances with that name. So why is it used repeatedly in an effort to connect to an American audience? Why didn’t they use a name more common in the U.S., and preferably one that is used to name both women and men, like Chris or Pat?

Wait a minute, I just realized: Even though I personally don’t identify with the name Marcel, I do associate it with something: Marcel Marceau, the famous mime artist who died in 2007. He might have been the best ever at his craft, but that’s just my opinion.

For AT&T, the question is: Does your audience like him, and do you want U-verse associated with him, or with mimes in general? I’m sure AT&T and their agency have thought this through better than I have, but I have this nagging sense that most Americans find mimes annoying. If so, is that a word AT&T wants linked to U-verse?

It’s not often that one word can make such a difference in a TV commercial or other marketing communication. But if you’re going to address “everyman” by name in your ad, you need to consider your audience carefully. Just think how much better AT&T’s spot would have come across to U.S. viewers if its refrain were “Hey Terry, watch this!”

brand building, copywriting, creative development 2 Comments »

May

Apostrophes are Not For Pluralizing Ordinary Words

Jim on May 4th, 2011

It used to be so simple. It seemed like most people, or at least most writers, knew how to use apostrophes. Now it appears that even some major-agency copywriters don’t know how to use them. What happened?

Before I start complaining, let’s go over it again: Apostrophes are used to indicate ownership (a “possessive” apostrophe, as in “Jim’s blog”) or the fact that letters have been omitted from a contraction (words such as “can’t” or “isn’t”). Rarely is an apostrophe needed anywhere else.

When the apostrophe is used to indicate ownership, there’s a key question: does only one person own the thing, or does more than one person own it? If it’s only one person, the apostrophe goes to the left of the “s” (as in, “Jim’s blog”: Jim is the sole owner). But if the thing is owned by more than one person (as in “the boys’ baseball”: a ball shared by multiple boys), then the apostrophe goes to the right of the “s”.

So why in the last few years am I seeing more and more cases of people using apostrophes when they are simply pluralizing a word?

Good writers know these rules, and know them well, because they learned them as schoolchildren. No one ever taught them to insert an apostrophe at the end of a word when using an “s” to pluarlize the word. So why does it seem that more and more people are doing exactly that?

Worse yet, why don’t major-agency writers, or their bosses, or their clients, know that to pluralize most words in English, you just add an “s” without an apostrophe? The folks in charge of advertising for Chuck E. Cheese’s don’t seem to know it, because they have a totally unnecessary apostrophe in the headline of this coupon flyer that I received last week.

When you are simply adding an “s” to make an ordinary word plural, don’t include an apostrophe. It’s incorrect, and can easily confuse the reader.

I’m sure no one wants a full-blown grammar lesson, but one other form of apostrophe-misuse has to be mentioned: The word “it’s” is a contraction of the words “it is” . . . and not the possessive form of “it.” The English language has more than a few exceptions to its rules, and this is one of them. In that last sentence, the “its” is correct without an apostrophe (because it doesn’t mean “it is”), and would be wrong if it had one.

Confused? If so, I’m sorry, but just trust me: “it’s” means “it is” ONLY. The possessive form of “it” is ALWAYS “its” without an apostrophe. End of discussion.

copywriting 3 Comments »

Feb

Google’s Shrinking Share of the Search Pie

Jim on February 2nd, 2011

It’s no secret Google is venturing into multiple businesses and service areas beyond the “core” web-search service that made them famous. Maybe that’s part of the reason they’re not as dominant in search as they used to be.

This article takes a very broad look at the shift in “search market share” among Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft’s Bing. What it doesn’t address is how many searches are now taking place on Facebook, YouTube, and other non-traditional search sites.

Google, SEO/SEM No comments »

Jan

Wally Tweaks the Big-Picture Guys

Jim on January 8th, 2011

In Scott Adams’ Dilbert comic strip, the character Wally has a special gift for avoiding work and re-configuring his cubicle-bound existence in creative new ways. Occasionally he also serves up brilliant satire about his boss and other oddities of life in the office.

Wally gets his big-picture guru on

I’m particularly fond of today’s strip (above) because Adams uses Wally to poke fun at corporate-strategy gurus, or any executive who’s ever trumpeted “the big picture,” without giving equal respect to the challenge of implementing those grand strategies. I’ve been told I’m more tactical than strategic; it used to bother me, but not anymore. Strategy is very important, but in many cases, how strategy is executed is just as important. Yes, the devil is in the details . . . which is why you need a marketing writer/designer (and other types) who focus on those kinds of things.

P.S. Be sure to visit the Dilbert store (just click those words, at left) the next time you need a gift, or just a laugh.

marketing strategy, marketing tactics No comments »