It’s conceptual…it’s a metaphor…it’s a personification…it’s aspirational…it’s a gimmick…it’s just plane confusing. I like a good mental challenge as much as the next girl, but I find LG’s Scarlet promotion of their flat screen TVs ties my brain into a knot of Gordian proportions. For those unfamiliar with the campaign, LG has created a fictional…well…fictional character named Scarlet – a red eyed super-something (hero? cop? spy? cyborg? vampire? siren? model?) The ads feature fictional promotions for the fictional TV show for the fictional character and end with a blink-and-you-miss-it oblique reference to flat screen TVs. Every time I come across this campaign, I find myself plagued with questions: What is it? Why is it? and Do I like it? And, strangely, the answer on all three counts is: I’m not sure. Explanations from the producers just deepen the mystery with vague Lynch-ian quotes about clues and martial arts: LG Reveals Mystery Behind 'Scarlet' I can’t help but think that if people who do this sort of thing for a living can’t figure it out, there is no way consumers are coming along on this journey down the rabbit hole. Is this a sign of abstraction in brand communications to come? Or did they forget to take that left at ambiguity?
Perfect. For wholesome, natural, simple, organic products, who has more street cred than the Amish? That is why the Amish Naturals brand makes so much sense to me. But, I as I kept pondering this brand, it occurs to me, is Amish the very definition of the new, modern, luxury lifestyle? Let’s see… IN Out Peace Military-Industrial Complex Organic Produce Petrochemicals Hand Crafted Mass Production Exercise Gasoline Organic Cotton Synthetics Natural Building Materials Faux Finish Religion Government Spelt Corn Syrup Twice Churned Low Fat Happy Cattle Fast Food Nation Facial Hair High and Tight Hats Scrunchies So, a fun thought for a Friday afternoon, is black the new black? Are buttons next to go on the fashion don’t list? Is Amish aspirational?
It’s Brita vs Fiji a prize fight matching two water titans in the endeavor to prove to the American public that one is more green than the other. Brita comes from the left, urging people to leave the disposable bottles alone and instead refill a bottle with purified Brita filtered water. Fiji is now countering with a right hook claim that, with Fiji, ‘every drop is green’. For me, this provokes 2 questions: First, I question the wisdom of this tagline for a bottled water company and fully expect to see it in Jay Leno’s Headlines by the end of the week. Second, I question the ability of this company to live up to the claims of the push for greenness when their fundamental business is transporting a commodity, which this country has in abundance, thousands of miles, encasing it in plastic and selling it to those discerning Americans who thirst for a more exotic and colorful filtered water product. With every company scrambling to put out a green message, we are starting to see a flow of eco-friendly claims that just aren’t believable no matter how loudly and emphatically they are proclaimed in the pages of Vanity Fair. Who will be the green referees who point to the winner when the bell rings?
Many of us consistently have When Harry Met Sally-style, specialized orders that embarrass the easy-going orderers around us. But it turns out that in the era of personalizing your own products, food-service creativity is no longer limited to Subway or frowned upon because it slows service down. In fact, lately it’s celebrated and the recipes are passed around. Some companies are taking customization a customer-centric step further to engage and build loyalty among the masses. They not only engage consumers by inviting them to make inventive combos, but also create buzz and expand menu options overnight to sell as new offerings to their less-creative counterparts. Treats Frozen Desserts in Chicago has led this trend for the last few years. The “mini-mess” is a made-to-order, blizzard-like delight featuring one of 60 flavors of soft serve and your choice of up to 30 toppings. Consumers make their own and submit the recipes to the “Make a Mess” Contest for consideration in the monthly flavor calendar or permanent menu for others to taste. Domino's new BFD (Big Fantastic Deal) Builder recently did the same online during the month of January. Consumers could choose their crust, amount of sauce and cheese, and unlimited toppings for one flat rate. Then they named and posted their pies online for others to order. In just ten days, more than 12,000 pizza recipes were registered and the most popular pizza was ordered more than 83,000 times. To simply satisfy consumers, customization is key. But consumers no longer have to settle for being sandwich artists, and instead can customize almost everything. As we've seen, the companies that encourage customers to express their creativity with an interactive experience also engage them, thereby expanding menu options and often building loyalty.
Feeling optimistic about the future of the research industry? Well… you should be… according to the latest Research Industry Trends Report issued by Rockhopper Research (with the help of Egg Strategy and other key industry players). Based on a study conducted among research providers and buyers, the report cites four reasons why researchers everywhere should be jumping for joy: In the minds of clients, research equals a strategic necessity = THEY BELIEVE YOU ADD VALUE Corporations are making more money which usually means bigger research budgets = THEY HAVE MONEY TO SPEND New brands & services are popping up as a result of mergers/acquisitions = THEY HAVE MORE THINGS THEY NEED MORE INFORMATION ABOUT Greater global expansion = THEY NEED BIGGER STUDIES THAT DEMAND BIGGER BUDGETS This indicates a promising future for researchers, right? Yes... but not without some challenges...and the report calls out three big ones… Clients continue to want their research FASTER, CHEAPER and BETTER. In addition, technology is allowing clients to do more of their own research projects in-house. (i.e. surveymonkey.com) But fear not… the report offers valuable suggestions for overcoming these potential hurdles and in turn, remain a necessity to your clients… In a nutshell…be more cutting-edge, more responsive to their needs and provide more value at all stages of the research process. Sounds easy, right? In theory, yes. We can all grasp the concept of this and probably think of some ways that we can fulfill these needs. However, it really goes way beyond this. Let's all put on our 'bigger' thinking caps for a moment and ask ourselves... How CREATIVE can we be in that process? How UNIQUE can we be in the ways that we address these important criteria? How can we really MAKE OUR MARK here? So tell us...what does this mean for your company...on both sides of the business (research supplier AND client)? Suppliers: What do you do to be more cutting-edge, more responsive, and add more value consistently? Clients: How has a supplier or suppliers been especially stellar at one or more of these things?
With so many products vying for customers’ business, customization and personalization are on the rise. But if you’re indifferent about what you drink from time to time, you’d love this little surprise. Anything and Whatever drinks are just the opposite of the trend. Today you can build your own laptop, customize your car, and personalize your very own online profile. But in Singapore, you can also invite randomness and a little risk into your life with a drink in six mystery flavors. The drinks are not unilt Airhead's mystery candy (which a secret source tells me is simply whatever flavor is left last on the production line and then packaged in white with question marks). And yet they also remind me of the absolute opposite with the latest super-specialized sodas. (Your lunch break might not be long enough to offer all your co-workers the lengthy new Chocolate Cherry Diet Dr. Pepper). In an era where everything is made “just for you”, is it nice to steer clear of customization and be surprised every once in a while? Are we too used to being able to pick and choose exactly what we want or could a little random variety be the next big thing? How about reaching into a bag of Doritos Collision to taste two unknown flavors? What about a surprise book from Amazon each month? Or hopping on a cruise ship for a mystery trip to unknown vacation spots...?
I came across this Ports 1961 ad in Vanity Fair this month, and it instantly struck me how much it reminded me of Richards post from Thanksgiving week about activist advertising (Does This Work? November 23, 2007). It has a similar setting, tone and color pallet. It uses an ethnically dressed model holding a designer bag. Both are ads aimed at awareness of African causes. This Ports 1961 ad, however, illustrates Charity’s point really beautifully. In the American market, awareness must be wrapped in an optimistic, aspirational and most importantly consumer message; voting with dollars, if you will. While the European ad that Richard showed us is blunt, self-analytical and guilt ridden; more shocked into awareness. It is fascinating to watch the continuation of the trend of intertwining social activism with commercialism, two seemingly opposed sensibilities. I am interested to see where it evolves in the future. Where do you think it will end?
There’s been a lot of talk about Duncan Watt’s challenge to the idea of “Influencer Theory” and, specifically, Malcolm Gladwell’s promulgation of it in The Tipping Point. Clive Thompson covers the debate very well in his Fast Company article this month entitled “Is the Tipping Point Toast?” As a very quick recap, Duncan is a geeky sociologist who, quite convincingly, contends that trends can come just as likely from “regular people” as they might from a super-duper social influencer-type. In his argument, it’s not the instigator but the social environment/climate that gives some trends traction and other’s the slip. Without diving into that debate any further… what caught my attention was the frenzied validation or refuting of trend hunting as a legitimate sport. I think most involved in the debate feel its significance because it questions some of the fundamental reasons for our industry’s existence (at least for those of us in “brand consulting” or any other purveyor of trend insight). Many of us have built elaborate and expensive “products” designed to help clients find Influentials and bleeding-edge consumers. Also inherent in our opinions about trends is the notion that we can, in fact, ride these insights to profitability for our clients. I still believe in the ability of savvy observers to ferret out cultural trends and I think there is merit in helping brands respond to the waves and currents of what’s in-the-moment. But now I’m seriously questioning the Influencer tactic as the primary means of levering trend insight. If (perhaps) it’s not about tapping the uber-trend-makers (since, according to Watt, that could be anybody), what exactly are we telling our clients to do with this insight? To keep the conversation rolling, I’ll suggest three new ways to use trend information: Pull Through: Since the adoption curve as a consumer dynamic is true, use trend insight to grab mid- and late-adopters. In this case, it doesn’t matter where the trend started or that the early adopters are moving on already, it’s about riding the second and third waves in the set. Zagging: When there’s so often a sea of parity where our clients are flanked by solid competitors on either side (anybody ever work in the beer industry?), trend work can be used to provide an opportunity to “zag” when everyone else is “zigging.” Case in point, I’ll give props to the ill-fated Miller Lite campaign a year or so ago that tried to step away from the bikinis and base humor approach of most beer advertising by inviting women into the category and daring to be somewhat serious. That’s called zagging. O.K., it didn’t exactly work but, borrowing from Watt again, that might have been because it was the right idea put in motion ahead of its time. Context Riding: Watt suggests that instead of focusing on finding the Influencer, perhaps the idea is to release the promulgating power of everyone who touches an idea… meaning, increase the ability/chances of spreading a virus by making it easier to do so (i.e. his idea of letting people forward an e-mail to others and then see the string… thus creating an addictive behavior in which one is compelled to “watch” their influence spread). In this example, knowing the trend at play is then only about understanding the context in which an idea can spread… but the trend itself is nothing beyond a playground in which everyone is encouraged to spread the word. It’s a good challenge, isn’t it… questioning some firmly held beliefs? What are other beliefs that we need to question in this category? And how can we find new ways to create value when we get smarter along the way?
One of my favorite stories of privatization is that of Virgin Galactic. This brand is taking up the mantle of JFK and valiant cold-warriors to carry forward where NASA has so clearly dropped it: The final frontier. Where government agencies used to corner the market on the romance and scientific one-upmanship of the space race, now private corporations are stepping up to put dreams of space into the heads of every elementary school child. What is interesting about a brand like Virgin, is that it is not American, not particularly nationalistic in any sense. Does this make it a more effective rallying point for exploration: a corporation without politics, allies or borders? Is state sponsored science an antiquated and counter-productive concept that is soooooo 1900’s? It will be interesting to see if capitalism and branding turn out to be the cornerstones of patriotism of the future.
Bravo is taking one brave leap towards a solution to the Digital Video Recorder advertising conundrum. Select Bravo programming in 2008 will feature an “L-bar” permanently on screen that shrinks the content to 80% of the page and allows the network to post online polls, contests, online chats, and – of course – advertisers. Not just during the programming, the L-bar remains on the screen throughout the commercial breaks. The big idea here is that viewers who don’t want to miss a pixel of content will not fast forward through sponsors messages. I am interested to see how this works out. The crucial element for success has to be the content. It is a simple equation: is the value of the content greater than the distress of having to sit through the advertisment? And, the cost of not delivering on this equation could be a large backlash. 20% is a lot of real estate to take away when consumers are seeking out larger and larger displays. I don’t think they have quite met the challenge that DVR has laid down, but perhaps L is the shape of things to come.
Pages
