Louis Vuitton accused of endorsing sexual slavery in latest ad

European fashion house Louis Vuitton has been accused of promoting prostitution after its models, including Cara Delevingne and Georgia Jagger, daughter of legendary Rolling Stones rocker Mick, stroll about the Paris streets.

“It is an extremely shocking representation of women,” says Dominique Attias, a leading lawyer who signed a letter in the left-wing daily Liberation.

Politicians, intellectuals and feminists have all attacked Louis Vuitton for using advertising to promote a form of prostitution chic, leaving US fashion mogul Marc Jacobs, the artistic director at Louis Vuitton to explain the motives.

Other signatories included Chantal Jouanno, a former centre-right minister, Laurence Rossignol, a Socialist senator, and the Scelles Foundation Against Sexual Exploitation.

An accusation that Louis Vuitton has “portrayed women’s bodies as an object and prostitution as something that is playful and enjoyable” has also been thrown by Attias.

“This is very damaging because we are trying to fight the idea, to which some young women in France subscribe, that prostitution is banal and just a way of getting money to buy clothes,” she says.

While Louis Vuitton state that they never authorised the video, with it instead being made for Love, the British fashion magazine edited by Katie Grand, a stylist and a consultant for Louis Vuitton, further spotlight has come on the brand after it was revealed that Jacobs stars as a pornography baron in the R-rated feature film Disconnect.

The letter in Liberation suggests that the fashion industry as a whole is seeking to make prostitution appear glamorous.

“What indecency, what ignorance, what indifference to play with the fantasy of chic pornography: the social condition of the immense majority of people who prostitute themselves is in no way enviable, and in no way happy,” it states.

 

Samsung hits back at Apple with ‘It doesn’t take a genius’ ad

Samsung has hit back at rival Apple taking aim at the iPhone 5 in an ad that carries the message ‘It doesn’t take a genius’.

As well as taking a jab at Apple’s ‘genius bar’ retail help desk, and potentially founder Steve Jobs, the ad suggests that the decision between the two devices isn’t rocket science.

The ad which ran in US newspapers over the weekend pits the specifications of the recently released iPhone against the Galaxy S III. The list compares a number of common features, pointing out areas where the Galaxy matches or surpasses the iPhone, like its larger and higher resolution screen, greater battery life and extra RAM. Samsung has listed a host of additional features making the list of specs for its phone look much longer than Apple’s.

It also points out the lack of near-field communications (NFC) technology in the iPhone, which can be used for mobile payments as well as a wave for more information tool on products. In addition, the ad pokes fun at the new ‘Lightning’ plug introduced in this iteration of the iPhone, which has drawn criticism for forcing past iPhone owners to upgrade their docking equipment.

Samsung recently lost a court battle to Apple over patents, and was ordered to pay $1 billion in infringement costs.

 

Nokia has joined Samsung in attacking their competitor on this very point, with a tweet from Nokia’s official Twitter account on Friday night (US time) using almost exactly the same sentence. It seems great (but not genius) minds, as they say, think alike:

Nokia iphone samsung genius

 

Samsung wins Olympic sponsorship gold, Nike upstages Adidas again

Samsung has taken gold for results from its London 2012 Olympics sponsorship, as the sponsor that did best out of the Games in terms of website visits, while Adidas has again been upstaged by non-sponsor rival Nike.

Despite experiencing a strong uplift in site visitation, Adidas failed to convert sponsorship dollars into the same level of social media buzz as non-sponsor Nike. Data from Socialbakers shows Nike, which released an emotive campaign flouting Olympic advertising rules by using towns named London, won the battle for sporting social media engagement on Facebook and Twitter.

During the course of the Games, Nike’s Facebook fan base grew by more than double that of Adidas’, the former netting 166,718 new fans compared to just 80,761 for the official sponsor.

Nike also took gold on Twitter with over 16,020 tweets linked to the brand, 6725 more than Adidas, which was mentioned in just 9295 Olympic-themed tweets.

Jan Rezab, CEO of Socialbakers says the data points to social media having levelled the playing field, marketing blog The Wall reports.

“There was a time when primetime slots around major sporting events were essential for maintaining position as a household name; but social media has levelled the playing field. Through its savvy social strategy, Nike demonstrated that you no longer need prime time to create brand buzz.”

In the site visitation stakes, Samsung experienced a 111% uplift in visitation during the course of the games, trouncing non-sponsor rival Sony which dropped by 7%. The data from Hitwise also showed Adidas and Cadbury coming out on top of rivals in terms of official website traffic.

Olympic sponsors with highest website traffic uplift

1. Samsung – 111%
2. Adidas – 44%
3. Cadbury’s – 41%

Nike received a 10% boost in traffic as a result of its guerrilla campaign and general association with sporting events.

 

Q&A with Nick Baker – the strategy behind ‘There’s nothing like Australia’

On launch day of phase two for ‘There’s nothing like Australia’, Marketing sat down to talk with executive general manager of marketing at Tourism Australia, Nick Baker, about the strategy behind the campaign.

Marketing: The new campaign marks the second phase of ‘There’s nothing like Australia’. Why have you chosen to stick with the same theme from the last campaign?

Nick Baker: When we first launched ‘There’s nothing like Australia’, it was creating a platform, if you like, and it was creating a rational argument why you believe there is nothing like Australia, our strategy for the future. Having said that, the next job was to prove it, so this is our proving, this is taking some of the most amazing experiences in really incredible places and bringing them to life, and set them against something in a very emotional way, because that’s what really sells.

This is the first time that a major tourism campaign has been launched overseas. Why was the decision made to do that?

It actually seems very rational when you think about it, the fact that most of the money that we’re spending on this, 90% of the money we’re spending on the campaign will be used overseas, and the biggest market that we’re going to be using for this year is going to be China. So therefore we wanted to launch it in China, although we’re launching in the UK and the US as well at the same time.

Why was China chosen? The opportunities in the East are well documented, but just how big is the opportunity in China for Australian tourism?

China experienced over 20% growth last year, so it’s the biggest growing of all of our markets. It’s becoming our biggest market by expenditure, and has certainly got the biggest growth trajectory for the next five or six years. When you take all those things into consideration, it’s a very logical market for us to do that in. We still spend a lot of our time marketing obviously in Europe and the US because they’re primary markets for us, but this is our chance to give China a red hot go. There is a lot of competitive activity in China now, everyone is competing for it. The number of direct flights are rising dramatically, so access is so much easier for people to get here. So when you combine access, spend, growth, actual and projected, it’s logical. And we really wanted to give it a really good go over there to show it, and we know that the Chinese consumer is very well disposed towards Australia; they think it’s a great place to come. It’s an antidote for a lot of the things over there, if you look at the comparison between living in Shanghai and living here. Just the stunning visuals work for them. We also found that when we launched the first iteration of ‘nothing like Australia’, I think it was about 91% of people who saw the ad went and did something about it… went and actually looked further into an Australian holiday, which is massive. So it showed us that we were hitting the market, and the market we were hitting were really interested and compelled by our story, if you like. The other element I probably should mention that I didn’t mention is Facebook, and social. You may have seen that we just hit three million, of which almost one million are from Australia and two million are from around the world. We’re great believers – our job at Tourism Australia is effectively to be storytellers, and as with all things storytellers, it’s often best to have other people tell your stories rather than yourselves. We have these fans out there that are great advocates for the country. They’re telling our story for us. We are launching today, in a couple of hours, our campaign on Facebook, and then we’ll back it up with a 24 hour roadblock tonight on Facebook, so Australians that are on Facebook will be served up our full ad tonight, our full three-minute version. We use those to push out the whole network effect that Facebook brings. There is a great sense of social advocacy that surrounds it because the underlying principle is that the world travels to experience difference, so therefore be different, differentiate yourself and know kind of what it is you’re going after. And the second is word of mouth is the most crucial part of any kind of marketing. Through Facebook and through Weibo Sina, and RenRen and others we’re a part of, we can amplify that message and create stories told by other people about this country.

One thing I noticed in the campaign is that there seemed to be a few luxury hooks in there; there were a couple of private boat cruises, there was one scene in a high rise that was full glass with a fantastic view, and there was a black tie function. Is that something that’s been chosen specifically for targeting the Chinese market?

Not specifically to target the Chinese market.

Is it important to the Chinese market though?

It is. But it’s not specifically for China. We’re doing that for the whole world. And the reason why we’re doing that is the world is in a constant state of change; we’ve got the occupying movements, the Arab Springs, the global meltdown, and why we’ve done that is we’ve been very much more targeted. The last year we spent a lot more time targeting who is coming to Australia and who are our target audience, and obviously they’re an affluent group because of the costs of coming down here; the currency and everything else coming to Australia is not a cheap holiday. What we’re doing is the same principle, I guess, that any fashion brand does or automotive brand, we’re pitching our best first to create a halo for the rest of the country. And in China, they go after a lot of luxury brands; there’s a great sense of status and symbolism that’s attached to it. So not just for them, but for everybody, we unashamedly pitched some of the upscale product that we’ve got in Australia. But what differentiates Australia from most of the other places – and we’re doing that; South Africa and New Zealand have been doing that with their lodges for a long time. What differentiates that is that nearly all the experiences that we’ve got in there that push upscale, can be done whether you’re spending $1000 a night or $20 a night. You mentioned the El Questro, whatever that title was. You can spend $1000 there, or you can go to the Emma Gorge camp site next to it and spend $20 a night, and I’ve done that. But you can still have all the experiences that are out there. So the great thing about Australia is that it offers these unique experiences, but at the same time, it doesn’t matter whether you’re on a beer bucket budget or a champagne budget.

In terms of fostering dispersal, where you’re trying to ensure that there is a share of the result from the campaign across all the different destinations, how does this campaign approach that?

What this campaign does is it moves away from just the normal icons, if you like. This is not just about the reef, the rock and the Opera House, and what we do is we show a greater diversity and a greater depth to the country than I think has ever been shown before. Going into places like the Kimberleys, going down into Tasmania, going into Kangaroo Island, these are dispersed areas, if you like, but these are the things that really differentiate Australia against the rest of the world. And when you see those images, they couldn’t be anywhere else in the world; they really strongly show why there is nothing like Australia. It’s part of showing the depth of the country, part of getting greater dispersal and part of just showing what is best in this country.

One of the criticisms that international national campaigns have had in the past is that they relied on the old stereotypes of both the Australian ocka, but also the icons. Has there has been a purposeful move away from that this time?

Yes, what there has been is there has been a definite approach to show the best of Australia, wherever it exists. So unashamedly, we’re still going to put the Opera House in because you’d be crazy not to; it’s an icon of this country. It is part of what makes this country unique, and in fact, as soon as you see it on the screen, it’s shorthand for Australia, and we all need, as marketers, to have that cut through. But at the same time, we’re showing some other incredible parts of this country that people don’t know about. And I think that one of the things is not just parts of the country but also experiences that you can have in the country, because really it’s about experiences, which is why everything in there is about an experience, not just here is a beautiful landscape, here is another beautiful landscape, here is another beautiful landscape; it’s about experiences. So we’re trying to get the people to see it, I guess, to imagine themselves, as it were, in that experience. And that is a different approach than we’ve taken before. But the remit was prove the line, prove why there’s nothing like Australia. That’s the challenge that I set myself, and that’s what hopefully we’ve done.

When you were targeting the different markets, are there nuanced versions of the TVC or slightly different things that you do?

Yeah, very good question. And that’s one of the key things because everyone says how can you make one campaign that’s going to fit everybody in the world? Well, the key inside this is that this has been built modularly, so I can take out segments that are more about cities, I can take beaches, I can take out segments that are just about a state, if a state wants to partner it. We have been extraordinarily careful in making sure that this could be broken down into different parts and reassembled either for a market, a customer type or for a partner, so they could build it. And that’s the great thing about the song and the way that we’ve built it; it’s lots of little stories, so you can take individual stories to make it.

This version that’s being launched today – is that the one that will be launched in the four locations that you’ve mentioned?

Yes, it will be. It is the same, as it exists now. Once you start getting down to the cut down versions, the 30 seconds and 15 seconds and 20 seconds, those kind of ones, that’s when it’s more likely to be broken up. So we’ll be partnering – last time we partnered with I think about 180 partners, when we launched this campaign two years ago, which we believe is a mark for success. And lots of times, they will take, for instance, 20 seconds of this footage, add their own 10 seconds for their airline on the end of it. That’s when we’ll do a lot more of the cut down versions of it. But an interesting point is when you do all the research around the world, and we do in-depth research and analysis on our customers, pretty much 80% of the things that inspire people, differentiate the countries, motivate people to make a booking, are the same regardless of the world over. People come here for our nature, they come here for the adventure, and they come here for this great freshness and lifestyle that Australia has. That’s right up there. It’s the other things that differentiate it further down, for instance, the German market really loves big sweeping landscapes and more drama, the Chinese market will like some more city and shopping experiences, those kinds of things. So that’s why we built it so that it can be tailored. But the majority of what we show unites everybody.

And given that there is a large focus on China, are there any cultural sensitivities that you’ve taken into account for that market in particular?

There is cultural sensitivities taken for all markets. Obviously Asia has some of those, Muslim countries have some of those. It’s everything from clothing through to alcohol, those kinds of things, always have to be taken into consideration when you’re doing this. The choice of talent, the experiences you portray people doing. You have to be very careful in a global campaign, and that doesn’t matter whether it’s China or whether it’s Arab states or whether it’s even America or the UK. There are certain things that you’ve got to do to bring the campaign to life, and it means that you have to be careful of all those nuances. So we work very closely with OMD on identifying these.

Can you give some examples of some of those that were selected for the Chinese market?

Again, some of those things are everything from showing bikinis, which a lot of Muslim and Asian markets just wouldn’t allow. The question of drinking alcohol is often a big one for certain markets. Those two are probably two classic examples, if you like. But also the China market, I guess, one other one that’s specific for them is, for them, it’s much better if they see activity. The Germans might like a big picture of sweeping open desert landscape, but for a lot of the Chinese market, they’ll go and say, “Crikey, that’s a bit daunting. How do I do it, all that open space?” Which is quite natural when you consider that they’re so highly urbanised. That’s why putting people in and having those experiences in them, which is what we wanted to do anyway, fits.

So there is a bit of comfort factor there for the Chinese market?

Yes, for the Chinese market – to be quite honest, for a lot of markets, because there’s not many markets – most people like to see people doing things, and certainly we want to show how it can be done, yes.

Are there any partners for this campaign?

A large partner domestically is going to be with Qantas, and we’re going to be partnering with loads – we’ve got a partnership with China Sun up in China, but there will be loads of partners all over the world that we’re doing this with.

Will Qantas be participating on an international level?

Yes, they will be participating in lots of different markets, but they are actually at launch today. And the reason why I’m saying that is that our launch in some of our other markets around the world takes place at different times.

How important is the TVC or video ad these days in the scheme of the campaign?

The TVC or the film, whatever you want to call it, is still vital, not because it plays out on TV necessarily, but because of the role that it plays out across all of your platforms and all of the mediums that you use, because that will probably be seen more online than it will be seen on the television, but it will be seen in the cinema, it will be seen in integrated outdoor and it will be seen digitally. But ultimately, there is always a manifestation of a brand that comes to life; there is always a spark of creativity, a spark of something that has to show the brand, and that’s the job this still has, which is still just as important as it ever was, and it just plays out differently now than it used to do. What is just as important is you can’t just sit there and go, “Here’s our TVC, that’s it. Fine, we’ll walk away now.” It’s how you bring that to life because the TVC, if you just show a TVC, you’ll get excited by it; there’s a long way of getting excited to actually buying and, these days, the proliferation of people trying to get in to stop you from doing what you hope it’s going to be, to do a lot of other things, is greater and greater. The media proliferation, fragmentation, all that stuff that we know about. So what we’re trying to use is social and digital to keep people on that story. And the great thing we know about with tablets is once you get somebody to actually interact with your brand, you leap frog ads on awareness, and on a connection front, because you really started a tangible conversation. Getting fans to interact with your brands is the most important thing today, whether it be on Facebook and liking it, or whether it be on a tablet and downloading it, or whether it be on aus.com or a mobile site. It’s all part of this multimedia storytelling, and the best way of storytelling is to have it two-way.

User-generated content is something that I think you used in the last phase of the campaign, and something that you use ongoing in social media. Does it form any of the key parts of this campaign?

It’s not included in the TVC, although references to all the places that excite people – and we got great learnings from the 60,000 stories that we had last time – shaped some of our direction. User-generated stuff will form because it will come through what we’re doing on Facebook. In other words, in Facebook, four weeks ago, we started seeding the idea of some of the things that were best of, and people just like telling their stories. So absolutely user generated through social media forms a big plank because the reason why we’re going out to all these Facebook people and we’re using Facebook at the centre of this is to get people talking about our brand, and that’s at the hub.

How is user-generated content received when it makes up the main part of the campaign?

When we launched ‘There’s nothing like Australia’ the first time and we got 30,000 people to tell us their stories of why there is nothing like Australia. It was really well received; it gave us a great footprint and it gave us a great tick to saying everyone believed in the strategy and everyone could easily show if it was truthful; in other words, nobody said that we went and represented the country untruthfully. It was very truthful. We then went out a second time last year and we asked again for ‘Nothing like’ and we got 40,000 people commented in 12 days. So the desire for people to tell stories about this country and tell stories about their holiday experiences, is absolutely alive and kicking, and we find that very powerful. Because you look at some of those stories, and if you ask any place, and you want to know how people think about a place, just log onto our There’s nothing like Australia, go onto that map, type in a location and you can see exactly what people think of that place, it’s real life. And now we’ve embedded that with TripAdvisor, with Facebook content. It really becomes a platform that people can interact with and get as much user-defined content as possible, if that’s the way that they went. So we are linking up all of these elements at the moment.

This campaign seems to tick a lot of boxes. Some of the criticisms that I’ve seen in the past, whether using the stereotypes or not showing anything new about Australia, whether it’s been more tailored towards Western audiences or Eastern audiences, it seems to cover off a lot of different angles this time.

Two years ago, it’s been a very interesting journey. When we had ‘Where the Bloody Hell Are You?’ stuff, it was like a punctuation mark for us, it was a stop. We used the Baz Luhrmann one to use that to tag on to Australia, the movie, quite naturally; it was something that had a big ball of energy that we sat behind, whilst we worked out what the next iteration was, what the future was. When you have something with that amount of power and voice out there, not necessarily all positive, to break away from it, it takes a bit of time to get the right thing. So we launched, ‘There’s nothing like’ two years ago as a start for that side of this journey, and this year was really about the incorporated knowledge that we gained over the last three or four years about what to do, what not to do, where the world is going, about working with our partners, all those learnings, and really trying to be on top in digital and social environments, because that’s where we really put a thrust, and we are against other countries in the world above them, to do something right this time. So it’s given us those learnings to do it.

And your greatest critics are always going to be at home, aren’t they?

Yes, which is why it’s very audacious to launch this campaign domestically, which we haven’t done before, but I really feel and hopefully you saw there, there was stuff that people in Australia don’t know about, that is quite emotionally inspiring, and certainly the research we did prior to launch of this showed that when people saw that, there was a sense of pride in their country and believability about their country. And also, a lot of people, when they came out of it, said, “I need to find out more about my own country.” So the research really gave us some fairly strong indications that we were on target.

 

Tourism Aus claims $61m budget windfall

Tourism Australia has been handed an unexpected $61 million marketing boost to target Asian tourists.

The ‘Asian Marketing Fund’, set aside in last week’s Federal Budget in recognition of the growth expected to come from Asia’s emerging middle class, follows the announced relaunch of ‘There’s Nothing Like Australia’ in China, as the national tourism body sets its sights increasingly on the East.

The boost will be given out over four years: $8.5 million in the first year (2012-2013), followed by $14 million the following year, then $17.5 million, and $21 million in the 2017 financial year.

Commenting on the boost, Tourism Australia chairman Geoff Dixon says, “Tourism Australia continues to approach its international marketing activity with a balanced portfolio approach, where traditional markets such as the United Kingdom and USA remain important, but nobody can deny that the opportunities that lie before us are in this Asian Century.

“With this new dedicated fund, we now have an unprecedented opportunity to further drive both existing campaign activity and new marketing efforts across our fastest growing and most valuable inbound visitor markets.”

While a decision is yet to be made on how to money will be spent, TA is expected to use it with its current agencies DDB and OMD.

 

Apple brings in Samuel L Jackson for Siri ads

Apple has brought in the big guns to boost the image of its artificial intelligence feature Siri, posting new TV spots featuring actor Samuel L Jackson and actress and musician Zooey Deschanel.

For a brand that doesn’t usually use big name personalities in its advertising, this is an interesting departure from the norm. The two TVCs feature the actors interacting with Siri in an effortless manner, something Marketing wagers many users are still yet to experience.

Pixar returns to 80s for Toy Story 3 campaign

Animated film producer Pixar has surreptitiously released a fake vintage TVC featuring one of the characters from its upcoming movie Toy Story 3 as a part of a viral marketing campaign.

Created to look like an ’80s-style advertisement for Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear, the TVC has spread through social media networks and has been viewed on YouTube over 650,000 times.

The TVC has elicited mainly positive responses from consumers despite it not making any references to the movie itself.

Yahoo! Movies writer, Mike Ryan, has commended the idea as a unique way to market not only the film but its new characters.

“Pretty convincing stuff. The distorted sound, the flickering video, the noise on the bottom of the screen – all tell-tale signs of an old commercial uploaded to YouTube from a long-lost VHS tape,” said Ryan.

Christina Warren from Mashable has suggested that the campaign is indicative of the direction that brands are taking in regard to creating buzz around products online.

“Disney and Pixar have heavily marketed the film across different demographics, but there has a been a strong viral push to grab the attention of people in their mid-to-late twenties. For that reason, creating an ’80s-esque toy commercial makes a lot of sense, because we’re a generation that is obsessed with recollecting our past and relishing what once was,” explained Warren.

iPad TVC released by Apple

Apple has unveiled its first iPad TVC during the Oscar Awards telecast.

The ad ‘Meet the iPad’ is set to the song ‘There goes my love’ by The Blue Van, and was played following the announcement of the award for Best Animated Film.

Focussing on the iPad’s user experience, the TVC depicts different people going through various features of the devices, such as music, videos, photos, ebooks, email and Pages.

The TVC indicates that the US on sale date for the iPad will be April 3, however Apple has not confirmed whether the ad will be run in Australia.

Are marketers still afraid of the web? Part two of our interview with Joseph Jaffe

Part one: Are marketers still afraid of the web?

Part two: Are marketers still afraid of the web?

After his successful session at the ADMA Forum, Joseph Jaffe squeezed in a chat with Marketingmag.com.au to give us his thought on why marketers are not ustilising the web as well as they could be and and the role of social media in marketing.

So basically, following the dotcom bust, marketers are still not seeing the web as anything – well, not utilising the web anything more than just banner ads and things like that. Would you agree?

Yeah, I would absolutely agree. In fact my company Crayon recently changed its mission statement or the ‘elevator pitch’ – our key positioning. It used to be just focused on the social media and the conversation, but what we do now is we help brands and companies leverage new media and social media from a strategic standpoint. Our point is that we’re backwards, to answer your question. 

The social media challenge right now is that the market is not predominantly tactics in search of strategy – solutions in search of a non-existent problem. That’s the problem with new media – it has become old media!
I mean look at the demise of Yahoo and AOL and even MSN, the three major portals. They fell into the trap where, from the perspective of the sellers, they were so enamoured and taken with the demise of the 30-second spot that they basically just tried to emulate it. So you can’t reach 80% of the US with three ads on the three networks, but you can put your 30-second spot or find a new home in a new haven on our home page. 

The point is the lack of innovation and creativity has almost become egregious in the new media space – reaching frequency and the branding hangover. The direct marketing hangover is the ad networks, performance based pricing, and the cost per lead and cost acquisition statistics trying to take existing metrics and transpose them or just transplant them into a platform or on to a platform that almost must be thought of as a transformative platform.

Not only is it a better mousetrap, it’s beyond that – it’s a trap that can trap a lion. It’s so much bigger and so much more powerful.

I’ll just give you an example that I often use: take something like an online store front – your online store front is in arguably as important as your offline store front (arguably more important). No problems with rude sales people, no problems with store hours and store closings, no problems with inventory and out of stock, etc.
It is just so much more efficient and effective, but more importantly, you look at msn.com as an e-tailer – people that like this book like that book. The up-sell and the cross-sell that is built into the model, the reviews, the ratings – it’s just profound.

Other than msn.com, eBay and Priceline, why are we not seeing brand interpretations of Amazon and eBay? What Amazon did to Barnes and Noble the book store, like what eBay did – I don’t think there ever was a consumer facing auction or marketplace. The fact is we’re not seeing brand presence in the new media world on a par with some of the e-tailers, but certainly utilised in a transformative way.

Do you think that there’s a danger that marketers will look at a social media platform and go, “Okay, this is the new – this is where we’re going to start our new strategy through,” and in that way, abandoning any other online creative in their executions they could explore?

Interesting question. To the extent that social media is the next bright and shiny new object, then yes. I use the analogy of six-year-olds playing soccer. They all bunch around the ball, they all kick each other’s shins, just blindly kicking at air, and then one person almost by fluke makes contact with the ball and the ball shoots out and then the whole mob follow.

I think the thing is that social media today, if we had to whip out the old report card and judge the level of adoption, implementation and activation across the board from a brand presence and investment stand point, it would be predominantly tactical, and because of that, would be very much focused and very superficial and one dimensional.

I once looked ‘creativity’ up in the dictionary, and the phrase that popped up for me was this idea of ‘productive originality’. It means basically doing things differently and getting a result. Of course, that’s juxtaposed with Einstein’s definition of insanity, ‘doing the same thing only expecting a different result’. So I think creativity is relative.

If we think about creativity in terms of winning an award at Cannes, then who cares. However, if we’re thinking about creativity as in doing business in a more profound way that it creates the ultimate win/win – the end economy which is one where both the consumer and the marketer wins.

There is the creation of value for the consumer and there’s the derivement of value for the marketer, which is it’s not just blind servicing of customers or consumers who don’t return that favour in the form of loyalty or word of mouth or patronage. That’s a very short-lived and one-sided exchange that ultimately is going to lead to a less than satisfactory result.

UK iPhone ad banned for telling furphies

Five years ago, if you didn’t have an iPod you were nothing.  Now, Apple has created a new tech drug in the iPhone that has sent the world insane. 

What sort of advertising do you need for a product like this? Well not a TV ad that claims unrestricted access to all of the net.

In the UK, Apples iPhone ad has been banned after the local watchdog ruled that it misled buyers over net access.

The news from Brand Republic is that Apple claims in the commercial that the phone allows owners access to all parts of the internet.

It attracted complaints from viewers who said the ad was misleading because the phone doesn’t support Flash or Java software, integral to many web sites.

In the commercial, which was created by TBWALondon, someones hand is shown using the iPhone, navigating through a series of pages and during the ad a voiceover says: “All the parts of the internet are on the iPhone.”

Apple has defended the ad saying it was designed to highlight the benefits of the iPhone in being able to offer availability to all internet websites, in contrast to other handsets, which could only access WAP versions or sites selected by service providers.

The California-based firm said the Apple Safari web browser was built to open internet standards, but because Flash and Java are propriety software, they were not open source and require plug-ins or individual downloads.

The UK Advertising Standards Authority told Apple it cannot broadcast the ad again in its current form.

It’s not the first setback for Apples ambitions to dominate the lucrative mobile phone market (and possibly the world). It faces competition from Blackberry and the soon to be launched Android from Google.

Proof that marketers have sense of humour (and that newspaper advertising will try anything to get noticed)

This ones been doing the rounds throughout the blogosphere over the last few days, and while its not like The Newshound to be, ahem, behind on a story, its just too good an opportunity to miss passing this one on. As well as being evidence of the remnants of a sense of humour in advertising and marketing, this is also an interesting ploy by newspaper to convince advertisers in the face of a mounting flood of evidence that spendign their dollars in print is still as viable as it always was.

First to run with the story was David Griner from Adfreak.com, who went all alliterative with his Plump passengers punkd by Philly papers piece; not to be outdone, Steve Hall at Adrants.com went for the slightly less creative but nonetheless very direct Got A Fat Ass? Derrie-Air Wants Your Booty; and then this morning Adland dropped Newspapers run ads about fake airline Derrie-Air.

The story is about how The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News and Philly.com all ran with ads for the revolutionary airline Derrie-Air, which bases
your ticket price on how much junk is in your trunk. The one-day hoax
campaign was launched by the newspapers’ holding company and ad agency
Gyro, who wanted to show that newspaper advertising is still a good way
to get noticed.

So basically, running a fake ad campaign in a newspaper is meant to convince advertisers that they should spend for a share of the newspaper audience. An audience who are presumably picking up the newspaper because they are looking for factually accurate, insightful longer-form content. In the long run this kind of campaign does absolutely nothing for the ability of newspapers to attract advertisers, because it essentially sacrifices the long-term credibility of the newspaper platform for short-term results.

If you check out Monashs Marketing Today podcast #64 [link to MP3], youll hear a similar kind of discussion going on around virals, with our very own Julian Cole chipping in: sometimes a short-term increase in awareness isnt the best thing you can do for your brand, especially if in the longer-term you are actually sending out a brand message inconsistent with your core identity.

So the next time you want to convince advertisers of real products that they should spend money with you, try publicising a case study that shows how advertising for real products can generate the kind of results advertisers may be looking for. If you want to attract advertisers of fake services, then scrap all that and just follow this publicity stunt by Gyro.

Smacks of desperation for the newspapers really.

Guerilla Guide: Briefing ad agencies

I’m sitting in a city café and it ain’t as simple as ‘white with one’ anymore. Skinny cap, soy mocha, skinny soy latte in a mug with the handle facing south. So many variations. People have too much time, too little to do. Here I am ordering a boring old skinny latte, which means cow’s milk… what an environmental sin! Fancy buying the juice of a methane-producing polluter… Do I try to fit in and order a soy drink? Bugger it. I hear soy gives you cancer anyway. Plus I’m already the odd one out: I’m the only person I can see who’s not wearing a tie.

Opposite me is the client, a major player in the finance industry. She’s very bright, very professional, but struggling with her role today. She asks me if I take on briefs. I’m appalled at her forwardness… (Sorry, had to try the joke, but pathetic, I know.) She ignores me, like the entire world population who are under 30, and goes on to explain her dilemma. They are having trouble penetrating the teenage market. Seems teenagers think and respond completely differently to anyone else in their customer base. Amazing. (It is always quite a problem for those in mass marketing. How do you keep a level of brand consistency when the message has to be radically different? But I digress again…) I should mention this is a professional organisation we’re discussing here. While they represent older, conservative, mostly white men, their core target market (for members) is younger, hipper and, like every group today, they are trying to be non-gender specific, non-racially biased.

We go though her understanding of the mindset of the target teenagers. We discuss the findings from a few focus groups they’ve just run. Then she pulls out a folder – it’s neatly blocked together in colours per issue – under headings like ‘pricing’, ‘psychological impacts’, ‘media use’ etc. She squirms, from what I’m guessing is embarrassment. It’s so big I start to feel faint. (Like those folders you get handed on a two-week live-in course.) Maybe I need a glass of water. I catch the eye of a waiter…

I’m hoping, as you do, they don’t really want us to take this all in and come back with something sensible. But, yes, they do. Yes, she expects us to wade through hundreds of pages of tightly typed notes to understand her brief. I think, as I smile and go slowly pale, that it’s got to come from above. This isn’t her. This anal, control freak stuff must be from senior management. I tell her I’ll email back my understanding of her brief, before I send it on to the creatives. That will save her time/money and stop me losing a few from jumping out the window into oncoming traffic.

There’s a point in life where you want to be professional, and there’s a point in life where you have to say, “This is over the top”. Two hundred pages of detail for a job that’s only worth a few hundred grand is a waste of a couple weeks. All it says is one of two things. Either you need another job ‘cause you’re so bored you actually have got time to put together a folder like this, or you need another job because someone in your organisation thinks you need to put together folders like this to brief somebody.

Which brings me neatly to the issue this month. Agency briefing. What works, what doesn’t and what costs you double as much for half as good?

Clients briefing an agency can vary hugely in their approach. From the ‘Just tell us what you think’ as they pass you in the street types, to the very serious this is the brief types who have 23 pages of closely typed thoughts just on the buying process – neither of which is exactly ideal. To get it out of the way, high cost briefings (assuming you’re paying people by the hour) are those that give way too much detail, that send creatives down unnecessary paths that waste time and/or that change frequently.

One of the roles of agency people is often to train clients into what makes a good brief for their agency. This is usually part of the ‘bedding down’ process, followed by all agencies and other creative groups, where you take a client and educate them about your systems and processes under the guise of getting to know them, but that is itself deserving of an entire article.

The public doesn’t care what your brief is

Don’t kid yourself that your cause is the cause of the general public. Their key causes are food, gratuitous entertainment, saving the globe and world peace. Yours only rates a mention if you’ve managed to grab their attention and hold onto it long enough to register on their personal radar. So don’t brief like it’s about you and your cause. Brief when you’ve worked out what it is that will work for the public. What is it the punters want from your widget?

It helps if you make up your mind

“My God, I’ll have to know what I want. And what we need as a company? All we really want is sales in December that are 15 percent better than last year’s, but that makes us sound shallow and this is a national, annual campaign, so maybe I better rethink what it is we want…”. If this is you, don’t panic. We in Adland expect you to be uncertain about it. “Seventy-nine percent of agencies claim clients (yes, you) use the briefing process to establish their own strategy, while 55 percent of clients say that briefs often change after the project begins.” (Paul-Mark Rendon, Marketing Magazine, Canada, September 2006)

Sometimes it’s best to make other people debate it

This paragraph could have been headed ‘leave it to the agency’, but that would have been saying agencies know all, and they just don’t. ‘Getting other people helping’ is a better thought. People who ask tricky questions and debate issues with you at briefing stage are way more valuable than those who just nod and come back in a week with crap. This heavy duty thinking is often the role of the accounts manager (or ‘strategy planner’ in a big, pretentious agency). It’s their job to take a crap brief and distil it down to a message or strategy/concept the creative team can get their heads around and respond to.

The agency needs to understand the job

First and foremost, it’s your job as a client to make sure the agency understands the job. (This is not your only responsibility. Your other key one is approving great creative.) Frankly you shouldn’t be working with them if they don’t understand your briefs. If you’re not sure they understand fully, ask some sneaky questions, like “What is your take-out from what I’ve said?” Or “How do you expect us to be positioned in a year from this brief?” etc.

Don’t be intimidated by suits/creatives

They give you forms to fill out, make a fuss about the content and go over details you didn’t think mattered. It’s all part of the ‘take us seriously, we’re professionals’ bullshit they throw at you to justify their retainers/nice cars.

We can blame anything on the brief in Adland

It’s so much easier than saying, “We didn’t come up with the goods.” Common comments are “the perfect brief is pure fantasy, like putting a rainbow in a jar”. Or, as Neil French (ex WPP creative head) once said, “Client briefs should be skipped altogether – taking things out is always better.”

The brief can be taken way too seriously

My most favourite quote has to be, “Forget just for a minute that you are briefing an agency. Instead, pretend you are standing on the bank of a river, about to build a bridge.” Taken, I kid you not, from the ‘Joint Industry Guidelines for Young Marketing Professionals’ in the UK, which includes marketers, PR people etc.

Mind you, I may be playing down the briefing process. Alan Doyle got it right by saying, “The key to effective briefing is to provide a simple insight that can be dramatised memorably” (‘Joint Industry Guidelines’). Certain information is crucial to any good campaign. So let’s cover what’s absolutely necessary in a brief.

Briefing basics – give this info to the agency

What’s this about?

What’s the actual job? Is it time to refresh the brand’s identity, do you need a new press campaign (because you’re sick of average in-house media jobs) or is your boss on your back to get better results? Whichever way, we all need to know why you’re doing it before you do it.

Who is it you’re targeting?

Demographics: who, how old, income levels, education, where they are, gender, relationships, jobs, etc. If you’re a mass marketer, like Coke, this could be as short as ‘anyone with a mouth’.

Psychographics: how they think, buy, behave, attitudes, perceptions, stage in life, political or entertainment mindset, star sign, hobbies, sports, etc. Again, this could be as short as ‘grumpy dumb people’.

Your company or brand’s position

Where you’ve been, where you are now, where you’re going and how you intend to get there.

What you need to achieve

Key goals and KPIs, time-frames, budgets.

Branding issues

What does the brand stand for (values, features/benefits), how is the brand portrayed (visually/audio/characters), previous recent creative (if they don’t know it) and any brand projections (future plans, if not obvious).

What hasn’t worked in the past?

Previous creative and media buys.

Why this matters

How this brief fits into the overall scheme of things in life, the universe and your career. Politics in your organisation – what does the big boss’s wife like? Is the finance department angry or happy about this sale and why etc.

Media thoughts

Media spend/rationale, if not being developed by the creative agency (always seek their input on this – media groups want to sell more space, costing you money. Better creative uses less, so costs less, saving you money.)

Focus

Core thrust/objectives of the brief – what is the key issue? If you say to a creative team that each one of these briefing points matter, they will be all over the shop. They’ll be doing work on issues to which no one will respond. They’ll waste days chasing moonbeams. Days you’re paying for. On the other hand, if you say this point is critical, this point is number two and the rest are just background you can ignore if you like, then that’s perfect. This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t discuss things from a range of perspectives. But you must have an idea what it is you want back…

Present how?

Do it a bit face-to-face, and a bit written down. Make the written stuff just the basics and a couple of dreamy thoughts. Keep it under three pages. Background stuff (10 to 20 pages) is OK, but the more info, the more confusing the brief, the more costly it will be.

Avoid too much information

Information overload confuses and freezes creatives. Creatives will always say to you, “We need more information.” Background stuff is great, because it gives them an opportunity to work their head around an issue and this is important because the creative process takes days to filter through from a briefing to great work. And you must allow them to take this time, or you’ll get shit creative. And that process needs bits of information to chew on. But the danger is in giving too much priority to too many issues.

Briefing forms

There are lots of them out there. They are good to fill out when you’re a bit unsure and you want to look busy one morning. I’ve never seen one that fits all circumstances at all times and invariably the short briefing paragraph works better to focus creative efforts than a 20-point form from your head office in Luxembourg.

Bites at the cherry

Many of my best clients will ring in over a couple of days (or send a few short emails) with other thoughts on a tricky brief, as things occur to them. Better to pass on more information or your changing thoughts on focus, than get it a little wrong and leave it wrong. If there’s a bit of information that is critical, give it to the creatives. Don’t assume they’ll ‘get it’ by osmosis.

The reality

Clients are strapped for time and often don’t have anyone inside the operation with whom they can debate these points. And they do need debating. The onus is often on the agency to find the information. If the client can’t provide it, the agency ought to go out and get it. Yes, fill out the best practice briefing list but if you don’t know what one particular answer is that’s not the end. A good agency ought to be able to work with you on finding the answer. All of the above will take time, so cost you money. Get over it.

Rejection is good

Trust the agency who argues the brief. If they put in a decent body of thought, they are worth their retainer.

Limiting your outcomes by your briefing

Many great products don’t go mass market because they think their product is ‘exclusive’. I know factory workers who drive BMWs, millionaires who drive Falcons. What I’m getting around to is that many briefs assume things that are plainly wrong (but seem right to a passing observer), because their authors are in fact ignorant of how the world really works. Don’t limit your career/business by briefing too narrowly.

Hidden agendas

These always exist. Yours are most probably career advancement, making sales, building the brand and, most importantly, being noticed, so it’s easier to explain what you do at the gym when someone asks. Your real need, to give the brother-in-law some work, may never come up at all. Their hidden agendas usually relate to the politics of the boardroom, and/or who’s shagging who in your office or theirs. These agendas rarely cross-pollinate in a positive manner, but one can hope. I’m a big believer in ignoring most agendas, ‘cause if I worried about them, I’d never get any sleep.

Value for money

How to get it is by thinking about what’s needed first, briefing accurately (note it’s called briefing) and then letting go of your baby and allowing people to actually be creative – that’s basically what you’re paying for.

Paying for briefing

If it’s an ongoing relationship, then you’ve already sorted out how the money works and the agency is either formally charging you for taking a brief or you’ve somehow agreed they’ll hide it in other costs (like everyone else in the world does). If it’s a pitch, taking a brief and more so, responding to a brief costs a fortune. If you are a half-decent company you will suggest a payment for the exercise. This normally won’t cover much more than the coffee and croissants run, but it goes a long way to being taken seriously and getting a far better response from management/creatives than those companies who feel (because they don’t get paid to put a pitch to Coles Myer or NAB) that they shouldn’t pay others to pitch. Most agencies nowadays charge by the hour. Like your lawyers. If you asked them to do 50 hours of work, would you expect to pay for it?

Budgets

Give people budgets. Some wankers believe in keeping it to themselves and think that saying something like “tell us what you think we should spend” is clever, like it will magically make your agency ask for less. But all it does is make things too hard for the agency, so you go to the bottom of the pile. Grow up and trust people. The agency is trusting you – they’re investing good money/time in answering your brief.

Sex is quicker with people you know

The better you know each other – agency/client – the less detail you need to give them each time. It can get down to basically a nod and a wink in a dark alley. “Oh, we can finally do the chocolate range. Usual budget. I need something for the board to approve, say next Friday?” That might be it as a brief from a very familiar client.