Amid attempts by advertisers to make "that time of the month" something that defies cutesy sobriquets (or even quotation marks, for that matter), including talking hands-cum-vaginas and divers stopping mid-flip to discuss period woes, the latest Got Milk? campaign has set itself apart by being the most offensive and hackneyed campaign ever to reference a woman's period.
In its new campaign, billboards insinuated the victimization of men who have relationships with menstruating women by asking, "Are you a man living with PMS?" The talent was selected no doubt for their ability to look terrified and helpless while balancing an armload of dairy products while headlines like, "I'm sorry I listened to what you said, and not what you meant" drive home two solid points.
Number one, that women are terrifying, illogical monsters 5-11 days a month, every month, for their entire fertile lives. And number two, that men are oafish, submissive and fully incapable of being intelligent and/or sensitive enough to speak to an agitated person on their own. Apparently, the only solution to the frightening dilemma that is – dun dun dun – The Period is milk. (As an aside: Milk? Seriously? I'd much rather have pizza with my hormonal rampages.)
At this point, social media has run its course and the ensuing hubbub has pressured the California Milk Board to change the campaign's cleverly-crafted URL from EverythingIDoIsWrong.com to GotDiscussion.com. I guess we can all go back to rolling our eyes at cheap and ineffective imitations of the Got Milk? campaign now rather than the cheap and ineffective potshots taken by Got Milk? itself.
It's closing in on lunchtime, and I'm starting to get peckish. I visualize various meal ideas while doing some work for a client: Thelma's chili mac and cheese, tomato and blue cheese pizza from On The Rise, last night's leftovers in the fridge at home. By the time I'm ready to head out, I'm gripped by indecision. What am I in the mood for? Which of my choices will leave me most satisfied?
So, I call a few restaurants, and to each I made the following request:
I am hungry, and I need to eat lunch. I do not know what I want yet, but I like bread, meat and vegetables. Please kindly make me something with those specifications, and I will come by your establishment to check it out. If I like what I see, I may purchase your lunch. However, I might have some suggestions on how to improve it before I buy. I might also wind up buying something at another restaurant altogether. Of course I will pay for this meal, and I will even tweet you if I like what I eat. If this works for you, I'll see you around 12:30!
Surprisingly, no restaurants I contacted were open to this method of selection. Perhaps these owners are not familiar with the concept of crowdsourcing, wherein a company outsources a project to a large group of people to amass a collection of ideas, in order to choose one for implementation.
As a designer, I understand the restaurant owners' hesitancy to spend their time and resources on a meal that may or may not be purchased. They must know that taste is subjective, and in essence they would be agreeing to a meal lottery, their ticket paid for with their product. I understand this concept because crowdsourcing is employed by a great number of people who need design services. There are a multitude of business on sites like 99designs and crowdSPRING, looking for a cheap alternative to partnering with agencies and freelance creatives on their advertising needs. And just like a restaurant owner who won't make a lunch on spec, I don't believe in doing design work that way.
I prefer the approach employed by most other creative entities. The business model built on understanding the client and their audience, and fostering a relationship by asking the right questions and doing some research – all before I ever turn on my computer. Yes, it takes more time, and perhaps it costs more money, but the result is a product which is tailor-made to the needs and tastes of the client's audience.
Which, of course, tends to make it more successful and therefore more satisfying – just like a thoughtfully ordered meal. (By the way, I went with leftovers.)
Unless you've been living under a rock (or trapped under one), I'm sure you've heard all about the recent rescue of 33 Chilean miners after 69 days in captivity underground. I'm equally sure you've read articles and seen videos about the birth of one miner's child while he was underground, as well as Yonni Barrios' wife-meets-mistress debacle.
What I think you might have missed, even while billions had their eyes trained to the TV, Twitter and online news feeds, was the subtle advertising done by Oakley.
After 69 days underground without sunlight, the miners' eyes were extremely light-sensitive. Where Chilean officials saw a problem, Oakley saw a great marketing opportunity. As each man emerged from the mine, his eyes were protected from the sun as well as the flash from hundreds of photographers by one of two products made by the eyewear company. It's estimated that Oakley has received $41 million in exposure from the 24-hour rescue. At $180 a pair (retail), with 33 men in the hole and in front of the cameras... it's easy to see that Oakley's "generosity" more than paid off. In addition to Oakley's sunglasses donation, every man rescued has been offered a free cruise to the Greek Islands from their travel bureau, both Madrid and Manchester have invited the men to watch soccer matches and, of course, Apple has offered to send each of them a top-of-the-line iPod.
Obviously, this campaign has a lot of legs, and we're less than a month from the rescue. The corporations and brands that want to capitalize on this heart-warming tale are lining up to feed, clothe and pamper the victims – with an accompanying press release, no doubt.
With innumerable television interviews in the works and a Discovery Channel documentary scheduled to air in a scant two weeks, I'm sure this is just the beginning of "miner mania."
I mean, they've already got a shout-out on 30-Rock. I doubt we'll need to wait long to see what advertiser comes next.
Thanks in part to being incredibly clever, beautifully directed and timed, the Old Spice guy and his first commercial, “The Man Your Man Could Smell Like,” has gotten worldwide recognition. It also had plenty of airplay, including a whopping 16 million views on YouTube. And while I am sure you are all familiar with this character, I’d like to introduce you to these two guys.
Personally, I think @ohdoctah was funnier, but the Old Spice kid was so low-tech and earnest that you can’t help but like it. I mean, he made it to Ellen!
I wonder what the effect of the parody is on market share. It can only help, right? The two parody ads got 200,000 views and 500,000 views on YouTube, respectively, along with countless blog mentions and tweets adding to the conversation.
This article in AdAge calls @ohdoctah a “boon” to the company, and while it details the recent market trends in body products, doesn’t discuss whether the parody ultimately hurt or helped the campaign. In its entirety, the latest Old Spice campaign-- which includes the aforementioned television spot, additional commercials, as well as the social media experiment run by Old Spice featuring the Old Spice Guy -- made the Old Spice the number one, most-watched channel on YouTube and increased its site traffic by 300%.
But what if your idea is turned into something ridiculous? Or worse, is used to deliver a scathing attack on your ad’s approach?
Behold, the Honda “The Cog” ad and the spoof it spawned.
Will these two lanky sportsmen help sell Hondas? Probably not, but I got a kick out of it. Now observe when a parody is used to deliver a smackdown.
Original:
Spoof #1:
Spoof #2:
Spoof #3:
Ouch.
As part of an agency, it’s my job to deliver engaging, informative and (hopefully) entertaining messages for our clients to broadcast. If these ideas get some recognition and are subsequently spoofed, how can it be tracked, if at all.
Does a happy audience equal happy shareholders? Whatever the analytics for Old Spice say, imitation is certainly one of the greatest forms of flattery. However, if your message hits a nerve with the wrong audience, it could also be hard to look at yourself through their eyes, and their subsequent YouTube response.
Recently, I had the experience of viewing an ad that took me back to my childhood. Not for being evocative of my particular experience but because the ad itself first aired in 1993, and I can recall it playing during Saturday morning cartoons. With some small updates, this spot has been given new life this Easter, and though its original broadcast was some 17 years ago, it's still fun, clever and relevant.
OK, so the production quality reeks of the day, but it still gives me a chuckle. And it raises a lot of questions. Did Cadbury intend on this ad running into the 21st century? And in today's ever-growing, consumer-focused, social-media-2.0-viral-digital-everything market, is there value in designing a "classic" ad, or should the imperative be about trends?
Personally, I love poring over issues of Communication Arts from the early to mid-90s because, while they might not be as flashy as today's ads (and of course, there's no social media component), the copy is BRILLIANT. The concepts are simple and powerful, and they're delivered with efficiency. It's what makes them remarkable, and therefore memorable.
So what of today's advertising will be remembered in 17 years (or 17 months, even) and what will be forgotten? Could this Cadbury spot still sell chocolate to my kids? Or will the next generation need more stimuli and a more personalized advertising experience to be compelled to buy?
Only time will tell, of course, but it's my belief that wit will forever trump flare, and frankly, Reese's Peanut Butter Cups always beats Cadbury Creme Eggs.
Similar to the parent who is asked, “Where do babies come from?” by a young child, many creatives struggle to come up a good answer when asked about the birth of ideas. Certainly the truth about each is more mysterious, complex and gruesome than “The stork brings them,” but rarely do we go out of our way to explain in full.
Generally, the process of idea generation gets little consideration from the client and their audience. They are far more concerned with increasing their bottom line and being entertained, respectively and justifiably. If the creative process is explained to the client at any point, it usually is described like this:
Read brief. Work on concepts and thumbnail sketches. Arrive at big idea.
Unfortunately, this is pretty much never the way things go. (Though if such an inspiring brief exists, it would probably get more exposure than this one.) The cold, hard truth is that there is no one winning formula. Sure, tackling a job well-informed with a comprehensive brief is necessary to understand the message you are trying to convey. And yes, there are methods of brainstorming out there, but truly great ideas usually materialize from the ether, sometimes at the oddest moments. In the shower. At the movies. Those quiet moments right before sleep.
Every creative carries the burden of not knowing where our next great idea will come from. Luckily, a common trait among our kind is the ability to pull inspiration from all around us. And as scary as not knowing when or where an idea will strike is, it means we are open to them coming at us from all over, from any source. It’s sort of liberating, really.
A better explanation of the creative process would read like this:
Read brief. Begin concepting. Gather CA's at your desk to look for inspiration. Surf stock photography sites looking for inspiration. Surf favorite food blogs looking for ideas for dinner. Meet friends for a drink. (Ok, a few drinks.) Unwind at home by watching Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 3 on DVD. Round out the evening with some Guitar Hero. Sleep on it. Grab some coffee on the way into work because today you are going to "nail it." Stare at your blank screen awash in fear of failure and coffee jitters. Go back to the CA's. Meet friend for lunch. Take notes on napkin during conversation about her ex (there's definitely something there). Back at office, review notes, brief and food blogs one more time... and PRESTO! Great idea!
Truly great ideas are born when your brain is able to unconsciously chew on the message and its audience. Sometimes you need a few sips of a stiff drink to get the mix right, sometimes it’s as easy as stepping away from the computer and taking a walk. Wherever they come from, creatives and clients should take comfort knowing that the well can’t really run dry. As the world shifts, societies expand and grow, and Guitar Hero continues to release special editions, we’ll always have something to inspire a good idea.
Most ADDY stories revolve around excess: drinking, testosterone, bravado. Ours is one of redemption.
After nary an award last year, I convinced myself that winning an ADDY didn’t mean much -- at least to the creatives like me, who get more joy from client approval than out of lucite.
Having never held a professional award in my hand, I theorized that nothing could feel better than hearing back from clients that they love your idea. The sweet relief of an ad (finally) going to print or airing on TV. The validation that comes when a campaign works to grow the client’s business.
These things are so much more important than awards because they get to what we do – harnessing our creative abilities to solve business problems and make a difference.
While I still think the greater rush is seeing one of our billboards or hearing positive feedback from a client, there's something to be said for having your company’s name trumpeted along with the names of your peers on ADDY night.
An ADDY isn't all-important, but it helps to have something heavy in your hand when your battling the competition. Last Saturday, we finally got our propers. And you know what? It feels pretty darn good.
