http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/26/news/companies/nike_hyperdunk_ads.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008072610

So Nike pulled these ads. They were causing controversy based on the fact that perhaps they’re insulting to the gay community.

If I were Nike, I would have handled this with a different type of damage control. Not only would I reiterate what these ads truly mean in the world of basketball, I would show support of the gay community through different promotions, relationships and opportunities.

I think that these ads have been taken completely out of context.Taking out any personal beliefs on this issue, Nike did have a responsibility to respond to this issue. I think that there should always be damage control. I do, however think that Nike did the wrong thing in pulling these ads.

Nike could have taken this as an opportunity to work on their relationship with the gay communities.

I think their decision to pull the ads was hasty and I think they didn’t put enough thought into the process. They were scared and the last thing that any organization wants is to have an entire community against you.

Simply put, I wouldn’t have pulled the ads. I would have given a press conference explaining the ads in their entirety, and then I would have taken the brand and immersed it in different support systems for the gay community. How about a gay athlete foundation? That may sound lame, but I think it gets my point across.

What do you think?

I think Ambush Marketing is great. It is all part of the game, and believe me, it is a game, and we all have to learn how to play. The article I’m referring, Ambush Marketing: Steals the Show, by Abram Sauer, has to do (in part) with the Olympics…appropriate, I thought! It talks about how basically, ambush marketers give the finger to the Olympic sponsors that pay millions upon millions of dollars to “officially” be part of the Olympic events.

It is a question of ethics, I suppose. I am just not sure how many people would render themselves ethical in light of an ambush marketing opportunity. It works, and it does so effectively.

“To become the official sponsor for the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Anheuser-Busch paid more than $50 million. In accordance with its agreement, it got all rights to use the word “Olympic” and the five-rings logo. Schirf Brewery, a local company, came up wtih “Wasuth Beers. The Unofficial Beer. 2002 Winter Games.” In accordance with copyright rules, Schirf had avoided using either the word “Olympics” or the five-ringed logo.”

AND

“Nike plastered the city (Atlanta) in billboards, handed out swoosh banners to wave at the competitions and erected an enormous Nike Center overlooking the stadium.”

Now, of course it is easy for me to say that Ambush marketing is part of the game, but that may be because I’ve never been on the other end of it. While there aren’t “laws” there are ethical limits and at times, Ambush Marketing definitley pushes them.

What would you do?

I honestly think I’d bite the bullet. There are many ways to reach our target. Not all are as effective as others, but there is usually more than one way. And, in the world of advertising – it is not called ambush marketing when a competitor reaches the target more effectively because they decided to run a TV commercial at a better time, is it? Same place – different time/location. When all the cards are down, technically that is all ambush marketers are doing.

Official Sponsors do have an easier, more expensive time at being successful through targeted advertising at large sporting events. However, there really shouldn’t be anything wrong with another player trying to get in the game. They’re playing in a different way- and I think the true problem is within the defeated minds.

All I am saying is that I wouldn’t write ambush marketing off until I’m put in that position. All situations are different, and this is definitley nothing to be “with” or “against” because there is a huge grey area.

As you may have guessed in my last post, I am not traditional media’s biggest fan. This is the kind of stuff I’m talking about:

- Advertisements in urinals

- Ad “scents” – filling a room or location with a “scent”

- Elevator Advertising

-Airport Security Advertising

It just makes sense to realize that the times, they are changing. People know they don’t have to watch commercials anymore, so they don’t. They know they can click “scan” in their cars, so they do. It is irresponsible, on a marketer’s behalf, to sit back and ignore everything that is going on in the world of today’s marketing.

Taken from the article inspiring this rant:

“Today’s consumers want their advertising to be relevant to their lives. Many of the old models of marketing have become obsolete. Yet never have the opportunities been so great, or diverse, for advertising. It is imperative to be hip, innovative, and contemporary. (In fact, it’s even more important than the product being advertised.)”

(you can find this article here:  http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/458743/shocking_nontraditional_advertising.html?page=2&cat=35)

What happens is this: Tell me the last time you saw someone sleeping on a bed in the middle of the airport? Exactly. It is buzz. Viral Marketing is non-traditional marketing and it stems from these outlandish concepts. You better believe that the next time you see someone sitting in a chair that has a bare “rear” on it, they’re going to be telling their friends. Then, they tell theirs and before you know it, it has gone viral. And in marketing, viral is a recipe for success.

Non-traditional media can be so many different things. It doesn’t have to be this outlandish, or it could be ten times worse! It is whatever you think will reach your consumers on their level. It is what you think you can do to make them understand and, ultimately want to talk about it, think about it, share it.

Check out this article, and some of the pictures I’ve posted below. These are some ideas of non-traditional advertising to help get some buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

If it were up to me, I’d allocate our client’s ad dollars 50/50 between traditional and non-traditional media.

Traditional is just that. It’s traditional, it is the chicken parm that nobody orders when they go out to a restaurant because they can “have it anywhere” – it is the regular margarita that is passed up because the strawberry is a little different. Or, maybe it’s the sitcom that is fast-forwarded because everyone knows “nobody sits through commercials anymore”.

It’s boring. It’s just there, and it’s there because it always has been and we all seem to think it always has to be that way. I honestly don’t think that is how it has to be anymore. With all of this new technology, is it really that absurd to think we could start getting our names out there a little bit differently? Please note that I didn’t say that I would rid any budget of traditional advertising. I simply think that it is possible to start using our imaginations a little bit instead of spending hopeful dollars on a t.v. spot we hope people didn’t skip through, walk to the kitchen during, or simply turn away from. Lets start using those creative minds of ours, after all – that is really what the marketing industry is about, isn’t it?

What IS neat about traditional media, is the relationship they are building with the new media. I’m sure it is safe to say that nearly every radio station has its own website. And I mean a big website. There are fan clubs, music videos, advertising opportunities, streaming radio, etc. and it is an excellent way to marry these two very different types of media. I do love this. It engages the listeners. It gives them a reason to go online to their website once they get out of their car, to drive them to not only have heard advertisers on the station, but now look at a completely different set of advertisers on the website. It’s very smart, and a lot of it is opt-in.

“Real” World Connection: In a meeting with one of the radio stations we work with, their Internet Specialist told us that they have a ridiculous amount of fan club members. I’m talking tens of thousands. These accounts are deleted if they are inactive for 6 months and are constantly being evaluated. These are opt-in participants. They are going to the website. They are taking surveys to earn points. This is how you reach customers. You go to their level and you invite.

You don’t scream at them to do something, you invite them. They’re opted in.

Traditional Media is necessary. I do believe that – but, only to a certain point. I think, if done correctly, it can be paired perfectly with another, non-traditional media to make a dangerous combination.

I was not in class last week – work got in the way. This doesn’t happen too often, as my boss is pretty understanding of the fact that I have school, but what a client wants, we give and it doesn’t matter when, what or how, you simply just do it. So, I’m looking forward to jumping back into things tomorrow!

We’re having an extended class to catch up on some missed work, and I’m not sure I ever though I’d say this, but I’m glad, because I really don’t like falling behind.

Steve and I are going to have the opportunity to discuss our final project for a while – we are putting together a marketing plan for the Buffalo Scavenger Hunt.

http://www.buffaloscavengerhunt.com/Hunt/Home.html

The Buffalo Scavenger Hunt is one of the coolest initiatives I’ve seen in a while! I know they are pretty popular, however I’ve never really looked into one too deep. This is great opportunity (as our final) because we get to utilize some of our event marketing skills. Sponsorships, Promotions, etc. It is all part of the IMC mix, and one that we haven’t been able to touch upon too much, until now – so this is a great opportunity!

Keep tuned for more information about our progress, and info. on the Buffalo Scavenger Hunt! Be sure to check out the website!

I’ve always had this problem. I don’t care what I’ve got going on, I always think I can do more. That’s not the case. What ends up happening is instead of doing 3 things very well, 5 things are done “good” enough – and “good” enough is well… good enough.

Work (which, you’re fooling yourself if you think is restricted to 9-5 M-F) School (which, you’re fooling yourself if you think it is restricted to Friday and Saturday) and “another” side/start-up job. So, there you have 24/7 filled. Lets not forget things that happen in between all of these, like a little thing I call, life.

So there you have it: my overly-dramatic explanation for not having posted recently! Keep tuning in, I’ll get a schedule figured out somehow.

The Limits of Market-Research Methods

Alison Dumas talks in this article about the oxymoron of the commonly used market research method “participant observation.” She drives home the idea that people today are more and more telling what other’s want to hear. This presents a huge problem for those who are trying to truly get to the bottom of one’s behavior. Even though focus groups, she argues are effective to a certain point, in order to truly understand a culture or a person, one must observe them throughout every minute of the day. Even then, she says, there is a huge problem. We stop. We stop after we’ve (market researchers) have recorded habits and trends, and that is a huge downfall. She continues to say that “Cultures need prodding to reveal themselves, and it’s not the type of prodding typically found in the moderators’ guides, where the goal is to get the consumer to answer our questions.” Enter, participation. Skilled participation is the “other half” without each other, neither, in her opinion would work.

Rather than sitting around and having a facilitator ask monotonous questions, trying to find an answer very simple questions that likely will provide no insight, it is important to find a “code”. Marketing guru, Clotaire Rapaille has long understood this problem. It doesn’t matter what people necessarily say. People are so savvy these days that verbal cues are most often always misleading. Rapaille, in an effort to break through this clutter, cracks the “culture code.” To Rapaille, there is a code for everything. Here is an excerpt from Rapaille’s Culture Code:

“I structured a three-hour session with each of the groups. In the first hour, I took on the persona of a visitor from another planet, someone who had never seen coffee before and had no idea how one “used” it. I asked for help understanding the product, believing their descriptions would give me insight into what they thought of it.

In the next hour, I had them sit on the floor like elementary school children and use scissors and a pile of magazines to make a collage of words about coffee. The goal here was to get them to tell me stories with these words that would offer me further clues.

In the third hour, I had participants lie on the floor with pillows. There was some hesitation among members of every group, but I convinced them I wasn’t entirely out of my mind. I put on soothing music and asked the participants to relax. What I was doing was calming their active brain waves, getting them to that tranquil point just before sleep. When they reached this state, I took them on a journey back from their adulthood, past their teenage years, to a time when they were very young. Once they arrived, I asked them to think again about coffee and to recall their earliest memory of it, the first time they consciously experienced it and, if it was different, their most significant memory of it.”

These are not usual focus groups, and it is because like Dumas, Rapaille understands that studying that pairing this very important observations method with the skilled participation is the recipe for success. Rapaille takes this understanding a step further to break the “code” to reach a certain culture.

Again, in our required reading – we read over a chapter that touched upon market research as a solid foundation to any IMC plan. In reading this, I was able to apply it to the “real” world of IMC and a certain client I am trying to pitch with the idea that in any situation, it is best to support a move by research, and to not move forward with anything until there is a solid, verified reason for doing so.

We have been brainstorming with this client and one of our radio stations. This certain radio station set up a couple of excellent brainstorming sessions with our client at which we were able to throw around some ideas- however, research didn’t seem to be too big of a concern for them. Why? Ultimately because they’re selling radio and aren’t truly concerned with whether or not they have adequate research (who can blame them, we’ve all got our agendas – and I’m not saying they’re wrong in doing this, because I don’t think they are.) But, it all came down to the meeting we had with our client outside of these brainstorming sessions. Yes, their (the radio station) ideas were solid – but, why would we move forward on a whim? Ad dollars are the first thing to be cut because they’re the easiest to blame. If two competitor stores went out of business and our client’s revenue increases, well hell – I’m sure the props will be given to advertising (even if that really isn’t what drew this new revenue) however if something just as disconnected from advertising happens, and the revenue drops – again advertising is the focus and ultimately to blame. It is just the way people think. Someone running a business doesn’t want to worry about advertising, they want their internal, agency or contracted marketing professionals to – however, the second something wrong happens – it is advertising’s fault. It is something with which we’ve been tainted with forever, and unfortunately will always be. Off subject.

Back to my point in regards to market research. Our client wants to completely re-invent themselves. This doesn’t happen over night, and it surely doesn’t happen without solid research to ensure we’re moving into these uncharted waters cautiously. I’ve been pitching market research to this client for months now, and am proud to say we’re setting up a focus group within the next couple of weeks. My message: You cannot REACH these new potential consumers without KNOWING and UNDERSTANDING exactly what makes them tick. Sure, we could place their current commercial on a different station, but what is to say that the copy/feel/design of that commercial will appeal to their senses the way it did to the old primary target (soon to be secondary). Maybe it will! Maybe it won’t, but you sure as hell can’t waste a 500k budget on “assuming” it will – you can’t even spend a 500 dollar budget assuming, it is wasted time, money and effort – all recipe for disaster.

SO: We’re setting up a focus group – a qualitative form of market research, and in my opinon, one of the most successful techniques. The non-verbal cues say it all and any chance you have to have a round table discussion with a target you’re trying to reach, is a good thing. Maybe we will find out that our current advertising will work with a few small tweeks, but maybe we won’t – and we absolutely cannot afford the time, money and/or effort to find that out the hard way.

In our required textbook for the graduate class I’m taking, I read a small blurb, with a big space for error. In the small example given in the book, the author simply explains that Exxon Mobile fought with the idea of localizing, or globalizing their new IMC message. Ultimately, E.M. decided to go with a global approach. Globalization? From what I’ve learned, there aren’t too many cases, internationally, in which this would be a “good” idea. Things change from town to town, county to county, state to state and they absolutely change country to country. To side-step any problems, E.M. substituted actors in these commercial spots with those of the country’s decent. Now, don’t get me wrong – I really don’t have some affinity towards localization only, but I do feel as though globalization has to be very broad,  and in some, if not most, cases – that is very difficult. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against E.M. or anyone else who feels and who has proven that globalization is the right way to go, but in my opinion, I feel as though the best way to reach consumers is to speak to them in their language (not only literally, but in every sense of the word) and I feel that it is very hard to do that by implementing something across the board.