We live in a world full of marketing clutter. Consumers see approximately 6000 advertisements every day. Whether a small company or a large organisation no one will argue that getting consumers’ attention is a monumental task.
As companies struggle to differentiate themselves from their competitors, they also have the added pressure of consumers consciously avoiding marketing activity. The unrelenting truth is that if the products/services, brand, or company does not get notice, it will eventually cease to exist. So, the ultimate question is: how does a company get noticed?
While a number of techniques may be applied in order to increase product and brand visibility, nothing is as efficient and cost effective as creative cut through marketing. Companies performing great creative cut through marketing, such as, ING, Cadburys, Mars, and KFC have embraced very clever and imaginative advertising and marketing campaigns over the past 2 years.
However, is this creative cut-through marketing enough and is this kind of marketing all it takes to enhance consumer awareness? Unfortunately, creativity alone will never be enough to cut through enormous clutter and sell a product/service and brand.
What separates ING, Cadbury’s, Mars, KFC from many other companies is not only their brand equity, products and services, and huge marketing budgets but also their strategic communication.
To create a fun, crazy, and cheeky campaign without communicating product/service features, consumer benefits, and brand culture and character is easy. But trying to combine the two is the real challenge that marketers face when it’s time to launch a new campaign; without the correct communication, it’ absolutely useless to engage in any form of marketing.
Take ING as an example. Their latest marketing campaign features a talking orangutan who projects the same attitudes and perceptions as generation Y consumers. The message is simple, but very effective: don’t stress, don’t worry, watch your money grow, and relax while it does. This message resonates with the target market. What’s more, the brand’s highly visible. Love it or hate it, you’ll certainly notice it.
So, while these companies are imaginative with their creativity and cut through material, they still infuse their advertisements with a clear and thoughtful message that they know must be communicated to the public in order to have maximum effect. Thus, great creative cuts through the clutter while effective communication makes it very clear what’s on offer; both are of equal importance.
In today’s very competitive environment, companies realize they must engage consumers with clever and entertaining advertising. And let’s face it, if advertising is a part of our everyday lives then why should any of us have to endure boring advertising? Conversely, using fantastic creative with a message that’s jumbled looks ridiculous. In other words, use the ape but get the communications right too!
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Friday, August 27, 2010
Who can dislike Word-of-Mouth Marketing (WOMM)?
There is no doubt that WOMM can be extremely effective, as well as fun, for marketers! WOMM encompasses a range of subcategories, such as: buzz, blog, viral, grassroots, cause influencers and social media marketing, ambassador programs, consumer-generated media, as well as other key mediums.
WOMM is the fastest medium in the world in terms of getting the message to the people, and due to its personal nature it’s more trusted than any other form of promotional method.
One of the latest WOMM campaigns to really catch my attention was launched by Pixar in preparation for Toy Story 3. The company essentially launched a campaign in the form of a series of fake, retro-styled commercials which were supposed to be from 1983, advertising Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear (see on YouTube), a new addition to the Toy Story cast; however, beware, this is a fake!
What makes this campaign even more fascinating is that it was posted on YouTube by Mr Crazycommercials (Not Pixar), a YouTube user that has uploaded seventeen (real) classic 1980s commercials. In addition, to make the commercial even more realistic, another user posted a Japanese version of the ad which had a comment that read: “vaguely remembered this toy from when I was living in Japan back in the day—got this off from one of my old VHS tapes I used to record off the TV with.”
So, what makes this campaign so unique? Well firstly, it targets late generation X and early generation Y using nostalgia as the advertisements really feel like 1980’s ads. Secondly, and probably most important of all, these ads do not mention Pixar, Toy Story 3, or any other character in the movie; however, they still achieved “buzz” and excitement before the release of the movie.
This specific campaign shows that it is possible to make communicating to a mass audience creative and fun. However, was this campaign successful? Well, the Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear English video currently has over 1 million hits while the Japanese version has over 250,000 hits, so I would personally say that it was a success.
Marketers and advertisers have long known key advantages delivered by WOMM, such as: trust; efficiency; low cost; ability to rapidly increase market share and brand awareness; and, theoretically, it’s the most powerful promotional tool available. What is its biggest drawback? Lack of control. While marketers may control most other mediums, WOMM is dependent on people, making it a much riskier medium.
Conclusions... no pain no gain! Sometimes risks are worth taking.
WOMM is the fastest medium in the world in terms of getting the message to the people, and due to its personal nature it’s more trusted than any other form of promotional method.
One of the latest WOMM campaigns to really catch my attention was launched by Pixar in preparation for Toy Story 3. The company essentially launched a campaign in the form of a series of fake, retro-styled commercials which were supposed to be from 1983, advertising Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear (see on YouTube), a new addition to the Toy Story cast; however, beware, this is a fake!
What makes this campaign even more fascinating is that it was posted on YouTube by Mr Crazycommercials (Not Pixar), a YouTube user that has uploaded seventeen (real) classic 1980s commercials. In addition, to make the commercial even more realistic, another user posted a Japanese version of the ad which had a comment that read: “vaguely remembered this toy from when I was living in Japan back in the day—got this off from one of my old VHS tapes I used to record off the TV with.”
So, what makes this campaign so unique? Well firstly, it targets late generation X and early generation Y using nostalgia as the advertisements really feel like 1980’s ads. Secondly, and probably most important of all, these ads do not mention Pixar, Toy Story 3, or any other character in the movie; however, they still achieved “buzz” and excitement before the release of the movie.
This specific campaign shows that it is possible to make communicating to a mass audience creative and fun. However, was this campaign successful? Well, the Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear English video currently has over 1 million hits while the Japanese version has over 250,000 hits, so I would personally say that it was a success.
Marketers and advertisers have long known key advantages delivered by WOMM, such as: trust; efficiency; low cost; ability to rapidly increase market share and brand awareness; and, theoretically, it’s the most powerful promotional tool available. What is its biggest drawback? Lack of control. While marketers may control most other mediums, WOMM is dependent on people, making it a much riskier medium.
Conclusions... no pain no gain! Sometimes risks are worth taking.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Rich Media: creative or just simply annoying?
For those who don’t know, Rich Media can be defined as advertisements that may contain animation, video, and audio in which consumers interact; however, many experts state that its definition is still very vague. While these advertisements are definitely more eye-catching than static online banners, is this type of advertisement creative or simply intrusive and annoying to online users?
From an advertising perspective, Rich Media is just another chance to gain brand and message recognition/awareness in a world full of clutter, thus creating a competitive advantage. Basically, Rich Media allows advertisers to gain communication strength by allowing them to communicate their messages through various media outlets, such as, animation, video, audio, and even apps and games. This opens the door to more innovative creative messages which grabs viewers’ attention.
In theory, consumer interaction creates more clicks which, in turn, creates faster brand and/or product awareness. Thus, experts argue that Rich Media, due to increased interaction, is a very powerful branding tool—viewers are more likely to recognise and remember the ad versus other traditional tools.
Disadvantages of Rich Media from an advertising perspective is that production is much more expensive and media placement costs are significantly higher (costs may triple!) Also, some argue that the intrusiveness of these types of advertisements may hurt the brand.
On the other hand, Rich Media employs emotional appeals (advertisements that stimulate ones emotions rather than practicality) and these emotional appeals are often very difficult to use in traditional two-dimensional forms of advertisements and online advertorials.
While these advantages are strong and make Rich Media into a very desirable medium to advertisers, how does the online consumer feel about this new type of advertisement, is it intrusive? Should you as the consumer have a say over what you see and hear while surfing?
From my own experience, Rich Media is extremely annoying and intrusive and I can never seem to get away from it. It also slows down my surfing: the page takes longer to load and may even block. However, as strange as it may seem I always remember these ads! I never click on them but I do remember them!
While it’s quite clear that Rich Media has some very strong advantages for advertisers, the issue may simply be that a lot of campaigns lack good strategic planning; advertisers (and media planners) may lack the know-how to implement this type of medium correctly. Therefore, it’s my opinion that while advertisers should always look for new creative ways of delivering messages, and should welcome new, innovative ways of targeting consumers, for example, social media, they should not do so in an obnoxious manner. However, that is not to say that Rich Media is always obnoxious and should not be used; it should just be used in the right way.
From an advertising perspective, Rich Media is just another chance to gain brand and message recognition/awareness in a world full of clutter, thus creating a competitive advantage. Basically, Rich Media allows advertisers to gain communication strength by allowing them to communicate their messages through various media outlets, such as, animation, video, audio, and even apps and games. This opens the door to more innovative creative messages which grabs viewers’ attention.
In theory, consumer interaction creates more clicks which, in turn, creates faster brand and/or product awareness. Thus, experts argue that Rich Media, due to increased interaction, is a very powerful branding tool—viewers are more likely to recognise and remember the ad versus other traditional tools.
Disadvantages of Rich Media from an advertising perspective is that production is much more expensive and media placement costs are significantly higher (costs may triple!) Also, some argue that the intrusiveness of these types of advertisements may hurt the brand.
On the other hand, Rich Media employs emotional appeals (advertisements that stimulate ones emotions rather than practicality) and these emotional appeals are often very difficult to use in traditional two-dimensional forms of advertisements and online advertorials.
While these advantages are strong and make Rich Media into a very desirable medium to advertisers, how does the online consumer feel about this new type of advertisement, is it intrusive? Should you as the consumer have a say over what you see and hear while surfing?
From my own experience, Rich Media is extremely annoying and intrusive and I can never seem to get away from it. It also slows down my surfing: the page takes longer to load and may even block. However, as strange as it may seem I always remember these ads! I never click on them but I do remember them!
While it’s quite clear that Rich Media has some very strong advantages for advertisers, the issue may simply be that a lot of campaigns lack good strategic planning; advertisers (and media planners) may lack the know-how to implement this type of medium correctly. Therefore, it’s my opinion that while advertisers should always look for new creative ways of delivering messages, and should welcome new, innovative ways of targeting consumers, for example, social media, they should not do so in an obnoxious manner. However, that is not to say that Rich Media is always obnoxious and should not be used; it should just be used in the right way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)