How Mad Men is doing it wrong.
August 26, 2008
Imagine this for a second.
You’re producing a very successful television show. You have a loyal following. You can’t open a magazine or newspaper, or read a blog, without seeing a pile of praise heaped on your show. Popularity is rising. Everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.
You’ve helped create something that’s difficult to make: a critically acclaimed television show that is receiving tons of public attention.
Everything’s looking good.
Now imagine that a group of fans hops on the Internet and starts emulating the characters in the show. They are true to the nuances of the program. They are gaining quite a following on their own, in fact, leading those who love the show to become even more involved during the six days in between new episodes. They are promoting your product in a fresh, original way.
Why would you sabotage that?
I’m not sure. Let’s ask the creators of Mad Men.
It’s no question that Mad Men, the AMC drama about advertising life at fictional 60s shop Sterling Cooper, has gained a big following. So it’s no surprise that, given this era of global online marketing, someone was bound to take the Mad Men idea and make it better. And they did – on Twitter, of all places. (What is Twitter? Watch this video.)
What this group has done is take the personalities of the main characters from Mad Men and created a series of online avatars. Acting out the parts. Furthering the behind the scenes identities of the characters. Being as completely true to the original concept as possible. Go ahead – ask them questions. They’ll answer in the way you’d expect the character to answer.
The only problem: they’re not AMC employees. Just fans. And now, AMC is forcing Twitter to suspend these accounts (via VentureBeat) due to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
I understand copyrights, and I get that AMC thinks they’re protecting their intellectual property. But this is fan fiction. This is like telling a group of Star Trek fans that they can no longer dress up as their favorite characters. Because that’s exactly what this is – it’s a group of fans dressing up, using an Internet avatar instead of a pair of pointed ears.
Even more, this is a golden opportunity; to create a cult following, to promote the television show in new ways. Don’t suspend them – heck, HIRE THEM. Give them a stipend to keep the banter up. Use them to your advantage. I’d guarantee that almost every one of them would accept some kind of payment for doing something they loved doing for free.
Because even though it isn’t an official series of accounts, the Mad Men doppelgangers are more than just fictitious slander magnets. They are an extension of the characters that many of us have grown to love. Fans of Mad Men get it. Those who aren’t fans are intrigued. Awareness is rising.
And for AMC, apparently, this is a bad thing. As if they don’t realize the public relations dream this could turn into to.
The goal in today’s marketing world is to be embraced by those who follow you. To be allowed into the precious circle of permission marketing. To gain feedback from those who know your product best. Business models are based on taking free publicity and working with it, not against it. Consumer generated content. Letting the people speak freely, feel comfortable and, in turn, become loyal.
In other words – before you rush to grab the lawyers, take a chance. See if the road bumps in your path can actually help you before tearing them down.
Read it out loud
July 25, 2008
Here’s a word of advice. Make sure you read your television and radio spot out loud.
Be extra careful. Because sometimes, things get by.
For example, whenever I hear Southwest Airlines commercials on the radio, I’m always confused. The fast paced nature of the spots and the quick radio read always garbles their new tagline. And I’m left wondering why Southwest would end every spot with “Please Don’t Fly With Us.”
(For the record, it’s “Fees Don’t Fly With Us.” A nice line, but poorly executed for radio.)
But that’s not nearly as bad as the most recent True North TV spot.
Seriously, was this a joke by a copywriter that no one caught? Was it a bet that made it past production?
Yeah. Nut Snacks. Maybe my mind’s in the gutter, but I can’t help but snicker every time I hear it. And I wonder how many people involved with the account, from production to placement, finally realized the error.
Read it out loud. Carefully. Then, have someone else read it. Out loud.
Lest you find yourself defending an extraordinary nut snack.
Faith in Sue
July 12, 2008
I went to Faith, SD, for a South Dakota Humanities Council meeting this weekend. They’re currently promoting the return of Sue, the most complete tyrannosaurus rex fossil ever found.
It’s a big deal for a little town. Fewer than 500 people call Faith “home.” And, due to their location in the northwest corner of the state, two hours from anywhere, it’s doubtful that many more people will call it “home” as the population shifts. It’s west of Pierre, north of Rapid City. It’s a beautiful drive, actually, highlighted with rolling hills and bluffs and, thanks to the heavy rain we’ve received, lush with vegetation.
Sue is a replica. Not the real dinosaur. They don’t disclose this. I guess they don’t need to.
Sue is impressive, but she’s just as impressive as any full skeleton fossil. For instance, the mammoth pits in Hot Springs. Or the dinosaurs on display at the School of Mines.
Sue is the only attraction in Faith, SD. It cost, reportedly, nearly $100 thousand dollars to bring it to town.
And, it’s reportedly not making that money up.
The entire display is fascinating. But is it worth it? Does this truly bring a new wrinkle to Faith? Will people veer off of their path to drive two hours out of their way (yes, that’s four hours total) to see a dinosaur? Especially in a dinosaur-heavy area of the country, where fossils are distributed throughout the state, scattered in nearly every direction.
It’s a neat homecoming. It’s a great exhibit. But it’s probably not going to pay off.
But let’s look at it this way. There’s a good chance at the beginning of this post you hadn’t ever heard of Faith. And I will guess that you’ve never even thought of going to Faith. Not in your wildest dreams.
Now? You’ve heard of it. You know what makes it famous. You might even travel to go see it. The seed has been planted. Because if you never ask for people to come see you, no one ever will.
Social Media in Plain English
May 30, 2008
We’re reaching a point in our industry where social media is starting to become more and more accepted by those Seth Godin classifies as the early majority - the people who are catching onto the trend because they’ve heard enough about it to put a little bit of trust into it. The value is at its highest. Everyone is scrambling to catch up.
But do newcomers really understand what the benefits of social media are?
If you find yourself needing to explain social media to the uninformed (or if you are still hazy on it yourself) CommonCraft has created an easy way to do it: Social Media in Plain English.
There. That was easy.
CommonCraft also has great videos explaining the relevance of blogs, social networking and, of course, my new favorite social networking tool, Twitter.
In Defense of Corporate Media’s Marketing…just this once
May 21, 2008
Is web 2.0 actually dividing us?
The Internet has provided us with an open market of ideas, contacts and experiences from around the globe. Or at least the opportunity to find them. But what was that saying about a horse to water?
Now, I love the idea of a global village. But there is a roadblock. It’s called “the constitutive other.”
Here’s one fine example of that being exploited. According to polls on voting habits and approval/disapproval ratings of incumbent representatives, Americas political rift has been splitting exponentially within the past few years.
Many scholars, media minds, politicos and culture watchers speculate that this fissure’s break really hit its speed with the establishment of the Fox News Channel. My argument to that would be perhaps NPR, or to a lesser degree, CNN were there first. The differences are political leanings and the tenacity at which they lean. But, before any of that there were AM radio pundits.
TV. Radio. That’s the old media. The new media is a wild stomping ground of opinions from the left, right and center (and some seemingly from outer space.) But how many people peruse the spectrum? Apparently, very few. As a Stanford study points out, the vast majority of people who follow old and new media get their news from few sources. Those sources being of one political bent or another. Furthermore, it seems that the bigger the issue, the more the source adherence.
So, who is to blame for people only wanting to hear one side of the story? Is it the corporations that own the media peddlers? I suppose one could say that, and many do.
But looking a little deeper points out why media venues go political. It makes marketing sense. So let’s string up the marketers!
Wait, one step deeper - if people weren’t buying, no one would sell. So, who do we direct our ire towards?
Ourselves, I guess. Dammit.
People like to hear what is within their view of the world.
Web 2.0, 3.0, etc, has a lot of promise ahead. It could be a road to a digital shangri-la. Now we just have to master our own nature.
If nothing else, we at least we have factcheck.org to help us sort things out.
We think.
May 15, 2008
Blogs, wikis, etc. They all allow us to participate in the sharing of ideas, a constant conversation that has proven to produce some pretty big results.
So what’s this century all about? Mass innovation. And this movie - promoting Charles Leadbeater’s new book We Think - sums it all up pretty nicely.
Fear the underdog
May 6, 2008
“You got no time for the messenger,
got no regard for the thing that you don’t understand,
you got no fear of the underdog,
that’s why you will not survive!”
– “The Underdog,” Spoon
Being the best is an honor and privilege.
It’s something you’ve gained through years of hard work and smart thinking. Being the best takes a keen marketing mind and a little bit of luck. It takes a different look at the industry – an expertise that no one else can offer.
But don’t forget. The best didn’t start that way. The best built themselves up from the bottom. The best overcame another “bests.” The best was once #2. And #3. And #10.
Now that you’ve made it, now that you’re at the top, the worst thing you can do is think you’re untouchable.
You’re not.
Because just like you were once a eager startup, or an unproven talent, or a free-thinking self-employed vendor, there are hundreds out there trying to outthink you. And they’ll surely outthink you, my friends.
If you let them.
Never stop asking for the business. Never stop thinking. Keep improving. Think five years ahead. Anticipate trends and create marketing with the future in mind. Solidify your brand and wipe out weaknesses.
Stay relevant. Embrace change. Take risks. Be willing to accept that the industry – whatever industry that may be – is always moving ahead.
If you stay stagnant, you can bet the gap will start narrowing. And once your competitors have momentum on their side, they’re difficult to stop.
Always fear the underdog. It’s the only way to survive.
Benefit over matter
April 22, 2008
We’ve all done it before, usually out of necessity.
We’ve created ads that are jam packed with information. We just start plugging things in. This element has to be there. That element cannot be taken out. My boss will freak if she doesn’t see the logo a little bigger. Here’s a list of features to add. And we have a special promotion that needs to be included. Don’t forget the Web site, both phone numbers, our seventeen locations and the names of each of our managers.
And by the way, the ad needs to be a little smaller.
It happens all the time. Each company has a lot to say in a very small space. But when it comes down to it, how much of it is necessary?
At a recent SDAF luncheon, Steve Lance of Unconventional Wisdom talked about how often advertising and marketing is driven by a list of features that the reader is expected to extrapolate into a perceived benefit. Really, Steve says, it should be the other way around. The benefit should be front and center. The details can come later.
What are you going to promote? A vehicle’s 3rd Generation Swiss-Engineered Classically Mounted ABS Brakes? Or a vehicle’s unprecedented safety (which, coincidentally, happens to be due to those aforementioned brakes).
Imagine your typical cable television remote. Of the 75 buttons featured, only about 10 of them really matter. Channel up and down, volume up and down, power and, to a lesser extent, the guide and record buttons. Take the rest of the buttons off and you’ve got a sleek, easy to use interface.
You know, like an iPod – the single most popular electronic device of this generation.
Your message could be the same. Why mention every single product feature when your audience really just wants to know why they should care? Pare it back, wow them with some blistering creative, create an image in their mind, tell a story in ten words or less and drive them to get more information on their time, not yours.
A vehicle’s safety is going to create a stronger emotional tie than the brand of ABS brakes being used. A music device’s style and functionality is going to create more of a buzz than FM capability, multi-colored moving display, optional earphones and side-impact airbags. (Oops. Got my feature set confused).
Why make things so complicated when all you need to do is leave a lasting impression?
How? Or Why?
March 6, 2007
Something that keeps coming up in my life – how do you balance the “how” with the “why?”
In other words, what’s the point of winning awards if the message doesn’t help the client?
At this point, early in my advertising career, I still feel the allure of awards – of winning Addys and of qualifying for Cleos down the line. I want to make a name for myself my company and my clients. I want everyone to know that I work for the best agency in town and that I work for the most fun clients around. I want to be number one. It’s only natural. I love sports. I love competition. I was made for winning trophies.
Agency-land is filled with this. It’s good to have your work recognized, to be seen as the best advertising and marketing agency in the city. We won a good number of Addys this past year – not the most in the city, but enough to feel vindicated. It helps boost the self esteem. It shows that we can be flashy, creative, clever. We know HOW to create.
The struggle is when to leave that behind in order to create something functional – to realize the limits of what we can do. Creating a killer television spot that wins lots of awards is nice. But if it doesn’t connect the product to the audience, it’s all for naught. It’s wasted money. The How has been done to perfection – slick production, hilarious idea, clients willing to take a risk. But the Why hasn’t been researched.
At HenkinSchultz, we talk a lot about the Why. It’s the reasoning behind a message; the purpose for a design. It’s weighing the benefits of raising some awareness vs. the cost of the production. We know how a message can be created, but we focus on why that message needs to be created, and why the consumer is supposed to care. It’s the difference between clever advertising and smart marketing. The two can overlap. But one can’t survive without the other.
So I find my mind split, oftentimes – I want a project to be uber-creative, cutting edge, Addy-winning material; something I can hold up and say “Yes, I worked on this and Everybody Loves It and We RULE!” But I also want the client to come back and say “You know that postcard you created? It helped sell 80% more candy bars.”
I love creating fun products. The only thing that compares is creating functional, helpful products that work.
Many of us slip into this. We worry more about the beauty and cleverness – the How – the press and the glitz and the awards; all of them are important to raise an agency’s and a client’s esteem. But what we need to increasingly remember is, well, a shiny beer cooler may look pretty, may be collectable, may cause people to stop and stare, but if it doesn’t keep your beer cool, what good is it?
Focus on the How. But don’t forget about the Why.
Talent vs. Application
December 14, 2006
Each of us has some sort of talent deficiency. It’s true. I’d be willing to guess not one of us is perfect. If you claim you are, well, we’ve got other problems to talk about.
How do our talents define us. In other words, is it the talent we possess that drives who we are? Or is it what we do with whatever talents we’ve been given?
Many times in advertising and marketing, companies want to claim something they’re not. They want to be the biggest. The best. Everything they possibly can be, even if it’s not true.
But what happens when a customer finds out you’re not the best. That you’re not the biggest? There’s a disconnect. People are wary of believing advertising as it is, and a false marketing stand is visible from a mile away.
Instead, a good company – and a good marketing plan – accentuates the positives. And while this seems obvious, often times it’s not used in practice.
Don’t claim you’re the biggest if you’re not. Instead, focus on the things that no one else does. If you’re small, you’re probably using a better communication level. Things aren’t getting lost between people. You don’t have to worry about several layers of approvals. Things get done quicker. You know the community better. You know your customer because you’re on the same level.
These are competitive advantages. Use them.
Sure, we can’t all craft a perfect symphony. But maybe we can use our imaginations to break things apart in order to pull something together equally as important.
While we’re at it, maybe we’ll break through the clutter and succeed.
(The guy in the video can’t play drums or piano. But, by breaking each piece down and using his vast editing skills to work it back together, he created a pretty cool piece.)