Monday, February 23, 2009
1. The support ad they use on TV is so annoying. It starts out as idea no 128, or whatever it is. But I never see any other ideas. And it's bad, oh so bad. The concept is that "Doritos" should change the name to "dorito" because that's what happens to people's names in Australia- ben = benno, deb = debo, rob = robbo, etc. And the guy says the names in that dumb guy moaning way. Painful. Especially when it's on all the time.
2. The ad is on everything. I feel like there is no targeting, no nothing. I seem to have experienced a frequency of 7+ and the competition ends in May. Where are the rest of the concepts kids? Do we have any other executions? I at least hope it's a 2 week on, 2 week off campaign. Maybe do some 15s too, unless this one is already a 15, but it feels bloody long.
3. I can't even post the video of the ad because it's no where to be found. Doritos, you want every person who enters the contest to post the doritos branding across the web, but you can't even post your own ad for posting?! A disconnect.
And I knew I forgot something yesterday....Pizza Hut/Pasta Hut. The ad where the chef comes out in an actual restaurant and says all the food came from Pizza Hut. The Australian ad is a total rip off of the American version.
I don't know what to think. The ad appears to be making its way round the world. The burger king version of this type of thing was so much better.
I also know most Americans eat plastic so they don't know what good food tastes like. Restaurants often serve processed crap and people somehow enjoy eating it, as long as they're ingesting. So for the chef to say the food has come from Pizza Hut isn't such a big deal.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Except, there is no superbowl here for the ad to run in. Looks like we have to resort to a national spot buy.
We all know how the US version went down. The prize money for starters, was a cool million. There weren't that many submissions. 2,000 for the third year running out of 320 million people. That was their best participation rate yet. I'd be surprised if we get more than 300 in the A.U.
And why do I need to see repeats of the same campaign? It's a little insulting- we don't live with closed domains anymore. The internet is global! I just watched the oscars live through my tinternet (thank you justin.tv).
This Doritos thing is a travesty. It's like the bloody christmas card office elves- been going for 3 years with some small changes each year. It gets boring after a while. But now Doritos decides they have a good thing going and just tap it into other markets. They even include a worksheet demonstrating how you can distribute your ad to get more people to vote for it. It's sad that most of the population is dumb, and they'll do it without realising that if the brand wanted to distribute content, it would actually cost a lot of time and money. Doesn't anyone else think it's mean to ask people to do all the work? I feel a consumer backlash and backfire is upon us.
In retaliation, i'm thinking of submitting the equivalent australian versions of the ads that have won (and here). Where is the originality, I ask? This has been going on too long. It's extortion. Leave people be. And don't creatives have a problem with this?! It just proves that anyone can be a creative. Shouldn't they be putting a stop to the consumers taking away their livelihood?
this is just a nice song.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
It looks like they gave Boing boing a wad of cash, free reign to do anything with content creation around the chip (it is a chip isn't it?), make it a couple of episodes long and all video content over the month is endorsed only by cheetos. Sweet.
And it's lovely. It's a nice bit of content. And I love that the writers say what it is, clearly, and say how much they loved the process of creating the pieces. With the inclusion of the associated adventures.
So cheetos I hereby salute you and distribute you!
Episode 2 is here
Ep 3 here.
And now...all this stuff has come to light regarding bloggers who have been endorsing brands without disclosing that it's cash for comment. Pretty despicable stuff. Mr Tim Burrowes at Mumbrella has the exposé. It's pretty shit as this Cheetos example proves how positive open endorsement is. The other kind just leads to bad place for everyone. What I like to call a lose-lose-lose situation. Blogger loses, brand loses and the reader loses. Their trust in the blog is pretty much destroyed. It's a hard struggle to regain your integrity after cash for comment is discovered. Just ask John Laws. Not pretty.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
For example- have you seen the Wrestler yet? If you haven't, you really should. It is a great flick. my most recent analogy, that I've also applied to Gran Torino, is that it's like a well cooked dish. Simple, not overly complicated, but cooked to perfection with great writing and an easy to follow story arc. Tom Colicchio would be v.happy with this analogy, because I certainly learned it from Top Chef.
Now, there is this video. Applying the themes from the Wrestler to Uncle Sam. Glorious. I love Alyssa Milano, she is great.
Then a band called "This bike is a pipe bomb", shut down an airport in Memphis. It's because they have stickers and someone put the band's sticker on their bike and left it unattended the airport. Funny. Although they may face charges, not so funny. It's not their fault that anal retentives aren't up to date with their punk band news! Story is here.
And my most favourite is the bacolicio.us. Being of the chosen people and never having eaten bacon, this is most fun. I get to graffiti all my favourite pages with bacon. I did the kosher site in Sydney and I thought my mum would protest, but she bloody loved it. See, eveyone loves a bit of bacon.
Monday, February 16, 2009
"You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof." and this was just added...
"You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content."
Oy ge valt
Where the fuck are you?
Your dream and hope for happy families is going down the toilet. I'm sure now you're more keen on the mula, but you won't have much left in the long term if you continue in this fashion and if you keep losing law suits. Hear about that? It was pretty hush hush until the law firm leaked it- they gave ConnectU, the almost hottish twins, $65Million! Looks like there was truth to the accusations after all.
But- all those commenters who announce they would be voting with their feet is bogus. The ability to cut the connection where all your friends reside is near impossible. People now rely too heavily on the medium- for photos, email, events, short messaging and of course birthday reminders. If you do cut yourself off, you really find yourself out of the loop. The only way that's going to happen is if something else opens up with the right new features, options and accessibility and that won't happen till web 3.0 comes along.
It's a shame that FB started out so strong, so open. I'm not sure you'll find a drop in user numbers, but there will certainly be a drop in content uploads. Keep bringing on the controversy, I is a loving it.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
I've mention my observation that the only useful things that remain are walls, photos and events.
I've expressed great concern at facebook becoming stalkbook and many people have told me this is not the case and perhaps I should keep my opinions to myself. Wow. This is MY blog after all.
And then recently I noticed why some are so keen to publicise and others are not. It's because some individuals view Facebook as their own personal mini gossip magazine. A la People, NW, New Idea, etc. They check in every day, sometimes several, to see what the latest goings-on are. They and their apparent celebrity social circle publicise all their comings and goings, their paparazzi shots, they announce personal information and they have to keep active to stay top of mind. Just like all those fabulous celebrities out there who spin the PR machine.
This has been demonstrated by certain well known instances:
a) The premature change of relationship status when either in or not in a relationship. This is often followed with question and concern for the individual of what has happened. Then usually dealt with through taking the heat and rectifying with an appropriate press release or correction of said information.
b) A very bad, compromising photo of yourself is tagged on the FB. You promptly de-tag and request said photo to be removed with a cease and desist email to your mate.
c) Some 'tard writes something on your wall, which is private or not for public knowledge. Cat is now out of the bag. Comment is promptly deleted and all questions sent through email are handled by your press agent.
And this weekend, I was told of an interesting tale. A young chap and his lady decided to call it quits after 5 years. Prior to changing his facebook relationship status, he decided to email his friends and let them know of the impending relationship change. Once all parties had acknowledged the email (someone even replied with a "Boo Hoo", funny, but not the point), he changed his status, officially.
Now- this is not normal behaviour for a person in common society. Who sends a press release prior to doing something on facebook? See! The thing has changed people, it has messed with how they operate in a daily fashion. It is not normal to feel the need to send press releases to your friends before you change or do something on the Facebook.
People think they're always watched, monitored and spoken about. People feel the need to update and create 'stories' so that they stay and active member within the space and spin their wheel into overtime. No! Stop! Step back into the reality. Because otherwise, Facebook pages will end up looking like the below.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Now, the venue is seeking to reach a wider audience through enhanced usability, helping new visitors quickly learn the ropes and enticing them to probe more deeply once they've become acclimated. Second Life's first attempt to accomplish these goals is a new home page that's already generated big bumps in exploration once users are "in world," according to the company.
Ish Don't Think So
Yawn, blah, big deal. I don't think this is realistic. I was showing someone this video yesterday and thinking, yeah maybe the social network players and their dynamic has changed a little- and that's only really between Facebook and MySpace. But then again, it hasn't really, we're only more sure of who is more capable of making revenue and who is better at fostering strong communities.
For Second Life to think that they can again re enter and stake a claim, only a year or so after its apparent demise (as declared by the greater public) is a little ridiculous. People still aren't ready. It's premature.
And I'm sorry, but the stat in the article detailing that users spend more time in the world is only half the picture. Face it, only nerds use the fucking thing, and more of it. They don't have a life so they go online and find one. Not just that, but they also finally get that virtual root that they've been waiting for their whole life. Fantastic.
The best thing about Second Life is this photo exhibit about people and their avatars. There is the proof to the pudding. This is your Second Life audience. Normal people won't touch it with a ten foot pole.
NAME Lucas Shaw BORN 1985 OCCUPATION Student LOCATION Texas AVATAR NAME Gaenank AVATAR CREATED 2003 HOURS PER WEEK IN-GAME 55
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Huh? That's not why, it's because of that god awful goatee and that weird thing he does with his jaw
I hope I don't get done like that guy who said that model is a slut. But would you trust ANYONE with a goatee of that nature? Goatees are just incorrect. They should be banned.
And no one should ever let Michael Phelps talk. Ever seen that weird thing he does with his jaw? Or even how he talks? This is David Beckham syndrome- let him perform, but do not let him open his mouth. Under any circumstance. At least Mr Beckham is easy on the eye.
Davie Brown index? Should this not be amended to David Bowie index? I keep thinking it is David Bowie every time I read it.
However, I digress. This whole thing reeks of america's over excessive tendency to be too conservative. You watch their tv shows, their hubs of culture and these are brimming with promiscuity and overt ideas. Some kid takes a puff of a bong and the whole country goes nuts. It's only pot for crying out loud. Chill out. At least he didn't take a chunk out of Rihanna's nose like other people we know.
Mr Phelps is a greedy little shit in any case. $100Million in endorsement deals he wants. Get back on that drawing board bucko, you got a lot of work to do.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
I'm hoping you'll be part of something special here at MediaPost. We’re putting together a new ad campaign to promote our newsletters, and I’d love to feature you.
The campaign centers on our readers. We’re looking to profile MediaPost members like yourself – to show the high-level quality of subscribers to our newsletters. You'd be perfect for one of our ads.
We’re in the early stages, but we’re moving very quickly. If you’re interested, I’d be looking for the following…
* A photo of you
* Your title
* A short testimonial about your favorite MediaPost Newsletter (Media Daily News, Email Insider, Online Media Daily, TV Watch, etc.)
Feel free to reply to this email with your info.
Director of Marketing
1140 Broadway, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10001
McEvil? Are you joking me? (apparently the y is silent)
I feel so special. So singled out.
The sign of a mass communiqué - no phone number dood. I'm the kind of person who prefers phone over email. Let's you fire some quick questions and clarify those answers in double time. Much more efficient.
Still, can't wait to see the swarms of bloggers desperate for the self promotion. They'll find a way to wrangle their URL into the piece.
Thanks Rob. Keep 'em coming.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
And I'll show what's wrong with both of these "things"
I'm scared. Scared for my privacy, scared for the simple act of doing something without anyone knowing. Scared that I will no longer be able to tell my real life friends "Hey, guess what I did today?", because they'll know because they would have looked at my Facebook profile and seen what I was doing that day.
This is too much, we're getting too connected in the bad way. The potential-for-stalking way.
This thing does have a place, and it's got to do with buying shite:
Step 1: You sign up to a list which tells you when/where you get discounts
Step 2: You choose your interests and preferences for categories that you want discounts for
Step 3: When you're out, the discount site uses the GPS in your phone to tell you "hey dood, there is a discount for chocolate salty balls 25m from where your standing right now. Show them this barcode to receive 15% off"
Step 4: And if credit card providers are smart, they'll jump on now, create alliances with certain stores and if you are a holder of credit card X, you are eligible to receive discounts from all of X's partners which X coordinates. Sweet, hey?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
(For those who aren't familiar, stories here and here)
Before we even get there, let's just say regardless of what was effective, what wasn't, it was lowly. A bad idea and a bad execution. And frankly, I expect more from any agency, especially one that apparently focuses on communications. I've learned from Top Chef, if the food is bad you don't send it out. It's not worth the aftermath or the ensuing damage. Same with a bad idea, if you think it's bad, stop, regroup, reassess. It was pov. Full stop.
So. My right hemisphere tells me there was a strategy, a strategy involving what we saw- girl, girl finds jackets and so on and so forth (to be honest, I didn't fucking watch it. I wasn't going to put myself past the first 5 seconds). And it was seeded. Seeded by a seeding company. There was all that we saw, but then, then there was more.
There was to be some Witchery involvement. Witchery would perk up and shout from their vantage point "let us participate, we can help you find your guy". They would then help cast/find the guy or some other fucked up idea like that.
I had been thinking that the story we saw, as a total, seemed to be unfinished. The girl component that we saw seemed half done. It felt like something was incomplete. That's the other reason why it doesn't add up. But now, now we have steps, we have legs, we have a process. This is no accident of campaign. We have seen a fraction of what was expected before the plug was pulled.
The problem here, and why we only saw a quarter of what we were meant to see- It went out with too much of a bang. Got into the mainstream too quickly. Best way to do something like this is to start small, in the underground and by the time you get to this man element, ie when the brand is involved, that's when you're mainstream. It means less hurt to the public or the media commentators because by this stage, we're all well aware of the cleverness and ingenuity of the brand involved. And yes, i'll enjoy my hindsight from where I sit, far away from the culprits, thank you very much. It wasn't me who got burned.
Then I happen to feel that this Numbers story, that was presented as an independent study, is one of no independence. It has been conducted by a friend of someone at Naked, a friend's neighbour's doctor's brother's sister. Someone with a connection. Either way, the licentiousness reeks. Plus as a kind sir whispered in my ear, over cigarettes and candy, for the study the qualifier was men interested in fashion. What about the male fashion disasters out there? Are they any the wiser to witchery and a jacket? I therefore question the integrity of the people asked to be in the study.
These are the details I remember, the sugar cloud of candy combined with nicotine, made me light headed and fairly whimsical at this point.
So go on, I'm ready for attack. I don't mind. I've upheld my imaginary truth, revealed the sham of this outfit, which is what has been suspected repeatedly and I'm happy some order has been restored.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
1. The battleground for both consumers and ideas is online
2. The permanent dialogue has begun.
3. Consumer expectations will change.
4. You'll need an active, authentic voice in the conversation.
I'm sorry? Where have you been Pete? This is what we've all been trying to do for months!
This is old hat. This reminds me of the time that a home and garden division of a magazine publisher, came in to present groundbreaking research. Groundbreaking as in: as families get larger they up scale and upsize. As newer technology for the home comes out, people purchase.
We've seen all this shite before dood. We've known it for a very long time, and if you're only figuring it out now, you have problems. Well you admitted to voting McCain, that's already pretty big.
The only thing Mr Obama did, was show marketers that you can do this, you can use the technology and see positive results. And as my former colleague Mr Monté says in his feisty comment, Obama lacked interaction and responsiveness. At least Malcolm Turnbull and Kevin Rudd have learned in Oz.
I still can't believe this Snyder chap writes that consumers have changed like it just happened. Forget that and try catch up. Consumers are now 10 steps ahead of marketers. They know the dance and if you aren't working out ways to woo them with new methods and tech, you are absolutely up poo-creek with no paddle to speak of.
Please, someone direct me to the porcelain bus
Oh my. The article has absolutely NOTHING to say. MySpace appears to be the winner by splashing its ad wares over its site- but that is what it's there for. The audience responds or doesn't mind it and that's the way it goes. They're just blatant and that's all there is to it.
FB on the other hand- well they appear your friendly, not into the whole ad thing, people for people type thing and they're suffering for it. I actually believe that advertising may not be the way to make money on the platform. I think it may be usage fees. Something nominal like an annual fee of $20 for all the features and then a free plan for the basics.
It's not just because I hate the fucker, or because the thing is poison and ruining socialising in reality. It's because advertising is not the way on Facebook, they've made that bed with hospital style corners and now must lie in it.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
It's an interactive game on YouTube. Each click sends you to a different round in the game. And the commentary is oh-so-funny. Freaking awesome.
Not that games aren't new or anything, and video interactivy is old hat. But I don't know of anyone who has looked at the two together in this way. Marketers have only looked at including product clicks in video. Lame. Boring.
This is a great way to create interactivity with TV. Besides, the game is addictive, and the potential is huge
You let this cat of the bag, to the mainstream public, and you're going to have a problem on your hands. No one wants more ads. Not even the ad execs. I'll sit them through ads, Clockwork Orange style and see how they like it.
I think I speak for all of us when I say that 'spots' are irritating and a thing of the past. And what do most people do when the ads start playing online? They go to another tab in their internet browser. A total waste of money and time for advertisers. The 30 second is dead, get used to it. Find other ways to spruik your wares. Ways that consumers will respond to in a positive fashion, rather than simply tolerate.