And He Returns

Good Afternoon all.

It has been a long while since I have written on here, with work and life in general getting in the way I haven't really been able to write too much.

Now that I have been working in the world of Media and Advertising for nearing 18 months I will hopefully have a more insightful view on what is happening in this wonderful industry.

I want to post once a week, however what I write and how often will be dictated on the news out there, so I am sure some weeks will be busier than others.

Anyway, I am leaving for now and look out for some posts in the near future.

Cheers, Scottie

TV Advertising is Childs Play

Now all of the exitement of last week's Graduation has been swept away in the weekend storms, I had better get my gear together to continue hunting those hiding Job.

I do fear that I have been looking in the wrong direction. I have been looking for jobs in the Digital forest (A natural destination for this climate), at the media sales market (jobs here are the first to suffer but first to pick up when it gets warmer) and also sports marketing in North America (a separate breed of job all together). Where I need to be hunting is in the dreamy world of TV advertising - Either get chummy with those that own the space, or those agencies who farm the TV land for profit.

There are many that say the land of TV has been over cultivated, and less people are buying into the products and entertainment that it has to offer - People would rather go to the Internet Market, because it's cheaper for both producer and buyer, and it can be bought/consumed any time of the day.

However, the days are getting shorter, the nights are longer and the time spent on the sofa all cosy are becoming somewhat more frequent - Oh and it's that festive period of Christmas. I know that Christmas is a fantastic commercial period for most companies, and for all the media land who are there to promote what these companies have to offer, however I do fear that one has fallen into the trap in assuming TV has had it's day, no matter how good and relevant it still is - therefore ignoring it. Digital is all very exciting and there is a lot of focus there whether its graduates looking for jobs, or advertisers looking for cheaper, and more creative ways to attract audiences.

I think it is easy to do because it is comparatively Old Hat, but TV has to be the biggest commercial driver in the Christmas period- and this is why:

My neighbour's daughter is 10 years old, and whilst in the car talking about TV she said; "I don't watch that much TV really, but I have started to watch a lot more so I know what I want for Christmas".

huh? YES, I know, I couldn't believe it either - she watches more TV so she knows what she wants to buy. For both those who have studied and/or worked in advertising and marketing, to those who have not, this seems a bit too passive and 1970's to not take this statement with a pinch of salt. However I do believe there is a bigger picture behind it. The internet can be a dangerous place for adults and children a like - both what you can find on it, and those who use it. A probable reason for my neighbour not allowing her child to use the Ultimate Argos Catalogue that is 'The net'. Because of this limited access to the internet, TV and WOM is the main way for children to discover and discuss new toys.

The playground is their forum, it's just a shame that it isn't that accessible.

On that note I would like to wrap up this Christmas based blog and conclude that TV is still the point of call for kids who want toys - whether at Christmas or any other time of the year. It always has been and for the next couple of years, will be in the future. TV is as much NOW as digital is and I think we seem to forget that because digital and online are exciting and still growing and TV has become standard and even boring, no matter how good a job it does.

So an end to this ost, I will still endure the job search within digital, media sales and Ad agency as well as TV/traditional, because as we all know, the Future is Bright, the Future is Integrated. Good luck to you all in all your job searching endevours wherever you may be looking.

Cheers, Scott

King of Shave(ing adverts)

Limited now to only one hour a day of internet by MUM (aka, La Loser), I couldn't wait to get down to the library to write this piece, I'm that excited!

Shaving adverts have become highly predictable, unoriginal and ultimately boring. Gilette ship in their adverts from the continent and/or USA, with Wilkinson Sword additionally taking the L'oreal/cosmetic approach to the male grooming market. Advertisers seem to have fallen into the 'easy' trap of repeating the same as last campaign, or saving cash with importing: see below, crap. (I tried to find the lasted one where Tiger and Roger come out of the tv - but no luck)



As we ALL know, advertising is a fantastic opportunity to really make an impression on viewers about who we (advertiser) are and what we can do. We also know that advertising has different functions for different companies, and with this in mind, one effects the other.

As overall market leader in shaving products Gillette's main strategy is to prod and remind consumers that they are still number one - 'Don't forget we are your favourite'

Wilkinson Sword is Gillettes main rival and so their adverts seems to be a little better but still retain the old boring conventions.

This is where the King of Shaves come in. A seemingly new product in a highly well established market - they have a lot to tell, and a massive challenge ahead of them. It may seem like a risky challenge at face value but looking under the skin (or beard) you can see that is a nice move, and this is represented in their adverts.

The Big 2 are complacent at the top and this is something that is shown in their advertising - bland, safe and boring. They are happy reminding their audiences that they are the best - there really isn't that much to worry about. This complacency is a perfect opportunity to catch them off guard and to allow King of Shaves to make a decent impact in a very secure market.


Their position in the market is well represented by their advertising. For me it's fucking awesome. A completely fresh style which really makes an impact in the minds of the watchers. I know when I first saw it I was amazed in seeing somethging that wasn't the same drivel. But this is what they HAVE to do because otherwise they would not stand out from the Big 2.

Everything I am trying to say - Their position in the market, being new, their advertising is all summed up in their copy at the end of the advert "Bend the rules".

Yes, I know thet they are trying to attract a different type of shaver, a slightly younger audience who aren't necessarily metrosexuals - but the fact is that this is a breath of fresh air.

Everything else has delivered perfectly all they need to do is to deliver a good product which for me isn't at the focus of the brand - it's the new image of shaving.

I actually have one of these razors. I got a free one in my travel edition of FHM when going up to Middlesborough in Summer. . . and it's crap. It dodn't really do too much shaving - maybe because it was a freebee, but should do a decent job still. It didn't nip or cut me so thats a plus, and it may have taken longer to get a closer shave because my neck scarf was as long as it could possibly be without getting beaten up - I may even try it out again later today so don't let my personal account put you off.

Right im running out of time in the Library but I think this is a great ad and poisition for King, let me know your thoughts!

Cheers, Scottie

Vague look into the Future

With this post I want to take a quick peek into the future of advertising; the weird and wonderful new vehicles being finally put into practise and other advancements on what we already have.

1. The Video Advert in print media.

This is something I was supposed to write about a couple of months ago when it was new and fresh, but I can FINALLY put it into writing, what this has to offer to the future of advertising. The ads featured in LA based subscriber September 18th edition of Entertainment Weekly. You can see it here:


:

A question that I would like to see answered in the next year or so is if this is just a PR stunt to get air time rather than a genuine tool for advertising products. I don't know if it will become a legitimate medium in the future, but for now it is purely based on novelty. I am sure it cost a lot to implement so until it becomes very cheap it will not be used en mass but kept as a niche medium.

2. 3D Advertising

I have a friend, George who currently works at Can Communicate in Richmond, who are a leading company in 3D film. They have recently filmed the Queen in 3D as well as sporting events and anything else one may desire. This has made those brain cells of mine curious about the potentials for 3D Ads. This is something that has of course been done already. Dreamworks' Monters vs Aliens and PepsiCo featured in 3D during the last Superbowl. This was a Big Deal. 125 Million sets of the InTru 3D glasses were made and distributed. That is the only thing that is holding 3D advertising back; the coordination of glasses and making viewers WANT to watch these ads in 3D.

I think there is real potential in this market, however as it is, it just isn't practical enough for the viewers to watch it in their own homes on a regular basis. This is a very good thing though. 3D films are breaking through in regularity and are wowed at, however there is the possibility with over use. A POSSIBILITY. The best and most practical way to get audiences to view your 3D ad would be to;

1. Show it at 3D films or other 3D events that audiences are going to be watching

or

2. Make the advert something desirable to watch. With this I mean something either purely 'fucking amazing' or branded content - such as the BMW short films with Clive Owen. I personally see the future of 3D advertising as something of novelty and exclusivity - has to be kept desirable by excitement.





I may be completely wrong and 3D will become normal TV - 3D will be easily accessible and the basic requirement. This is just my idea of what will happen, I am sure you will have one or two of your own that will shoot me out of the water, but effect do you think technology outside of advertising will have on Adland, if any?

Cheers, Scott

Car Ads [review] spark discussion

I had this article passed onto me by a friend and colleague Phil Freddy Weinbergerson Pickering. As both our titles suggest (yes I did copy him), Cars Ads have sparked discussion, however I think William Jeanes' article is the one that is making the discussion boards.

If you can't be bothered to read the article I will sumarise it for you: William Jeanes suggests car advertising should be literal- detailing suspension or roof strength etc.

This is the opening excerpt (my italics):

Do we have yet another advertising scandal on our hands? A full-page four-color ad touting the tiny Smart car’s safety features appeared in the September 10 issue of USA Today. By way of illustrating the minuscule microcar’s muscularity, the ad included a photograph of a size Medium elephant standing on the roof of a Smart fortwo . . . There was a tiny problem with the elephant photo, however. If you thought the Smart’s body was strong, maybe you’d better have a look at its springs. The suspension is stiff enough to withstand the weight of an elephant without a bit of travel.

The Advert in question is this one:

Basically, this advert doesn't truely represent the effect of having an elephant standing on the roof, regarding the suspension and roof strength. The author is persuaded in thinking this is an issue and confusing for smart car buyers - but it's not.

I know there are crap adverts out there; some are misleading, boring, old fashioned and just cringeworthingly bad, you know the ones, that make you slap your forehead and flip the channel before you mum or partner asks if you were involved in 'that one'. The issue isn't conflicting ideas of a crap creative in a business sense because there are a number of shit ads out there. The issue is the creative essentials and expansion of reality that Jeanes feels does not see fit in a car ad.

Cars are high involvement goods and consumers need to know they are making the right decision, there needs to be an added extra value with a purchase. I as a consumer need to know that the car I am buying fits my lifestyle, represents me as a person in the correct way, and emotionally does what I want (that's what we are told anyway). That is why car adverts, and most others tend to communicate an ideology, a corporate image, an experience, a lifestyle and everything else that makes up a BRAND.

I am not naive enough to think that Jeanes doesn't understand this, because he is of course a consumer of goods and products, and isn't stupid. But he has got caught up in his 'AOL Editor' position though. He is receiving the advert not as a consumer but as a car buff, something he has failed to step away from in light of reviewing this ad. He is of course interested in the specifics and realities of the car (it is his job of course), and not the ideology and imagery that comes along in a consumer world.

But why is he reviewing the bloody advert, something that IS based on something he isn't interested in? It is like a camera engineer writing an article damning The Blair Witch Project to hell because of the step back in camera technology used in a major film (this is an example, so please don't flag me up on this!). Most people don't care or understand, or care TO understand all the technicalities of a car and that is why creative adverts appeal to the majority of people because it goes beyond what we already know; it goes forward and backwards and is safe, that's. As I said earlier, it tells me how it's going to fit my lifestyle and what it say about me. And as a result it makes a good viewing, unlike these two adverts - Ad 1, Ad 2 (although highly enjoyable adverts, but for all the wrong reasons, like laughing at the clichéd 'father wedding dance' anecdote. And yes, I know the 2nd is a spoof).

In light of the above, his article makes him seem like a moron or as a friend said, "a cretin" for advertising ignorance, a view shared by many other readers of his article, and I am sure the advertising nerds reading this. It may be a mistake because his POV is so, just for the sake of writing a critical text. A lot of the comments left are highly critical of what he has written mostly along the lines of "DUH, what do you expect from an advert - not realistic!". However he could be pulling one over, as the whole article could be a farce in order to drum up some user generated content on his page and just to hook people in. I don't know, but whatever it is, has got me thinking and writing on this sunny Sunday.

I would like to speculate - whatever the motivation of his article - and wonder what Mr Jeanes thought when he saw Fallon's creation for Skoda in "Cake".

"WAAAAIIIT a minute, I cannot buy a Skoda, what happens if it rains? or in summer time it will attract loads of bees, and ill be replacing the fanbelt every trip. I am NOT going into a candy shop to patch up my car . . . and neither should you. And if I crash, Ill get gum in my eye brows"

I am being silly, I know, but one can't help but wander.

Cheers, Scott

Political Face-off

The Broadcaster Sky is trying to gain signatures to push the leaders of the main three political parties to participate in an American-esque debating face-off. The Head of Sky News John Ryley, has written letters to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Tory leader David Cameron and Nick Clegg, Leader of the Lib Dems putting forward the live televised debate can help restore the lost of faith in politics. It is a proposed move to re-engage voters around the time of the General Election.

This will be the first time a political debate between British leaders is broadcast live on TV giving voters the opportunity to have their questions heard and answered by the top brass. So far Cameron and Clegg have agreed with enthusiasm with the latter stating he would “relish the opportunity” to go against his opponents.


I do feel that Sky have looked at our cousins across the waters and seen the enthusiasm, the hype and interest of everyone that is brought by the election period, and thought it would be a great idea to import the same techniques to get British audiences ‘re-engaged’.
However it is obvious that Sky is consciously naive of the effect it will have on ‘actual engagement’ for the purpose of commercial gain.


I shall explain to you by what I mean by ‘actual engagement’. The hype and excitement that surrounds American elections is caused by media and Spin Doctors. There is extensive advertising, PR in the form of television debates, the use of Youtube, Twitter and Facebook and rallies. Voters become highly familiar with the politicians, their lives and the slogans they promote. As a result there is massive turn-out and everything looks like a success. The country is officially more democratic, there is a voting and political culture and it gives people something to look forward to more than a leap year. These are all positive and desirable attributes for any nation to have however this has been slightly ill-defined as political engagement. Yes, voters are more engaged, but it’s not in the politics; it’s in the celebrity politicians, the gossip and emotional connections voters have with politicians. Looking at this you can see what I mean of ‘actual engagement’; engagement in policies or the political process. Voters are no more informed of policies than they are about how often Gordon Brown changes his pants. (It wouldn’t surprise me if they did know the latter).


So this is why I say Sky’s proposal is ‘consciously naive’, because it’s highly predictable that this TV face-off will end up like PMQ’s – Childish point scoring. The ‘dumbing down’ of politics is nothing new to British Politics, with many people viewing Cameron’s attempts to PR his way into government, however the introduction of the TV debate will take it to new lengths. If this is the case, people voting like it’s a popularity contest, and then surely having more ill-informed voter’s results in a less democratic system as votes are, well, empty?


I agree there is already a lot less policy based politics now in Britain than there was, and there is a struggle to get younger voters interested, however making politics about the biggest smile and the best youtube account isn’t the way get people’s political taste buds buzzing. This is what the Sky Debate is really, but also makes some money for Sky as well.

Of course criticism should be ½ the argument, solution is the 2nd half. I am yet to think of anything that could be done to make the actual politics and policies more interesting off the top of my head; however I shall come back with some ideas for a post soon.
Do you think it’s a good idea for Sky to have this debate or is it just a waste of time?

Cheers, Scott

Going Logo

Hello All. I thought it was about time that I had a logo for this blog. Something that is catchy, visually pleasing and says something about this blog and the subject. I need something more than a man breastfeeding a child.

I am therefore opening this up for all of you to help me out. Please leave a written description below and a picture if you want, and I will pick out the best and put it to a vote. The winner will be most graciously be credited with the idea and also, when I start my own Agency, you will be employed (Terms and conditions being thought up as I type this)!

I have an idea already:

To have a middle finger showing that has some copy on it saying "Advertising space" or"Space for sale" etc.