Wal-Mart advised to discontinue ad claims

Misleading advertising statements are revealed as The National Advertising Division of the Council of the Better Business Bureaus advised Wal-Mart to cease the use of their advertising which was a component of their “Save Money. Live better,” campaign. The year-old campaign used a claim of saving consumers $2,500 each year by shopping at their stores, according to an article in Ad Age.

The campaign which was introduced last year was by Interpublic Group of Cos.’ Martin Agency in Richmond, Virginia. Wal-Mart had previously disclosed to Ad Age that it is not necessary to shop at Wal-Mart to save the $2,500 each year, but because of Wal-Mart’s presence in the market, competitors have cut prices as well. Despite their Ad Age acknowledgement, other reports on the Save Money. Live Better campaign stated that customers receive the savings by shopping at Wal-Mart stores.

After receiving the statement from the NAD, Wal-Mart has removed the savings statement from their magazine and TV ads yet have left them on the company’s website, although clarifying the claim so that consumers understand that the savings are not necessarily from shopping at the retailer.

In a world surrounded by so many media messages and claims in advertising, it is reassuring to both consumers and those in the industry that the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureaus is monitoring claims closely. By keeping the advertising industry responsible for the legitimacy of their messages, will maintain a more trustworthy image of our industry which has so many negative stereotypes held by the public. On the other hand, stories such as this one focusing on not-so-honest claims by major corporations in their advertising, can have a negative impact on the way consumers filter media messages, which adds to other ongoing struggles such as media fragmentation.

http://adage.com/article?article_id=126062

Size isn't the only thing that matters.

Measuring audiences isn’t as easy as counting heads anymore. Sure audience mass is still important, but now there’s a multitude of other things to consider. According to an article titled "It's Not Just Size of the Audience That Matters", published in Media Works, its no longer all about how many people view a program its about the different types of people that view that program in different ways. The article points out that “a stay-at-home viewer who watches "General Hospital" at 3 p.m ET, might be quite different from a working person who watches it at 10 p.m. on cable.” Because there are so many ways to view programs, the audience is more fragmented so understanding viewer behavior and how that translates into consumer behavior is more difficult, but perhaps- more plausible!

This is because cable, satellite and telecommunication providers will be selling audience-behavior data from set-top boxes. Advertisers want to understand the behavior of the smaller audience groups. According to Mediaworks, “TNS has unveiled a new service, known as TNS DirecTView, that studies 100,000 DirecTV subscribers and their granular viewing habits.” Nielsen and TiVo also plan to provide clients with set-top-box data.

Also, quantity of people who saw the creative may not be as important as before. Other factors such as engagement levels of audiences might effect which eyeballs are actually more valuable. For example, if we can identify audiences that are channel surfing they may be less valuable then the audience that is tuned into the new episode of CSI.


In my opinion, understanding the audience is a valuable use of this detailed information but I would think it would also be a good tool to evaluate a specific vehicle. With this information, what if we could know what time during the program viewers tuned in, which programs cause people channel flip during commercials, which programs cause people to stay on the same channel through the entire time slot, and what channels and programs they flip back and forth, which programs lure certain audiences away from other programs. Couldn’t this information have some effect on evaluating which programs are most valuable to advertisers? I think we could not only evaluate how many people view the program but also which programs keep the audience on the same channel.

Source: http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=125981

YouTube to Offer Users 'Insight'

This article has been published in Adweek on March 27, 2008. It showed the fact that advertisers can use YouTube Insight to gauge the popularity of ads in different parts of the country. Google has introduced a free YouTube tool that will provide those who post clips whether they are semiprofessionals or media conglomerates with deeper insights into when, where and how often their videos are viewed.

Using YouTube Insight, publishers can analyze the viewing patterns of individual videos far more thoroughly than in the past, when only total views and users ratings were available. For example, with the new tool, any content producer who posts videos on YouTube can examine which days of the week or hours of the day traffic spikes; which U.S. states account for the most viewing streams; and how long particular clips remain popular.Theoretically, content publishers can use the tool to determine programming strategies. Advertisers can use it to test the popularity of several different ads in different parts of the country. Media planners could use it to gauge their best spending opportunities.

"Effectively, we've become the world's largest focus group," said YouTube product manager Tracey Chan. "There are so many use cases. This really enables programmers and marketers to optimize their presence on YouTube.Total audience reach for an individual videos -- something that many in the burgeoning online video space have been clamoring for is not immediately available. However, Chan said that several innovations to the new tool are already in the works. It's even possible that YouTube Insight could be used to measure video traffic on other sites something that is mostly Nielsen or comScore's domain at the moment. "If there is a strong desire, there is the ability to take it to other platforms," he said. "We're really open." (Adweek is a unit of the Nielsen Co.)

In my opinion, it is a great idea and good for all advertisers. Since YouTube has been incrediblly popular and used by all the users over the world. Using total viwes and users rating is definately helpful for advertiser to get tips for determining programming and marketing strategies. Also, they can gain many ideas and different ads in various countries, moreover, get a chance to research on which type of ads work in which countries. Media planners can take this best opportunity to set plan with correct resource, also it is always opened and updated every moment. It is great start that YouTube is being used for Advertisers and this system should be developed to better way to be providing good scource and opportunity that can be shared in advertising industry all over the world.

Spending on Alternative Ads Jump 22%

According to a recent article by AdAge, money spent for alternative media has continued to grow and is expected to grow over the next few years. Compared to last year, alternative media met a 22% increase in spending which was a total of $73.43 billion in 2007. Forecasts predict that there will be a 20% increase in spending which will total to $88.24 million. Spending on traditional ads has been stable but the budgets have been declining, while the budgets and spending of alternative advertising budgets are on the rise. Alternative advertising includes online, mobile, entertainment, web advertisements. Many brand marketers are expanding into different demographic areas that have been upgraded to faster wireless/internet technologies.

Advertising in the game/entertainment industry has also rose from the previous year by 16.2%. Driving this growth of entertainment advertising is the use of ads in technologies commonly used by the younger generation. Ads are being placed in games, movies, television shows, websites, and other places that are accessed by young children and teenagers. Some of the popular ads in the digital realm include ads that act as games as well as episodes.
Different ad companies are looking to create more appealing ads to attract a wider variety of consumers. The companies are looking to make ads more interactive, engaging as well as entertaining than traditional ads.

Ad companies are doing a very stellar job in creating advertisements that catches the attention of consumers. They are also doing a good job in expanding their audience to attract more potential customers. There are many ads that allows for interaction, and communication. In this ever-changing society, technology will become more advance, and ads need to follow that stage of growth to ensure success. I believe that spending will continue to increase, as more ad companies find more creative ways to make ads. Although many people do not like alternative ads, I consider them to be affective in a way.


http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=125950

My Oh My Macy's

Macy’s is famous. The store has reinvented itself as the largest department store chain in the country. But they aren’t letting the fame go to their head. Now, Macy’s is looking to balance its national TV campaign with locally tailored products and promotions.

According to an article on AdAge.com, Peter Sachse, the chairman-CEO of Macys.com, is trying to find the perfect mix of national and local media. Mr. Sachse is overseeing the implementation of “My Macy’s,” a localization initiative. "My Macy's" seeks to increase sales by adapting merchandise and marketing based on area preferences.

From a marketing perspective, the program will ensure that advertising closely reflects local trends. For example, coats will be marketed more heavily in Minneapolis than they would be in Miami. The initiative also seeks to embed Macy's in the local community. When the high school prom is approaching, Macy's could run a prom ad, Mr. Sachse said. And when the local cheerleading squad wins a competition, Macy's could run an ad congratulating them.

The program was announced last month, possibly as a reaction to criticisms from customers of the former May Co. stores that Macy's didn't understand their needs. "We want to be locally relevant," Mr. Sachse said.

I think that this is a brilliant plan for Macy’s department stores. Tailoring their advertising to respective areas is only going to increase awareness and sales for Macy’s. Customers will gain a new respect of the brand name for understanding their needs as consumers. Macy’s is the largest department store in the country so why wouldn’t they want to get a better feel for the locals in different areas? I think that the implementation of localized advertising will make customers feel more appreciated because Macy’s has taken the time to think about what it is you need in your market area. If you think about it, advertising coats in Miami isn’t very effective anyway so why waste they money and time? Smart move, Macy’s.


The full article was found on http://adage.com/article?article_id=125885&search_phrase=now+a+goliath

Those Teenagers Sure Love Triscuits in North Dakota…YouTube Unveils More Detailed User Info

For every three videos viewed online, one of those clips is viewed on YouTube. With the understanding that such a consolidation of video viewing on the Internet could provide a wealth of user data, YouTube has introduced a new analytics product. Rather than just being able to access comments, ratings, and total views for each video, the new tool will provide video creators with more information in order to build audiences and improve content. YouTube users that utilize the new software will be able to access the geographic makeup of their video’s audience and a timeline charting content popularity.

With YouTube continuing to operate as an important distribution channel for creative content, the website has faced increased pressure by media companies and advertisers to reveal more data about the viewing habits of its users. According to YouTube product manager Tracy Chan, “With this insight you have a better view and more context around your audience…and maybe some signals that can help your video gain more popularity.” Chan suggested the software could delve further into consumer mindsets, which allows planners to specialize their media plans to exploit geographic and seasonal niches. For instance, if a series of Skittles commercials were viewed at a surprisingly high rate in New Mexico, the new analytic information would signal that the media planner for the Skittle campaign should increase ad frequency in large cities throughout the state of New Mexico. Although the recently introduced analytics tool is still rather limited, only providing geographic info by state and time-viewing data by day, the software is a huge step forward concerning the measurement of consumer activity on the Internet.

Unlike other Net ratings software like Nelsons that must continue trying to solve measurement problems like “click-throughs,” YouTube has the ability to capture the habits of active content viewers. Not only are these viewers given option to make their own cost-free content choices, but they also can be considered captive audiences for the selected content. In addition to such valuable statistical information concerning web viewers, advertisers know that sight and sound provide for the highest potential viewer impact. Rather than having to deal with pop-up ads while reading an online magazine article, it seems that internet users would prefer a twenty second commercial before watching a YouTube video of their choice. All in all, the less-invasive practice will obviously provide advertisers with the greatest advantage. With consumers spending more time online, YouTube analytic software provides a clearer perspective in examining the mechanism that drives the media machine…. consumer insight.

http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=125965

A New Promotion for Duracell

Duracell has been a pretty well-known brand for their everyday use batteries, but a newer product of theirs, the Ultra M3, needed to gain more attention. The Ultra M3 is a higher powered battery for use in high-drain electronics. So what Duracell decided to do was take a new approach to the advertisement of this battery and promote it through concerts. I think it makes really good sense to focus on concert-goers, because this is a group of people who obviously care a lot about their music, and probably play it on high-drain devices such as stereos. And although many people use products such as iPods that don't need any kind of battery, there are still many other electronics (like stereos) that people own that use batteries, and that they find really annoying when the batteries die quickly in them.

The promotion of the Ultra M3 consisted of Duracell setting up marquees at different concerts and festivals over the entire summer of 2007. Called "Duracell Powerhouses", these marquees made a point to keep the music going until late to symbolize the long-lasting power of the Ultra M3. The campaign also had Duracell working with MTV, iTunes, and AOL music to ensure reach to their target group of music fans. Overall, I believe that choosing this target group was a smart move for Duracell because they obviously reached a large population of likely users of the Ultra M3.

This article was found on http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=125948.

White Space Soon to be Filled

Google recently announced its plan to use the soon vacant-television airwaves for a new wave of wireless devices. As television moves to digital programming, companies like Google and Microsoft have begun lobbying for the use of this "white space" that exists between television stations for a lower power generation of wireless devices, which are expected to transmit electronic data at a much faster rate than most wireless internet providers currently offer. Google's plans include the making of a line of phones that operate on the white space and offer internet access as well as other wireless devices that will be modeled after Google's Android software. Executives at Google feel that the use of this white space could lead to large economic gains. Since Google is primarily based on the selling of advertising, expanding the access and speed of the internet will serve to make it an even larger and more often used advertising medium. More usage translates to more exposure for any advertising campaigns that have purchased space on Google. With this lobbying comes a growing concern that this use of white space between television stations will cause interference with such devices as wireless microphones as well as with television broadcasts in general. Google attempted Monday to assure the public that these problems will not occur as they spoke about plans to leave channels 36-38 clear for commercial use. Devices such as microphones "along with medical telemetry and radio astronomy devices" would have these channels designated for their use specifically. Therefore, no wireless devices could possibly interfere with that white space. Google also spoke about the use of "spectrum-sensing technologies" to test if channels were in use before attempting to utilize them. The military already uses this technology, and will keep problems with interference from occuring.
I think this use of white space could prove to be a great new advertising opportunity. The internet is already used by a large portion of the population, and a growing amount of those users access internet services through personal portable devices. Making this access both more expansive, as well as faster than an average internet connection means that more people will be exposed to more advertising more often. If these devices are released in late 2009 as planned, it will be interesting to see if they become the next generation of internet use, and therefore the next big marketing medium.

Source: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=google-unveils-white-spac

My Starbucks Idea

Last week Starbucks announced the launch of My Starbucks Idea at its annual meeting. My Starbucks Idea is a social network where consumers can post ideas for how the company can improve its service and products. Starbucks bloggers can even comment and vote on each other’s ideas, resulting in each idea being assigned a point value. Consumers can also stay updated on what Starbucks is doing through an Ideas in Action section of the blog that highlights what Starbucks is doing with the new consumer suggestions.

This new program, as interactive and “fun” as it may seem, is already drawing criticism from observers of the company. Some observers, such as Jim Romenesko the creator of the Starbucks Gossip blog, believe that the new website is already becoming very repetitious. “How many times do you want to read about people suggesting free Wi-Fi” said Jim. This problem is already evident on the website as the same requests for free drinks and wi-fi is already occurring.

Some critics argue that this move could be very beneficial to Starbucks, as they have previously not taken consumer feedback and insight very seriously. Others, including New York magazine, view this new website as “a virtual suggestion box.” Still other critics site My Starbucks Idea as a corporate propaganda site which provides no real fun or excitement for the customers.

I believe that this website is a step in the right direction for Starbucks. It is helping customers to feel like the company cares about their opinions and truly values them as a customer. Currently the My Starbucks Idea site is a little boring, there is really no interactivity on the website, other than the suggestion blog. Helping customers to view the site as more than a computerized drop-box system for suggestions may help customers and observers of the company to take the website more seriously. Starbucks is definitely onto something important with this new website, they simply need to discover how to best utilize their new resource.

http://adage.com/article?article_id=125882

Nice&Easy Urges Women to Rethink Hair Color

This article was published in Ad week on March 6, 2008.  P&G brand comes up with 10 reasons in campaign by Grey. What would it take to get you to change your hair color? Procter & Gamble's Perfect 10 by Clairol's Nice & Easy, which arrived on store shelves earlier this month, has 10 reasons it thinks women should rethink their hair color. The integrated campaign from Grey, New York, launches on Sunday with a mix of four 15- and 30-second television spots, print, in-store and interactive. 

In the 30-second "Saturday," a variety of reasons are given for why women should change their hair color, including No. 2: "You don't want to ruin your hair or your Saturday" as a woman is shown being annoyed at applying some other hair product instead of frolicking at the beach with her daughter. One of Nice & Easy's chief selling points is that it only takes 10 minutes to apply. TV will be seen on channels such as Lifetime, the Food Network and Oxygen. The Brand manager of Nice & Easy, Stamford. Conn. said "Our consumers are women who put a value on time, but they also want to invest in themselves,". "We don't want them to forget about themselves." On the perfectcolorin10.com Web site, 10 reasons to use Clairol Nice & Easy are spelled out against the backdrop of a model displaying presumably recently dyed hair. No. 1: "You wish the color was endless, not the process."

Print, which will run in periodicals such as Allure, Good Housekeeping and Vogue, depicts women with luxurious hair and reasons why they might change their hair color. "Our aim is to change the game in hair color -- from the quality of the footage of hair shown to the look of models used. In this case they are aspirational," said Kathleen O'Brien, cd, Grey, New York. Clairol is a premium brand that competes against the likes of L'Oreal and Revlon. As the U.S. economy wilts, the company said that it was not worried about consumers seeking less expensive brands. "What you do see in an economic downturn is that people do turn away from salon products," said Jeffreys(the brand manager). That does not happen to Clairol because "our value equation is very strong," he said. 

In my thought, it is  a fresh and interesting idea of campaign. It is definitely different from the ads of hair color products in the past. The reasons the created would targets to change their mind or thought and become interested in dying their hairs. Costumers would be boarded of ads showing a good visuality of good and shiny hair and the telling them the detail facts and reasons of it verbally  should be fresh and good approach for the targets. i also think it is a very good strategy that they mention about Saturday for the reasons. It is an idea that can narrow and reach their target in the way the want. This campaign may be good result through. I also very agree with what the brand manager said about the brand status on the economy wilts. Quality and the brand value equation has been developed very strong and it would get stronger by this campaign. 

High Ratings for CBS' NCAA Internet Stream

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003728947

This past week marked the start NCAA basketball championship tournament, also more affectionately referred to as "March Madness". It also marked the third straight year that CBS has broadcast the games over a live video stream titled "March Madness on Demand" through their website. A few upgrades were made to the launch this year and they have paid great dividends. The online viewership of these feeds are up 122 percent from last years reported numbers at this time. The total unique visitors recorded on Friday were 1,751,956 (compared to the 789,045 in 2007).


This year, the stream is live, in HD (high definition), and can be found as cbssportsline.com. Apart from being offered in HD, there are also many other changes to this years broadcast. For instance, CBS had increased their streaming capacity which allows them to offer all 63 games and deliver them to the consumer with a significantly shorter wait time. CBS also removed certain registration requirements that were placed on the stream the past two years. An additional "Boss Button" was also added to ensure the jobs of the consumers will not be in jeopardy for fear of being caught by their bosses. If you think you may be in danger of being discovered slacking on the job you can quickly click this button and a fake spreadsheet will fill the screen to present the illusion that you are still hard at work. It has been reported that this "Boss Button" alone has generated 1.2 million clicks.


Furthermore, perhaps the largest change from years past, was the way that the online stream was advertised. CBS decided to use an aggressive distribution strategy and "place links to its site’s coverage of the games on 200 sites across the Web, including Facebook, YouTube, Yahoo Sports and SI.com." This change, above all others, is credited with the high increase in traffic to the site and CBS and its advertisers could not be happier about it. Jason Kint, Senior VP and General Manager of CBSSports.com, said that he estimated the audience growth to be around 50 percent over last year and had no idea that it would be this huge. He also stated that, “Pushing the links all over the Web was a huge factor.”

Personally, I have used this stream quite a lot over the past week and found it to be absolutely amazing. The HD picture and streaming quality that CBS has been able to produce through a live feed over the Internet simply astounds me. Add in the individual game commentary, full screen feature, and they power to switch back and forth between three or four different games at your leisure and it is like having your own HDTV. Not to mention, CBS only has the capability to broadcast one game at a time on television (unless you have an extended sports package, in which case you may be able to watch two). I think this was a perfect choice of medium to broadcast the NCAA basketball tournament and CBS is coming through almost flawlessly with March Madness on Demand. I heard about the website both through their television broadcast and their website, which I went to in order to print out my bracket. However, I also noticed their advertisements on Facebook, YouTube, and Yahoo Sports. Pretty much wherever you may go to in order to view a NCAA tournament bracket or highlights, they have a link. This was a great use of advertisements to promote a great use of media. I applaud CBS for an all around great job.

The Internet and Web Advertising

This is from an article from Advertising Age Magazine issued March 17, 2008, entitled “Think different: The web’s not a place to stick your ads.”

As we all know, the internet has only been growing as not only a national, but a worldwide medium over the last several decades, and has become arguably the most powerful mass medium in the world today. People can instantly communicate from anywhere on the globe and even though communication is a major facet of the internet, the fact that it has become such a predominant tool in the consumer market is another amazing component of the internet. Advertising on the internet however has been, and currently still is a heavily debated issue, because the internet is a consumer controlled medium and can only be controlled by advertisers to a limited extent. This is where much of the controversy comes into play.
Jakob Nielsen, web designer of the website The Art Bin, said this on the subject of the internet as an advertising medium: “The basic point about the web is that it is not an advertising medium. The web is not a selling medium; it is a buying medium. It is user controlled, so the user controls, the user experiences.” Nielsen’s strong stance on the negative aspects of the internet as an advertising medium are shared by many. Online advertising by no means in ineffective, but many are concerned about the return on expenditure because much of it as looked at as paying too much, only for reach. Ads viewed are not necessarily ads absorbed, and the “click-thru” rates are usually extremely low.
Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, is not a big fan of online advertising even though Apple is a technological-based company. Apple spent about $32 million in measured media online in 2007, despite Steve Job’s personal preferences. Online advertising is advertising on an effective medium, there is no question about that. The opportunity for consumers to purchase so many products online is a great way to get consumers to consume, but the debate is, do online ads really encourage people to do this? I feel that the best way to get people to a specific website, is just simply through better positioning on a Google search. People use the internet, usually when they are seeking information, or looking for a quick and easy way to purchase something. A quick search into Google, or perhaps a website like eBay will bring up thousands of results for the product that the consumer is looking for. This is why the internet is so user-controlled, and looked at more as consumer-driven exposure because consumers will seek the information or product on the internet that they want. TV commercials, advertising for specific websites are a great way to advertise a website, but putting the company website at the bottom of the end of the advertisement will not necessarily promote people to visit it, unless they are looking to purchase, or simply browse a large number of products of that company.
Once on the internet, people are not very susceptible to online ads anymore. We all know that spam and pop-up ads are annoying, and we are naturally trained to ignore all banner and mid page web advertising. All of this advertising only gets in the way and inhibits consumers from getting to the websites that they really want to. I do not fully agree with Nielsen that the internet is not a medium for any advertising, but I do feel that it is more of a medium for buying and browsing, and leading consumers to a website through other mediums, is more effective advertising than online advertising. The internet is ever-growing however and will only continue to do more of the same. Only time will tell how the internet may be used in the future, and it will be very interesting to see what changes may occur.

Nick Launches mobile website

According to the article on adweek.com (http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/digital/e3i1cef1824d6c1e597960da36097c88da1). Nickelodeon will be offering a mobile version of its website that is to include alot of games and mobile tie-ins to its regular tv shows. While they don't go into tremendous detail about the potential advertising on this new mobile media I think it raises alot of ethical questions that are intertwined with some very brilliant ideas. The sites will be able to be accessed by wireless devices, which a growing number of younger kids are getting their hands on these days. It isn't very uncommon to see kids who watch Nickelodeon in posession of a cell phone or have the ability to get ahold of a parent's PDA. The first ethical problem I see with this is that the ability for Nick to advertise while a game is loading. Being as old as we are in class we are very aware of when someone puts an advertisement between websites or loading screens and we have an opinion of it being annoying. To a child it wouldn't stand out as much and it almost seems like they would be a very captive audience as they eagerly await to play a game.

The next ethical question is if is ok to target children this young. With television there is typically a parent watching what the child is watching or is in another room and can overhear advertising and what is being sold to children. On a PDA it seems like it shuts out everything but the child and the mobile device. It is wrapped up in a brilliant idea that Nick can sell branded toys in quick little 15 second spots between loading screens for the character in the game.

The mobile website is also going to be a way in which kids can vote for the kid's choice awards. I think this is only a start. It will only be a matter of time til kids will get notices during the show to log into the mobile site and get a follow up or the rest of an episode. How much is too much? The question I think of is it ok for children that young to use media so much? I remember being that young and I was much more inclined to go outside after my favorite show. If I had other resources to watch more I would have spent more time inside. It seems like parental responsibility would step in here but I feel like Nickelodeon is will walk a thin line between getting parents to block it/take it away and having a media where it consumes kid's attention and is immensly successful in selling advertising.

BP Powers SimCity's Windmills

We all know that advertising in video games is becoming more and more popular. Whether it be Snickers in Madden or Axe in a different game, it is a more realistic idea for media planners out there. The latest company to move into a video game is BP in SimCity. BP's logo can be found on windmill's and other energy sources in the game. The reason for EA (makers of SimCity) and BP getting together is because EA says they want to raise awareness about low-carbon power choices. Usually it's the advertiser going after the video game. In this case, it appears it was the other way around. Many video game users find such ads in video games annoying. So annoying, that one user even came up with a downloadable software that can actually remove the BP logos from the game. With all the ad clutter out there, I think, for now, that advertising in video games is a great idea; However, I think that in the near future it too will become too cluttered. I don't know how many SimCity players are concerned with low-carbon power choices, but it will get their brand image out to a new market. Only time will tell if it was a good choice for BP and EA to hook up.

Running: The Love-Hate Relationship

New Balance has been losing valuable awareness to Nike within the running category. New Balance thinks this is because they have not been spending enough to keep their brand in the mind of their consumers. As a result, they are now planning to triple their ad spending in 2008. Last year, they spent $19.7 million in media. Their goal: to double sales to $3 billion by the year 2012.

The footwear company is targeting casual runners with the strategy of reminding them of how much they can hate running. The campaign is being launched by Onicom Group's BBDO, New York. They will portray the relationship between runners and their sport as one that is hot and cold. The print piece says, "Today you almost broke up with running. Today running shook you out of bed and into the deep, dark cold. Today, once again, around mile 2, lungs full of air, pupils full of sunrise, you remembered, 'Oh yeah, this is why we got together." The pitch is aimed to boost sales among the 18 - 29 year olds.

New Balance has always had the loyalty of hard-core runners. This is why they are trying to appeal their brand to the younger, casual athletes that see running as a chore that they need to complete in order to prepare themselves for their actual, real sport. Through testing, the new TV spots are supposed to be most effective to high-school athletes that view running as a "punishment."

New Balance's main competitor is now Nike which is putting most of their efforts in promoting their new sneakers, Nike Plus. This is a new iPod integrated shoe that allows the runner to play music while providing mileage and timing information, to motivate the runner to run. Nike is basically focusing on showing off the benefits of new high technology.

Meanwhile, New Balance is trying to keep things more simple. They focus on their sneaker's low-tech advantages. Some examples include "Rock Stop Technology" which emphasizes the sneakers ability to reduce discomfort from running over rocks. The ads will play during the NCAA basketball tournament with New Balance's widest advertising push to date.

The ads that New Balance are releasing do have an advantage over Nike's ads. They focus on simplicity and the consumers themselves. Who really neeeds a shoe that can play music? The New Balance ads remind us that although we are initially reluctant and hesitant to run, that after overcoming our laziness we begin to enjoy it and realize why we force ourselves to do it in the first place. I think that the ads will be successful with their target market.

A Push to Limit the Tracking of Web Surfers’ Clicks

A Push to Limit the Tracking of Web Surfers’ Clicks


AFTER reading about how Internet companies like Google, Microsoft and Yahoo collect information about people online and use it for targeted advertising, one New York assemblyman said there ought to be a law.

So he drafted a bill, now gathering support in Albany, that would make it a crime — punishable by a fine to be determined — for certain Web companies to use personal information about consumers for advertising without their consent.

And because it would be extraordinarily difficult for the companies that collect such data to adhere to stricter rules for people in New York alone, these companies would probably have to adjust their rules everywhere, effectively turning the New York legislation into national law.

“Should these companies be able to sell or use what’s essentially private data without permission? The easy answer is absolutely not,” said the assemblyman who sponsored the bill, Richard L. Brodsky, a Democrat who has represented part of Westchester County since 1982.

Mr. Brodsky is not the only lawmaker with this idea. In Connecticut, the General Law Committee of the state assembly has introduced a bill that focuses on data collection rules for ad networks, the companies that serve ads on sites they do not own.

•

The New York bill, still a work in progress, is shaping up as much broader. Although it is likely to see some tinkering before it comes to a vote — which Mr. Brodsky hopes will happen this spring — it aims to force Web sites to give consumers obvious ways to opt out of advertising based on their browsing history and Web actions.

If it passed, computer users could request that companies like Google, Yahoo, AOL and Microsoft, which routinely keep track of searches and surfing conducted on their own properties, not follow them around. Users would also have to give explicit permission before these companies could link the anonymous searching and surfing data from around the Web to information like their name, address or phone number.

Because there is no federal legislation on these subjects, Mr. Brodsky’s bill — and, to a lesser extent, the one in Connecticut — could set interesting precedents.

“A law like this essentially takes some of the gold away from marketers,” said Joseph Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. “But it’s the right thing to do. Consumers have no idea how much information is being collected about them, and the advertising industry should have to deal with that.”

Web companies in the advertising business, which have spent the last few years busily courting advertising agencies to persuade them to shift their clients’ ad dollars to the Internet, are now lavishing their attention on Albany. In recent weeks, Microsoft and Yahoo have sent lobbyists to meet with Mr. Brodsky, and AOL, a unit of Time Warner, is planning a meeting. Unlike most Web companies, Microsoft favors legislation about online privacy and advertising practices and has lobbied federal lawmakers to establish regulations, said Michael Hintze, associate general counsel for Microsoft.

Microsoft asked Mr. Brodsky to broaden his bill to include all sorts of companies that serve ads around the Web, not just those that show ads based on users’ behavior. Such a change would create a bill that more clearly includes Microsoft’s chief competitor, Google.

Mr. Brodsky says he has asked the Web companies point-blank if they would support legislation similar to what he has proposed. Microsoft gave him a firm “yes,” but Yahoo, he said, seemed to be opposed to any sort of regulation. Yahoo declined to comment on its meeting with Mr. Brodsky.

Targeted advertising, the kind based on consumer data, is one reason that big brands like Coca-Cola and General Motors have been shifting their ad budgets to the Web. The largest Web companies collect data about Web-surfing consumers hundreds of times a month and use the information to help clients show different ads to different people, based on their demographics and interests.

It is unclear how much consumer data is really needed for effective online advertising. The attitude among Web companies is that more is always better, but Mr. Brodsky said there might be a compromise position that enables many ad practices but enhances consumer protection.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/business/media/20adco.html?_r=1&ref=media&oref=slogin

Scion is Rockin' the Outdoor/In-Store.

This is pretty darn cool:
http://www.brandweek.com/bw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003726994&imw=Y

Attik for Scion is working with InWindow Outdoor to create billboards that sit in store windows and interact with consumers. In Scion's case, they want to create the image that Scion's are out of reach- specifically their Scion tC Series 4.0. It's a limited edition car that Toyota is only producing just over 2,000 of. The campaign consists of signs in storefront windows in New York and Chicago. As pedestrians move closer to the signs, the cars on them move farther away. Scion is also releasing a web address to link the outdoor: http://www.scion.com/rstc

Now, as a Scion owner (a xA, my mom picked it out, don't judge!), I know that Scions aren't exactly luxury cars like Toyota seems to be trying to tell people. Scions are Scions. They're different, but I wouldn't consider them a collector car.

Without seeing the billboards, I'd have to say that this campaign is still pretty cool- whether Scions match up to Lexus' or not. The website design is sleek and mimics the car very well. Interactive billboards are one of the coolest ideas I've ever heard of in this day and age and I think I'd have to stop and take a look if I saw a car moving in the window of a store in New York.

Selling Out to Stay In

A couple months ago the British rock band Radiohead made musical history when they became the first group to release their album independently and for whatever price their fans wanted to pay for it. While no official numbers have been released by the band, it has been estimated that they made more with this process then they would have had they gone through a record company. Although it seems to have paid off, many speculated on why the band had made such a risky decision in the first place.

In the year 2007 48% of teens didn’t purchase a single CD. With illegal downloading and so many new back channels to get music without paying for it, artists are losing enormous amounts of money and are now faced with the dilemma of how to literally, stay in business. This is where advertising comes in. It has always been a debate between the musical and commercial industries where the line can be drawn between selling out and making money.

While many artists are resisting this switch into corporate America others are embracing and flourishing off it. Everyone remembers the Britney Spears Pepsi commercials from a couple years ago. Common was recently featured in a GAP ad and there have been many more. The most recent example comes from the Yael Naim the Israeli artist whom no one had heard of until a little company named Apple decided to feature her single on an ad which then skyrocketed the song to number nine of the Billboard Top 100 and debuted with over 135,000 downloads.

So my question is, is this a good change or a bad one? While there can’t be a right answer to that question being that it is opinion based, it raises some serious issues for us as advertisers and as music listeners. While on one hand we have an exploding new medium on which we can develop our brands on, but on the other we may be changing the face of music. Is “selling out” something we should see as the saving grace for the dying music industry and a new playing for field for our line of work, or is it the turn from one of the last parts of our culture that corporate America hasn’t corrupted yet?

The Financial Times Turns to Facebook

The Financial Times is handing out FREE web subscriptions ( a $109 per year value) to college and grad students through an application on Facebook.

The FT says that more and more young readers are seeking FT.com's content for research. According to the publisher, "There is an increasing demand from university and MBA students for access to the FT's quality of insight. . .".   By providing college students free access to their premium content, FT hopes to obtain a new generation of readers that will become life long subscibers. 

The FT is hoping to use the viral nature and international reach of social networking to carve out their next generation subscribers. Evidently, those who install the application can share it with other friends (as long as they are college or grad students).

The FT is not the only publisher to make a move to Facebook. Evidently, the Wall Street Journal has already added an application that allows site users to share select articles from WSJ.com.

What do you think of this idea? As a college student have you seen these types of applications and do you use them? Do you think that this new media will help deliver a new generation of subscribers for either the FT of the WSJ?  

Internet Ads: Annoying or attentive?

According to the Associated Press there is a new problem in the online world. The online companies and websites are trying to develop a way to show online ads in a "TV" manner, while not loosing the targets attention. The problem seems to be that the audiences are skipping the ads or just disregarding them. The budget for these ads though is not as high as one may think and the increase in online watching is causing a need for increase in the budget.


"Spending on online video ads represents less than 4 percent of all Internet advertising and just 1 percent of the amount spent on TV, according to eMarketer. But growth is expected — with the research firm forecasting U.S. spending more than tripling to $4.3 billion in 2011 — especially as more viewers embrace full-length TV episodes and other video online."

Companies are trying new approaches besides the normal video ad that one is forced to watch; (these companies make it so one cannot fast forward through the ad on the tool bar.)
They are making the ads more innovative and interactive for the viewer, making a better lasting impression.
For example, Taco Bell ran an ad that was a virtual tour photo shoot.
And YouTube and AOL have created overlay ads that if clicked on, pauses the video; but if not touched again are closed and the video starts again.
They are also trying to make the ads shorter, hoping the audience will not mind a 15 second clip versus a 30 second clip.
These companies hope that these types of ads make the audiences more interested in their pitch than annoyed.

The viewer's control seems to be the key issue that it comes down to in this case. I think that viewer's should be able to decide if they want to watch a particular ad, but companies also need to get their pitch in so it is a touchy subject. I think that if ads were placed less and were shorter people would not mind watching them as much.

What are your thoughts? Are internet ads effective in your case or just annoying?

Mucinex move to MPG

Adams Respiratory Therapeutics, which markets the Mucinex brand, has placed its media planning and buying account at Havas' MPG. Their former agency was Interpublic Group's Initiative. In 2007, the company spent over $85 million in their ad spending. That is $20 million more money spent on ads then in 2006. The switch will take place in a few months. The article doesn't disclose why exactly Adams is making the switch. I feel that switching an ad agency could be a big deal. It must take a real good reason to switch your ad agency. I'm not sure if it really is a good idea to be switching your ad agencies. I feel it could really mess up the ad campaign you already have. Also the new agency could and most likely will have a different style and image than the last one and this could change your ads. If this is what your company wants or needs this could be a good thing. But if your company is doing good with the way your ads our now then I'm not sure if it is smart to change agencies. I just hope that the Adams' company knows what they are getting themselves into by switching agencies. I would like to know the reason why just to understand where they are coming from on this move. If I knew the why they chose to switch then I could talk more about the reasoning behind it. I can't wait til more information comes out to find out the reason why the Adams' company moved their ad account from Interpublic Group's Initiative to Havas' MPG.

Chinese Pond’s Ads Under ‘Caution’

According to news from Shanghai, a major campaign by WPP Group’s Ogilvy & Mather for Pond’s (one of Unilever’s biggest brands in China) has been derailed by China’s media regulators, and the main point for that is the new face of Pond’s in the mainland --- Tang Wei, star of Ang Lee’s sexually explicit movie “Lust, Caution.”

Someone guess that the reason behind because of the sexual and political background related with Ms. Tang from the movie. The movie ‘Lust, Caution’ includes full frontal nudity and some violent and explicit sex scenes. There is likely a political aspect as well. Since in the film, Ms. Tang plays a student activist who seduces a Japanese spy during Japan’s occupation of Shanghai in WWII and ultimately betrays her country. As we all know, China and Japan share a difficult, often violent past, and tensions still simmer today.

The regulators have ordered TV stations and print media to cease running ads featuring Ms. Tang. Although the statement which issued by China’s State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (SARFT) did not mention ‘Lust, Caution’ or Ms. Tang by name, but from a separate letter to station owners and print titles, SARFT warned media owners not to run ads featuring the actress.

In general, every ad that runs in China is cleared by a government censor. The censors approve storyboards before TV ads can be shot and print ads before they are shipped to media. From Unilever, the ad for Pond’s had already been approved by a different government agency. Thus it is still unknown if the ban for the ad will be enforced or not recently.

Personally, I think every choice is important for the campaign, it can directly determine if the campaign will be successful or not. In this case, I don’t think the campaign has made a wrong choice for the face of the product. Actually, Ms. Tang is very famous right now by playing the movie ‘Lust, Caution.’ Her influence is much bigger than other top actresses in China. There is no doubt that the company can use her to bring more attention to the products. The only pity here is the campaign neglect the oppressive regime of China. I believe if the same thing happen in United States, the result must be very successful.

No such thing as bad publicity?

In case you were wondering why March 1 was late by a day this year, it is because 2008 is a leap year and last Friday was February 29, a day that only comes around once every four years --- much like the Olympics, minus the fire.

Anyway, this once-in-a-blue-moon occurrence caused the sound-minded individuals at Cash Tomato (an Internet video sharing site --- much like YouTube, minus the popularity and selection) to hatch up this marketing gem:

Raise publicity by handing out $29 to random pedestrians passing through busy Union Square, located in New York City.

Brilliant, right? In defense of Cash Tomato, the little-known company has successfully pulled this stunt before in three British cities, as well as San Francisco and Berkley, California. Never underestimate New Yorkers, however. The money giveaway turned into a near-riot as the impatient crowd grew tired of waiting for their FREE money, resulting in one person being hospitalized and intervention by police and paramedics.

Such a shame.

Now, two questions come to mind:

First, when did this country sink to the point where employees at a fledgling video sharing site (that offers a selection of just 250 videos) can't put on tomato costumes and hand out money to a swarming crowd of New Yorkers without a brouhaha breaking out?

Second, if you look past the riot and minor injuries, wasn't this ploy a resounding success? I mean, the whole goal of the giveaway was to raise awareness of Cash Tomato's existence. And now that the event has garnered national news coverage, I think it is safe to say that the mission was accomplished --- you know, once again, minus the injuries. Now I don't think Cash Tomato is ecstatic with the result of the giveaway, but I am sure all of its employees discreetly gave each other fist bumps when they picked up the newspaper on Saturday.

Your thoughts?

Competition at it's best!

http://adage.com/article?article_id=125460

According to a recent article in Ad age Proctor & Gamble and Unilever are competing to see who is the best philanthropic operating in the realm of "ethical marketing". These two companies are infamous in competiting for consumer's loyalty and brand positioning. P&G and Unilever are overly conscientious about their positioning in the mind of consumers as the "Captain Planet" of products. Your view of their good deeds matters to these Fortune 500."We are seeing, particularly with the new generation of young business people and young marketers, that they are only attracted to companies that fit with their own value set," said Kevin Havelock, president of Unilever U.S. "And the value set of the new generation is one that says this company must take a positive and global view on the global environment. ..." Unilever and P&G both agree that more advertising would win over their brand position. I feel a bit indifferent to having these companies going head to head for the best philanthropist. On one hand I think that it is wonderful that these companies are performing good deeds and supporting a good cause, but on the other hand I feel like a good deed should not be measurable, especially not in competition because it belittles the real cause, and too much attention is focused on the competition. The self-less acts of each of these companies started to shift gears in my mind from focusing on those "in need" to brand positioning of those who have money. At the end of the article you are left to question the authenticity of each company and how did philanthropy meet rivalry. Is this all for show?

Starbucks closure?

http://adage.com/article?article_id=125458

The world of Marketing has come a long way. It is no wonder that brands need to come up with pretty impressive campaigns to really get at consumers. Often times, this means creating a plan that's out of left field... maybe even controversial. It is no wonder Starbucks went to extreme lengths last week when it initiated a 3-hour closure of 7100 stores last Tuesday night. I personally think it is brilliant. There is so much going on in the media these days and it is really hard to cause a stir. Pulling a stunt such as Starbucks' is a guaranteed way to receive major media coverage. The reason behind the closing is linked to some sort of "barista training." Starbucks wanted to prove its dedication to improving product and customer experience, but inadvertently (definitely not...) created enough PR to truly spread the message.
Through my experience with marketing thus far, I am definitely seeing the challenges that exist in this field. There are so many messages being thrown in consumers' faces and it is important to develop a strategy that can break through the clutter. Not only do these marketing methods need to stand out, but they need to carefully walk the line between effective and over-the-top. There are instances where PR stunts get a bit out of hand, perhaps even dangerous. Recall the incident in Boston last January when a guerrilla marketing campaign of strategically placed blinking characters for the Aquateen Hunger Force movie were mistakenly identified as explosive devices. Two major bridges were shut down along, costing Homeland Security close to a million dollars. The definition of marketing gone very wrong.
Some marketing analysts believe that Starbucks 3-hour shut-down could have been horribly wrong as well. By closing, they are driving the customers right into the competitors hands... aka the opposite of what a marketing campaign aims to accomplish. However, I believe that Starbucks maintains a strong enough brand for them to pull off the closure in order to reap the benefits of media coverage and the uproar of Starbucks withdrawl.

Miller Chill Moves to Saatchi

On February 29, 2008 Miller decided to move its creative duties to Saatchi & Saatchi for their product Miller Chill. Young & Rubicam was their previous company that was reliable for Miller Chill's creative advertisements. This is not surprising because Saatchi & Saatchi currently handles Miller High Life. Saatchi & Saatchi described their future plans very generally on their new product they just took under their wing. One of Miller Chill's representatives explain for their creative advertising strategy that the company upholds is, "always seeking to develop creative concepts to see what resonates with consumers doesn't necessarily mean that a particular creative concept will be used. It's just helping us gather information."

In my opinion giving a product of your brand to a different company for advertising can be risky, if the company has had lots of success with previous advertising with Young & Rubicam, why would they want to give the product to Saatchi & Saatchi for new creative duties? On the contrary, it could also be very smart. Young & Rubicam was the company they used for when Miller Chill was being introduced, so they did a good job of the introduction and getting the product out there, but maybe Miller wants to have a different appeal now that they have been successful and the product is being consumed. Either way this is risky, only reason for my reasoning is that although Miller, Miller Genuine Draft, Miller Lite, etc. have been a trusted beer for many consumers, Miller Chill is somewhat new in comparison to those mentioned, and any wrong move could bring Miller Chill into a halt for consumers to continue purchasing.

http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/account-activity/e3i4f5a5225e24b60e0145e1b35a51395a2

Dudes Like To Shop Too.

There was an article on Ad Age titled 'How the Male of the Species Shops' that I found particularly interesting, being that I was curious to see how my male point of view conflicted with what the female author had to say on the topic. Unfortunately, the article didn't dig too deep into her personal opinions, but rather seemed to simply summarize a study done by Mens Health, and pick out the rather telling statistics. The most telling, and rather surprising of them all was that while some 65% of men admitted to doing at least half of the food shopping for a family, it was noted that about 80% of all marketing dollars for food goes to targeting women. It seems as though there is a hugely missed opportunity here for marketing food towards guys, which up until this point, I thought would be rather obvious.
Seriously, guys love to eat, and on an average, we consume alot more than our female better halves. However, I suppose one possible reason for the marketing bias is that in the minds of most, the female is still typically the one who prepares meals in a household, however, even that percentage is shrinking. Also, another possible reason for the bias would be that in a family household, that mother is the one that typically manages the diets of the children. So, marketers are not only targeting woman in households to purchase food for themselves, but also to make purchasing decisions based on the dietary habits of their children as they see fit. So assuming that a family has a mother, father and two children, they could possibly influence the eating habits of three consumers, as opposed to one, by targeting the woman as opposed to the man. So sure, there is logic to the food marketing bias, but as a male who happens to be an avid enthusiast of food, I wouldn't mind getting some more attention either, atleast more than 20%!

PBS Network Refuses "Unhealthy" Ads

PBS Sprout Kids is a 24-hour network that promotes healthy lifestyles for kids. As a result, they do not accept advertising for sugary cereal or other snack foods. Instead, they have advertisements for cars, insurance, and movies. Their reasoning for this is that their advertising is "100% parent-directed" rather than kid-directed. Because Sprout is a 24-hour network, advertisers can run traditional 30-second spots unlike other PBS shows. The network isn't Nielsen-rated, so they collect data through VOD views and visits to their website. Sprout has totaled 350 million VOD views since its launch, meaning it is one of the top five most-watched VOD networks on TV. The network has also reported a 170% increase in unique website visitors.

Can the network's growth be attributed to its ad plan? I think it's a definite possibility, but I also think it's a bit risky to rely on sparking the interest of the parent. Depending on the age of the child, there is a good chance they are watching the network without a parent. There is a lack of connection between the target of the network and the target of the advertising, but it seems to be working. I think this is one fairly rare case that such a divide can exist and still allow the network to thrive. Perhaps other kid-directed networks should consider using a similar ad plan.

Cold Stone Creates Constant Craving

It is the article published in the Ad week on Feb 29, 2008. Cold Stone holds New spots for ice-cream chain target women 18-44. Cold Stone Creamery looks to make consumers crave its premium ice cream with four new TV ads breaking March 9. The high-end ice cream chain is targeting affluent women 18 to 44 with the new campaign that touts the many combinations they can create using its various ice creams and toppings. "Millions of combinations mean you can change your mind as often as you like . . . Cold Stone Creamery . . . Create your own mix,"

One spot touts its cake business, which is a growing segment for Cold Stone. This campaign is about cravability, showing thier products and the ability to customize the ice cream. Their goal is to increase traffic in Cold Stone Creamery stores and build brand awareness. Although the chain operates more than 1,300 stores in 50 states, there are pockets in some markets where brand awareness is low. They hope that will change with the help of the new campaign. Supporting online ads break in June. The ice cream segment has been flat the past few years except for premium chains like Cold Stone Creamery, Marble Slab Creamery and Maggie Moo, per Technomic, Chicago.

This new ad campaign is Cold Stone's second foray into TV. The previous campaign, which ran last year, was all about the store experience. Cold Stone Creamery is known for its outgoing "crewmembers" that have been known to break out into song. [The TV campaign] is a smart move. Ice cream is an impulse buy, so the thought needs to be put into consumers' minds.
This year the budget will grow 5 percent, per Schutz.

Currently, the place where I'm living in has the Cold Stone Creamery store at the fist floor. So I am one of the consumers who likely to eat it often. Also, I am always available to observe on it. In my thought, it is good idea for them to hold the target for the new campaign as women 18-44. . It is obvious that females like sweet thing, especially ice cream more than males do. Whenever I get it or pass along the store, I always see girls much more than guys. However, I don't really that many ads for Cold Stone during watching TV. They do outdoor advertisement and the particular songs with crewmemebrs. One spot touts its cake business, which is a growing segment for Cold Stone. This campaign is about cravability, showing thier products and the ability to customize the ice cream. It is very good chance for them to increase traffic in Cold Stone Creamery stores and build brand awareness, which has been their weakness in their marketing strategy.