The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]

Now I stand by my belief that is the greatest product overclaim I’ve ever seen but recently I came across [a bad choice of words, as you’ll soon discover why] another product that seems to:

1. Be making a rather audacious claim.

3. Contradicting their ‘benefit’ in their packaging choice of words.

What am I going on about? This …

That’s right, it’s a chewing gum that supposedly stops you having the urge to have a wank for 6 hours.

What the fuck is it made of, chloroform?

But the bit that utterly confuses me is that surely they should be making a product that makes people’s hands busy, not their jaws – or surely this would be better named as a Anti-Blowjob gum?

And then there’s the fact that on the packaging, they proudly announce …

“INSTANT RELIEF LASTING UP TO 6 HOURS”

… which is either a very cruel joke designed to mock the people who want instant relief via a ‘hand shandy’ or some sort of subliminal positioning genius created to make the product sound like Viagra 2.0 … where it doesn’t just get you ‘ready for action’, but invites some hot, high class ‘friends’ to your house to roger you senseless.

No, not that ‘POLO’ brand you get in knock-off markets.

You know the sort, they’re designed to look sophisticated but actually ends up making you look like a total cheap bastard.

Nor have I bought some LV type bollocks … designed to make you look rich and sophisticated but actually ends up making you look like you’re unbelievably gullible, a total label whore and distinctly muggable.

No, I’ve bought some bog-standard, matching Samsonite stuff.

In black.

Designed to hold my clothes [army shirts, shitty jeans and birkenstocks] … put up with the bullshit care and attention you get from Airport bag handlers around the World … and to stay closed and locked so that it doesn’t fling open on the luggage carousel and reveal my Asda pants to all and sundry.

In all honesty, having a good set of luggage feels way better than you’d imagine.

For a start, the wheels don’t act like a supermarket trolley and there’s a sense of assurance when you close it, that it will stay that way until you get to your destination.

I never thought I’d give a shit about a suitcase, but I do … but let’s face it, that’s only because I use the bloody things so much I could justify the cost, because otherwise I’d of blown the dosh on some technology rubbish.

Now I know that Samsonite had an award winning ad recently, but I didn’t buy it because of that.

Apart from the fact I got my luggage waaaaaaaaay before that ad came out, the fact is I’m not so fucking insecure that I need my suitcase to convey the level of status I think I have. Or should I say, want to appear I have.

Now I know I am hardly the blueprint for ‘average consumer’ [Average, maybe. Consumer, probably not] but I saw an ad recently that smacked of a client and agency that just doesn’t understand their audience in any shape or form.

This is it …

WHAT. THE. FUCK. IS. THAT.

Are they seriously trying to say that this is the luggage of Rock Stars and VIPS’s

Do they really think this makes them look cool and desirable?

Are they really that fucking deluded?

And why does it look like he’s wearing too-big-for-his-feet ‘pixie’ shoes?

Let me give the people behind this bollocks some advice …

1. Your ad makes the luggage look like it is the bag of choice for assistants and roadies, not Rock Stars or VIP’s.

6. Only people who are try-hards would want a bag that makes them feel like they are successful and travel a lot.

I cannot tell you how much I hate this ad.

HATE IT.

It’s everything wrong with advertising.

It’s not even effective in making people think they would look successful if they were seen with it.

It’s more likely to attract pity than glances of envy.

No, it wasn’t a holiday like you all think it was.

Can we all just move on? Please?

Good.

So a few weeks ago, when I was in Australia, I was in a cab when I saw this:

As you can tell from the photo, I was in a cab so I only saw it for a few seconds, but I was surprised to learn that it was actually an ad for quitting smoking than quitting drugs.

Of course, both are filthy, dangerous habits … but the headline, the picture of a sweating man with a pained impression on his face, the overall bleakness of the ad made it feel it was far more about heroin usage rather than cigarettes.

Now I appreciate that some people view smoking as being ‘less dangerous’ than hard drugs and that by creating an ad that communicates it in the same way, they might be helping reframe people’s opinion but I still think it’s wrong.

We see so many ads these days that we self filter.

It’s as if our brain has developed an internal firewall to ignore the things we don’t relate to.

For some brands/agencies, they think that means they have to be more and more extreme to ‘cut through’ and while there is an argument for that, I believe brands just have to be more and more relevant to the audience they’re targeting.

Know them.

Understand them.

Play in their World.

Speak ‘to’ rather than ‘at’ them.

Ads like the one above seem to be doing none of that … it feels its goal is to communicate what the Government want to say rather than what might actually connect with people who want to stop but don’t know how to.

In fact, I’d argue that the ad might actually be being more effective at grabbing the attention of drug addicts than cigarette smokers. Or at least the cliche definition of what a drug addict looks like.

Now I know what some of you might be thinking …

Given I noticed this poster and yet have never taken a drug or had a cigarette in my life [I know I look like a alcoholic, 40-a-day, coke-snorter, but I’m not] I’m sort of undermining my own argument … and that’s a very good point … however I’d say that while there are occasions when people need to be ‘shocked’ out of their mindset, where cigarettes and drugs are concerned, this ‘fear inflation’ might not be the best strategy for substance abuse because after years of slowing turning up the ‘shock heat’ on these people, they’ve been ‘trained’ to either ignore the ads or ignore the shock tactics.

By the way, if any government out there needs a campaign to try and stop drug abuse, get in touch because I have an awesome one that the Australian Government were too frightened to use in 2003. Which is kind-of ironic, given it’s using comedy and music rather than fear.

No, it’s not your birthday … and no, it’s not because I’m going on holiday again [even though you will argue I am] … it’s because I’m off to Thailand to mentor at the wonderful Mediaworks conference/workshop.

I love this thing.

I love it because it’s basically the marriage of a pitch with a reality show.

What do I mean?

Well the pitch bit is pretty obvious, because participants are put into teams and then they are challenged to answer a brief that a real client gives them.

The reality show reference is simply because everything has to be done within 72 hours … so the participants – and the mentors for that matter – are under intense pressure to get things done.

Then – to make matters worse – the poor sods, who basically end up having little or no sleep over the entire duration of the event – have to then present their ‘pitch’ to some of the regions most senior execs as well as the client who gave them the brief in the first place.

It’s intense … it’s highly pressured … it’s exhilarating.

But while you might think the reason I like it is because I get to be a bastard to smart, eager, talented individuals … it’s not … it’s actually seeing how they face up to the challenge and surprise themselves.

OK, so not everyone does it – in fact some end up piled in a heap – but when I did it last year, I got to witness just how good one of my planners was.

Of course I knew they were good already, but seeing them present their idea in a way that not only answered the brief, but in a way that held the entire audiences attention was a sheer delight.

Hearing the room let out a collective groan as they realized that not only had they witnessed my colleague deliver a killer strategy, but presented it in a way that had insight, drama and charm and utterly brilliant.

I know this might sound mad, but I had tears in my eyes.

I felt like a fucking proud father.

She was awesome … and while I knew she had bucket loads of talent, to see it unleashed in such a powerful and memorable way helped me see just how far she had come in such a short period of time.

Companies talk a lot about training.

They go on and on and on about how their staff are their greatest asset.

But 90% of the time, the training is about managing internal processes rather giving people ways to liberate their individual talent and that’s why I am so happy to be part of this MediaWorks thing, because it is a boot camp with purpose … something you learn from, not just in terms of approach and experience, but in terms of seeing just what they are capable of doing and being and when that starts to happen, you start realizing you might be able to go to places you never thought possible.

What I’d like you to pay most attention to is the highlighted quote from Baluca Budiu, a researcher from the Neilsen group.

Now I appreciate some people were expecting more innovation from Apple … I appreciate this update is tinkering with the ‘well known’ … I even accept OS7 has more than a dash of influence from the Windows Mobile operating system … but to suggest that because they both have incorporated a ‘flat design’ means they will both experience the same response from their users is utterly, utterly fucking ridiculous.

Virgin Atlantic uses the same jet technology on their aircraft as Garuda Airlines, but that doesn’t mean they both fall out the sky at an alarmingly regular rate.

Nor does the fact I went to the same school – and was taught by the same drama teacher – as Samantha Morton [admittedly at different times] mean I am suddenly going to be a Hollywood actor.

This low rent game of ‘attribute snap’ that people like Baluca like to use to justify their viewpoint, drives me nuts.

At best it’s naive, at worst it’s a demonstration they have no concept or ability to appreciate the importance of context or reality.

Besides, is it really bad that people will have to ‘re-learn’ stuff?

I know Northern wrote a great post about the power of stability, convenience & ease … but I quite like the fact there may be some new things for me to learn … to experience … to play with.

And even if I didn’t, I think I am smart enough to be able to work it out within a few hours, seriously, it’s not going to be that fucking hard and as an added bonus, I get to feel like I’ve achieved something – which is more than I tend to experience on an average day.

For the record, I really like the Windows Phone operating system.

I know some have deemed it ‘a failure’, but even if that is the case, I can assure Baluca, it is for far more reasons than simply because they used a flat display.

Maybe it’s because they called the thing ‘Windows’ … a name that is intimately associated with work when people view their mobile as a tool that gives them freedom.

Or maybe it’s because they linked with a mobile brand that had about as much desirability as a $2 crack whore with a dose of the clap.

Or it could be that after 20 years of telling people to always look for the ‘start’ button, they had forgotten to educate people about the new symbolism.

Or maybe it was too expensive or had shit distribution or they did bad ads or any one of countless other reasons.

The point is, when researchers – or anyone – for that matter, starts spouting viewpoints based on the flimsiest of ‘evidence’, then they are doing themselves far more harm than they are intending to do to the other party, which is why if you ever find yourself in this sort of position, I would encourage you to do one of the following:

1. Remind them of the difference between objectivity and subjectivity.

3. Hit them. Hit them very, very hard.