It's never to early to start.

Start shilling that is.

Snack food manufacturers in England are in the throes of what is termed "stealth marketing" to children. The premise is that the kids become brand ambassadors and perform specific tasks, from postering to commenting on social media to direct endorsements during recess. In return the kids get 25 quid, free food, prizes, social prestige, and the fun-filled sensation of childhood obesity. It's a win / win all around.

The idea of empowering the actual consumer of the products is nothing new, but when the consumer is easily influenced, and doesn't have the requisite skills to make an informed decision, is it more like exploitation? Sure, teens will shovel fast food and sugar into themselves, but when you're going after 8 and 9 year olds in a medium where there is no advertising standards watchdog, don't you think its gone too far?

Funnily enough, the British government doesn't think so. They've embraced the idea and are using it to promote healthy eating. Yes, that sound was two truckloads of irony colliding head-on.

Putting paid to corruption

Corruption is everywhere to a greater or lesser degree. Unfortunately in India, corruption is pervasive and affects the poorest people the hardest. 5th Pillar, an Indian NGO, has come up with a unique way to protest corruption and give people a voice. It's called the zero rupee note, and is, in essence, a transferable protest sign. Much like Iranian dissidents defacing their country's currency to protest the dictator, this note allows for a widespread and distributed protest without having to openly demonstrate.

It's a very interesting way to promote something, and a great way to give a voice to people who deserve one.

A spot of the old ultra violence then?

This would make for an interesting concept to pitch to your clients: new research shows that adverts in violent video games are subject to better recall than ads in more non-violent video games.

Here's the article from the MIT Technology Review.

Now I'm off to find a way to work some Laura Ashley ads into Grand Theft Auto.

Oh Ogilvy...

I thought you knew how to party.

The article below is from the blog of Peter Rojas. He's the guy who founded Engadget and Gizmodo and co-founded Gdgt. So he knows a bit about social media and marketing. A wee bit.

Here's the article in all its glory.

Ogilvy engages in tone deaf social media marketing for the AmEx Zync card

Yesterday I got an email from a social media marketer at Ogilvy about a new card that American Express is introducing and how they’d like to strike up an “exclusive relationship” with me. I wasn’t sure exactly what that meant by that, but I’d done some work for AmEx in the past — I spoke to some of their executives about the future of mobile a few years ago — and so I figured I’d at least see what was up. I wrote back (and this is all I wrote back), “Could you give me an overview of what you’re describing?”

The email below is what I received in return. If you can get past all the buzzwords (“for 20somethings by 20somethings”, seriously?), basically the deal is that in exchange for the “privilege” of signing up for the Zync card I get to give AmEx free consulting (because paying me would make me lie to them, apparently) and then host a party where I can market the Zync card to my “network”.

So let me get this straight: I get to sign up for a product where they make money (in terms of card fees), where I give them advice and insight that AmEx used to think was worth paying for (but now is not because that would make me dishonest), and then to wrap it all up I get to pimp out all my closest friends? I can’t believe AmEx would be stupid enough to give Ogilvy money for this program, I hope they convinced them to accept payment in Zync card accounts and tweet-ups.

UPDATE: I should make it clear that it’s not about getting paid or not getting paid — I’m happy to contribute to all sorts of things for free, even things for big companies like AmEx — this is about it being a very one-sided arrangement where one side seems be asking for a lot and not delivering any discernible value in return. Value can come in lots of different forms. I’ve beta tested products before and given my honest, unpaid feedback to those companies, but I did so because I felt like I got some value out of being able to use the product and learn more about it. There isn’t much offered here — I already have an AmEx card, so it’s not like I need to gain some experience using. The value only moves one way, from me to them. They’re asking to leverage my usage, my knowledge, and my network.

Hey Peter,

Not a problem! So, here is the deal: If you don’t know Zync…

Zync is the new American Express Charge card for 20somethings. This card is created for 20somethings by 20somethings that is all about customization: consumers can choose packs of benefits. So if you like buying say tech products, you can specifically choose the tech pack tailored to your needs to give you extra membership rewards. It’s all about you and what you want.

Another important thing to know is that the card is currently in beta testing – that is where you come in. As a person who is in the tech world and is out and about in the New York City scene we felt that you would be an awesome person to test out the card and be part of the ongoing discussion with product development team. Since this card is in beta, this truly is a card that is for you by you: you get to choose during beta what works and what doesn’t.

Lastly, since we want this to be genuine, we won’t be paying you for your time to participate because we want the feedback you give to be honest. The benefit is that you have an access to an exclusive relationship with the Zync team, cool events, special committee standing in our Zync Tank and the opportunity to host your own tweet-up, completely paid for by the Zync team. All that is detailed below-

o Zync Immersion Event:

§ To start the relationship, we want to get you to know Zync

§ While we enjoy our PPT presentations, that is not how we want you to get to know Zync

§ For this day, we will be doing fun activities all around New York City so you can really interact with the Zync team

§ This will be a one-and-a-half day experience full of exciting and exclusive events that tie into the Lego Packs (eco, tech, social and green)

§ This will take place sometime in early February

o Zync Tweet Up:

§ While we are looking for feedback we are also celebrating the development of the new card

§ For this, we want to co-host Zync tweet ups for you and your network

§ Will be held in top metro areas (e.g. New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco) themed around one or more Lego Packs

§ Events will be for 25 – 50 people at fun locations related to packs such as Brooklyn Boulders

§ This will take place sometime in February/March

o Zync Tank:

§ Since you will be a Cardmember, we want you to get the full experience of the beta testing of the card

§ For this, we have something called Zync Tank. Zync tank is our online community/listening tool that we use to get sentiment of Zync from Cardmembers participating in the beta program

§ With this relationship, you would be able to be part of the “Special Committee” in which you really get to provide feedback to the product development team on ideas for iPhone applications, the next packs and much more

There is a lot that we want to accomplish. With you, we are not asking you to write anything on our behalf or provide us a post. Merely, as a person we value, we want to experience the card with you while we develop it so it’s not just American Express but from a person who really can put a lot of value into the card and perhaps vice versa.

Let me know if you have any other questions. I’ll touch base with you tomorrow to see if you are still interested or have any questions!

Best,
Priya

The pen. The sword. Who wins?

If you can't speak your mind, you aren't free. It's a universal right that extends to people, groups, countries, corporations and everything in between. As the old saying goes, I may disagree with what you're saying, but I'll defend your right to say it. Let's all take a moment to enjoy that freedom. It's freedom to advertise and freedom to disagree with that advertising. It's freedom to start up a site that slams WalMart or a bank, and it's freedom to tell the government that their ads aren't too convincing.

Now, for your viewing pleasure and as a reminder that not everyone enjoys freedoms that we exercise every day, here is a gallery of posters protesting the suppression of speech and the denial of that universal right.

With a great beard comes great wisdom.

Isn't that right Tom?

LG makes cellphones. Cellphones are sometimes used for cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is a big problem for a lot of high school age students, in some cases it's even led to suicide. And then there's the problem of teens misusing cellphones and the inbuilt camera to take pictures that, well, pictures that would best not be taken.

So how do you get the people holding your product in their hands to use it wisely?

Give it a Ponder, and let James Lipton help you.

I don't care if you're hungry

You can't sell the commercial rights to my favourite song! If you do, you're nothing more than a sellout, a corporate shill, lower than pond scum.

Isn't that what runs through your mind when you hear a song you love being used to sell cars, or shoes, or snacks? Damn those artists and labels for selling your youth, for corrupting that great song, for trivializing it by using it to sell something to you. Their cynicism in thinking a song you recognize and relate to will make you buy their product...the nerve.

But, you know, artists are people too. And they like to do people things, like eat and have shelter. So when the agency comes calling and offers to buy the rights so they can sell something, and they're willing to pay top dollar, who's to say that artistic principle trumps a growling stomach?

Even The Clash has done it. In 2002, the band incurred criticism when they sold the rights to Jaguar for a car advertisement. In an interview posted on his website, Strummer explained the reasons for the deal. "Yeah. I agreed to that. We get hundreds of requests for that and turn 'em all down. But I just thought Jaguar... yeah. If you're in a group and you make it together, then everybody deserves something. Especially twenty-odd years after the fact."

Here's a great article about the math and the emotion behind selling the rights to a song.

And here's one of the greatest bands in history performing one of their greatest songs.

Your facebook profile is the real you.

New research from The University of Texas at Austin about people's Facebook profiles...

Facebook profiles capture true personality, according to new psychology research

Online social networks such as Facebook are being used to express and communicate real personality, instead of an idealized virtual identity, according to new research from psychologist Sam Gosling at The University of Texas at Austin.

"I was surprised by the findings because the widely held assumption is that people are using their profiles to promote an enhanced impression of themselves," says Gosling of the more than 700 million people worldwide who have online profiles. "In fact, our findings suggest that online social networking profiles convey rather accurate images of the profile owners, either because people aren't trying to look good or because they are trying and failing to pull it off.

"These findings suggest that online social networks are not so much about providing positive spin for the profile owners," he adds, "but are instead just another medium for engaging in genuine social interactions, much like the telephone."

Gosling and a team of researchers collected 236 profiles of college-aged people from the United States (Facebook) and Germany (StudiVZ, SchuelerVZ). The researchers used questionnaires to assess the profile owners' actual personality characteristics as well as their ideal-personality traits (how they wished to be). The personality traits included: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and openness.

In the study, observers rated the profiles of people they did not know. These ratings were then compared to the profile owners' actual personality and their ideal-personality. Personality impressions based on online social network profiles were accurate and were not affected by profile owners' self-idealization.

Accuracy was strongest for extraversion — paralleling results of face-to-face encounters — and lowest for neuroticism. Those findings were consistent with previous research showing that neuroticism is difficult to detect without being in person.

"I think that being able to express personality accurately contributes to the popularity of online social networks in two ways," says Gosling. "First, it allows profile owners to let others know who they are and, in doing so, satisfies a basic need to be known by others. Second, it means that profile viewers feel they can trust the information they glean from online social network profiles, building their confidence in the system as a whole."

Gosling recently co-authored a study on how first impressions do matter when it comes to communicating personality through appearance. For his latest personality research, he focuses his attention to personality in relation to online social networks.

Findings will be published in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science. Researchers include: Gosling and Sam Gaddis (The University of Texas at Austin), Mitja Back, Juliane Stopfer and Boris Egloff (Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Germany), Simine Vazire (Washington University in St. Louis), and Stefan Schmukle (Westfälische Wilhelms-University Münster, Germany).

Tax this to pretty up that.

Toronto city council is debating a new tax on billboards this week. Links are here and here. The idea is to implement a tax on billboards in the city and use the revenue to facilitate a cleanup and beautification of the city. And anyone who's been outside lately knows we need a cleanup here.

One side of the fence sees billboards as urban blight and visual pollution. The other sees them as a sign of business-friendly city government.

Billboards should be taxed, but so should all the other pseudo-advertising that clutters up the great outdoors. From those plastic signs for roofers to the posters that seem to overlap one another in a space of minutes. If a budget can afford a billboard, a poster or the printing of thousands of plastic signs, it can afford to pay a tax to use public space. If it doesn't pay a tax to use public space, then why should it be allowed to remain? This isn't a freedom of speech issue, it's not an example of government being unfriendly to business. It's about public space and who gets to use it.

The point is...?

From the Pharmatimes.com

US consumer ads “led to higher drug prices”

A new study suggesting that US direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) for a top-selling drug had no effect on prescribing rates but led to a major rise in the drug’s price needs to be followed up, say the authors.

Use of Bristol-Myers Squibb/Sanofi-Aventis’ blood-thinner Plavix (clopidogrel), which first appeared on the market in 1998, did not increase as a result of the consumer advertising campaign for it which began in 2001. However, a “sudden and sustained increase” in the drug’s price after the ads commenced cost 27 state Medicaid programmes an additional $207 million in pharmacy expenditures during 2001-2005, say researchers led by Dr Michael Law of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, reporting their findings in the Archives of Internal Medicine this week.

The price of Plavix increased 12% immediately after the DTCA began in 2001, say the authors, who note that in order to recoup the “substantial” costs of DTCA – which totaled more than $350 million for Plavix during 2001-5 - drugmakers need to generate higher revenues through increased sales, higher prices or both.

“If drug price increases after DTCA initiation are common, there are important implications for payers and for policy makers in the United States and elsewhere. Future longitudinal studies should examine other drugs and settings because many other countries are currently considering whether to permit DTCA," the authors conclude. Currently, DTCA is permitted only in the USA and New Zealand.

In comments to Reuters, Dr Law added: “the public should rightly wonder why they’re paying millions in extra drug costs to pay for advertising campaigns that don’t work.”

US drugmakers’ spending for DTCA has increased more than 330% in the last 10 years, and in 2006 the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that every $1 spent on DTCA generates an average $2 in sales. However, in September 2008, the first-ever controlled study into DTCA – whose authors included Dr Law - reported in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that money spent on such advertising has no effect whatsoever.

Nevertheless, the control or abolition of DTCA has long been a popular target for Congress, and current proposals include House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman’s call for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to have powers to ban such advertising for new drugs for up to three years after approval, and New York Representative Jerrold Nalder’s reintroduced Say No to Drug Ads Act, which would abolish tax exemptions for DTCA.

It is in the first few years of a new drug's life that manufacturers "often aggressively market their products and engage in DTCA," and this "increases the number of consumers exposed to safety risks of new products long before they are truly understood," Rep Waxman has said.

Around 30 million people, or about 16% of the US population, are enrolled in the 27 state Medicaid programmes – the federal health insurance programme for those on low incomes – used in the study.

By Lynne Taylor

I've kinda gotta just do the old facepalm/headshake combo after reading this...and then be really thankful I live in Canada.

Go naked, save the planet.

Here's an interesting math problem. How much of an impact does your product's packing have on the environment, from the raw materials through to recycling or disposal? Jesus Diaz over at Gizmodo.com did the numbers for one product line for Coca Cola and came up with this:

It doesn't only look beautiful, and it would make Jon Ive and Steve Jobs wet, but this naked Coca-Cola can would help save energy while reducing air and water pollution. Would it really make a difference? Let's do some math:

Assume the consumption only increases through time, but let's take the daily 2007 numbers from Global INForM Cases Sales database: The total number of Coca-Cola cans sold per worldwide is 67,873,309. Diet Coke and Coke Zero sold 35,387,241, while My Coke sold 103,260,550. Yes, that's all per day.

So using only classic Coca-Cola's daily sales figures, that means 24,773,757,785 are sold every year. Twenty-four billion cans. That is indeed a lot of paint and paint removal products. Because this doesn't only affect the production. It also affects the recycling process, eliminating one step:

The naked can help to reduce air and water pollution occurred in its coloring process. It also reduces energy and effort to separate toxic color paint from aluminum in recycling process. Huge amount of energy and paint required to manufacture colored cans will be saved. Instead of toxic paint, manufacturers process aluminum with a pressing machine that indicates brand identity on surface.

Sounds good to me, and it even looks better if you take into account all kinds of Coke. That brings up the number to 75,380,201,500 cans. I don't know how much paint that represents, but I'm guessing quite a few thousand tons. [7760 via Likecool, Sales info from Let's Get Together]

Send an email to Jesus Diaz, the author of this post, at jesus@gizmodo.com.

Terry meet Russell, Russell meet Terry

Terry O'Reilly knows advertising. And now someone has snagged an interview with him where he is asked the question we all want answered. What is up with that Russell Oliver guy?

Here's the interview, pilfered from BlogTo.com

What makes these bad ads?

I feel all ads should give something back. At the very least, an ad should reward the viewer/listener for sitting through an ad with a smile, or a laugh. These hard-sell ads don't do that. They don't respect the audience's intelligence. I truly believe that when people say all advertising is bad, these are the ads they have in mind. Plus, these ads are also aired with high frequency, so hammer the audience.

If you were brought in to run Oliver's advertising strategy what would you change?

I would sit down with him and try and figure out what kind of a brand he really wants to be. If it is, in fact, a loud, hard-sell guy, i would try and bring some wit to it. Right now, it is silly and almost juvenile in its execution. I also think you can be hardcore retail but still have intelligence at work.

Toronto Tourism and the City of Toronto in general are also much derided for what many residents feel is their inability to effectively market the city. If you were tasked with marketing Toronto, what would you do differently?

I can't really say, because I'm not privy to their strategy. Oliver Jewellery aside, i don't like commenting on how I'd change ad campaigns without having a lot of knowledge about the product. I will say this - tourism campaigns are very tough to do well. It's tough because you are caught between projecting the image tourists already have about you, or projecting a completely new one that may not appeal to them.

Canada, for instance, is widely thought to be mountains, snow, rivers and moose. Europeans love this imagery of Canada, but that is hardly all that Canada is. Plus, Montana could also claim that imagery. It's not unique to Canada, but Italians, for example, dream of coming to Canada to see the mountains and the moose. I also think there are too many masters to please in a tourism campaign, too much vested interest. One of my first demands would be to streamline the approval process, so that it isn't left in the hands of a committee.

How do you feel about the increasing incidents of illegal, guerrilla marketing tactics in the city. Since these incidents often generate publicity (albeit not necessarily favourable) do you think it's paying off for marketers? Or is it ultimately bad for their business?

I think guerrilla advertising is a creative way for smaller advertisers to get attention. I don't think it is tolerated from bigger advertisers. The great thing about guerrilla advertising is that it is usually not paid media - therefore it levels the playing field for smaller advertisers. Some of it is highly creative, and I admire it. That said, illegal advertising is not smart. It can come back and bite an advertiser, as it did Ikea.

Toronto has a very active community aiming to keep ad creep in check. In particular, illegalsigns.ca works tirelessly to get the city to remove illegal billboards and now the city has introduced a sign and billboard tax by-law. Heroic work perhaps. But do you think more can be done to get marketers or industries to act more ethically or police themselves?

I think regulations and rules are very good things. Any industry needs to be regulated. There will always be companies that push the boundaries, or test the limits. Regulations make the industry behave responsibly.

You've just released a new book. What can you tell us about it? Can loyal listeners of your radio show on CBC expect to read some of the same or similar anecdotes?

Mike and I want people to judge advertising by the best, most creative advertising, not by the worst, bad ads. Most of your questions above focus on the worst of advertising, I want to celebrate the best of advertising. What if the music industry were only judged by the worst songs? Or the book industry by the most terrible books? There is some incredible advertising out there. Just look at the Advertising & Design Club of Canada Awards that were given out earlier this month - amazing work.

Canada ranks in the top five countries in the world when it comes to creative advertising. We have an incredibly high level of creativity here. That's what the radio show and the book celebrate: the stories behind the best campaigns ever done. We have over 600,000 listeners a week, so clearly, there is enormous curiosity when it comes to the 'behind the scenes' stories of Madison Avenue. Our biggest wish is that people start spending their money with the great advertisers, and stop buying from the worst advertisers.

Anything else you'd like to add?

Yes, there is too much advertising in the world. But remember that advertising does play an important role in a free-market economy. Almost everyone is connected to marketing. Most people work for companies that have to market their products. The marketing of those products keeps companies profitable and healthy, and consequently keeps lots of people employed. When Mike and i celebrate excellent advertising, it is advertising that is honest, smart and hopefully entertaining. That's the goal. And it is the kind of advertising most of the people I know in this business aspire to. We don't always hit the bullseye, but we try every time out.

The market demands media

And Demand Media has met the demand for media in a most industrial fashion.

Content is king, or key or something. Either way, it's important. With so many sites, and so many people looking, you have to stand out. Templates and colour schemes are nice but if your content ain't relevant you might as well go back to being a shepherd or selling decorative shoe horns.

Enter Demand Media. They've streamlined content generation and acquisition, industrialized it and designed a Just-In-Time delivery system, with up to 4,000 unique pieces of content coming out daily.

Using proprietary algorithms and other top secret methods they're poised to revolutionize content for other sites.

As to whether or not speed to market creates a bias in the content or generates content that doesn't stand up to scrutiny...well time will tell. It does make for an interesting study in collectivization of labour in the digital economy though.

If you find them, count'em

Taking a census is never a simple matter. In fact it's a swamp of logistics, data and analysis. Of course getting people to participate is crucial, but what if they don't want to? For fear of 'government surveillance' in the big brother era amongst other reasons.

To combat low numbers and generate more responses, the U.S. Census Bureau has embarked on a media campaign that goes beyond what they've normally done. Way beyond. All the way to Super Bowl XLIV. But that's not all. They're also reaching out to immigrant communities and engaging them in ways that haven't been attempted in the past. Like telenovelas for the Latino spectrum of the population.

Politcal Advertising - British Style

Britain. They gave us the Magna Carta, fish n' chips, humour and now they've given us some rather amusing and satirical political advertising over the recent expenses scandal.

Perhaps you heard about it. MP's were caught claiming expenses for such things as moat cleaning and floating duck houses. Moat cleaning. Hmmm.

Instead of marching, yelling, throwing things and generally getting all shouty and anarchistic, the good people across the sea did something better. They made fun of it to show how serious they are.

A series of videos have been produced and released this week taking the mickey out of the rather exotic expense claims British Members of Parliament have made. These expenses came to light after numerous media outlets campaigned to have details released earlier this year.

The videos are directed by John Lloyd (the man behind British comedy classics like Blackadder and Spitting Image) and they've been made to support the Open Up! campaign for Parliamentary Reform. Watch the videos, and if you're based in the UK, you can sign the petition calling for change. Funny how media can turn against you in the blink of an eye innit? Funnier still how youtube can completely and utterly captivate and educate while skewering you.

Interesting infomercials in India

Inhabitants in India, initially interested in identical items inhabit interstitial innerspace.

Or, to put it simply, many people living in India don't have televisions. And if they don't have televisions, they can't watch infomercials. So, someone came up with the novel idea of doing it live in front of an audience.

The Wall Street Journal profiles one such person, who works for a division of a division of Lowe Worldwide.

Small world innit?

Adding fuel to the fire.

It's a given that many images used in marketing materials are photoshopped. Usually they're done to enhance or otherwise improve the objects in the image. Sometimes they don't.

The most recent disaster to hit the internets is Ralph Lauren, a photoshopped image that is on the grotesque side, and as an added bonus, threats of legal action combined with takedown notices against two sites that have reproduced and commented on the image.

So, instead of admitting that it was a mistake, performing a small mea culpa and putting the whole thing to rest, they've decided to light a big fire and invite everyone over.

Brilliant.

I won't bother commenting on the use of photoshop to promote unhealthy body-image stereotypes or the like, nope, not me.

It's how long?

Ever go to the store and spend less than $2 on something but wind up with a receipt almost a yard long? Sure it's got all sorts of info, maybe a coupon or seven, but really, hot dogs and subs are footlongs, not receipts.

It's a trend that is growing every day, resulting in more paper waste generated, over and over. The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article about it.

New directions and the future of augmented reality

It's been used to sell cars, movies and who knows what else, but augmented reality is much more than a marketing platform. As data devices become more prevalent, augmented reality will eventually become a transparent overlay to our daily lives.

Here's a very cool article from Wired.com about AR, how it's being used and its future applications.

Just do it.

WWF ads. Not only are they brilliant. They're right.

"The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is an international non-governmental organization working on issues regarding the conservation, research and restoration of the environment. It is the world’s largest independent conservation organization with over 5 million supporters worldwide, working in more than 90 countries, supporting around 1300 conservation and environmental projects around the world. With the mission” to halt and reverse the destruction of our environment”, WWF is trying hard to make this world a better place.

To WWF, what’s important is to get their message passed to the public, and to arise the public awareness of the importance of protecting the nature. That’s why they rely heavily on advertisement. What we have collected here are some of the most powerful and eye-catching ads of WWF. They are all creative and well executed, and the message is clear. What it takes a make a great ads? Maybe you can learn something from the ads below."