To access online readings and participate in related conversations, click here.
To access online readings and participate in related conversations, click here.
Posted at 11:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Three recent articles touch on the role of humor in advertising. They raise questions in my mind about how men and women may respond differently to humor, and I’m interested in your thoughts. Are there fundamental differences in what men and women find funny? If so, what are the differences, and why do they exist? Can you think of any examples of humorous advertising that you think is funny to one gender and not the other? Check out this article on Microsoft’s new, sarcastic tone in its advertising, which seems to me to have a very male sensibility; this article about advertising for feminine hygiene products; and this article about the role that humorous media play in the lives of young men.
Posted at 06:33 AM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (8)
Here's an article with some amusing insights into how public relations is done in the fashion industry – and how important social media have become there. Who are some other noteworthy leaders in fashion social media? What do you think they’re accomplishing with their blog and Facebook posts and their tweeting?
Posted at 07:43 AM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (8)
Here's another example of how brands are getting creative in order to engage with consumers. Why do you think Chipotle’s online video has been so popular? What do you think of the company’s efforts to associate its brand with sustainable farming? Would that incline you to eat at Chipotle's? If you've eaten there, does the association with sustainable farming come through in its stores? Is it consistent with the consumer’s experience?
Posted at 02:33 PM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (10)
What distinguishes an effective call to action from one that generates no response? Your chances of success are better if the action you’re calling for is simple and easy to do and low- or no-cost. That’s obvious. It helps too if the action offers at least a potential reward, such as a chance to win something of value or contribute to some worthy goal. And the action should enable the communicator to follow up with the audience. That is, you want the audience to tell you how to reach them and give you permission to do so. That way, you have a chance to increase and sustain participation, or marshal your audience for new actions as circumstances evolve.
In terms of eliciting response, the NFL scored big with its Super Bowl ad aimed at attracting participants to a new fantasy football game: 1.7 million people texted to get more information. In texting, they handed over their mobile phone numbers to the NFL and gave tacit permission for the league to contact them in the future. Pretty cool.
You may have noticed that many Super Bowl ads ended with a Facebook and/or Twitter address. Were any other notable strategies used to drive traffic? Have you responded to any of these, and how did the advertiser engage with you?
Posted at 05:55 PM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (10)
Are marketers insane to pay $3.5 million for 30 seconds on the Super Bowl? at least one marketing professor thinks so. Follow his thinking about auto makers' ads, and ads by fashion retailer H+M. What do you think? Are a lot of smart people doing really dumb things at enormous cost?
Posted at 12:48 AM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (10)
In the past 24 hours or so, a huge reputation crisis has engulfed the nation’s leading charity dedicated to fighting breast cancer: the Susan G. Komen Foundation. In deciding to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood for cancer screening, the foundation ignited a firestorm of criticism. Read about the latest news here. Then read this analysis from a PR perspective. What do you think of the foundation’s efforts to respond to the crisis, so far?
Posted at 05:48 PM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (11)
Edelman, one of the world’s largest public-relations firms, sponsors an annual survey of elites in countries around the world. They’re asked how much they trust major institutions – government, business, media and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The 2012 Edelman Trust Barometer has just been released. The survey contains a wealth of insights, and because it has been conducted every year for 12 years now, it reveals important trends in trust and reputation. Browse around in Edelman’s analysis of the data. What jumps out at you as most significant or important for strategic communicators?
Posted at 03:04 PM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (11)
As we’ve discussed, advertisers today mostly avoid the use of jingles and instead use music from popular recordings. This music serves several functions. It borrows interest, helps establish a mood, sometimes helps deliver the ad message through song lyrics, and associates the advertised brand with the brand attributes of a popular artist.
Check out this review of some famous and infamous uses of popular music recordings and artists. Which do you find most appealing and effective? Which are least effective? Can you think of any current commercials that stand out for their use of music? What makes them effective or ineffective, enjoyable or annoying?
Do you think less of a music artist for licensing the use of his or her music in an ad? Why or why not?
Posted at 02:24 PM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (8)
You’ll soon be reading Words That Work, which focuses on how your choice of words can frame your message, make it more (or less) sticky, and incline your audience to accept or reject it. Here is a prime example from the realm of energy and environmental advocacy.
“Fracking” is a lot easier to say and remember than “hydraulic fracturing.” (Get the facts about it here.) Given the former's stigma and unsavory associations, the oil and gas industry probably needs to come up with a term or phrase that is as sticky as "fracking," but friendlier. If you were hired by the industry to rebrand the process, what would you recommend they call it?
Posted at 07:29 AM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (13)
Facebook and Twitter have become powerful tools for movements for social change from the Middle East to Occupy Wall Street. Now, social entrepreneurs are creating businesses to provide additional online tools for such movements. One such business is Change.org, which makes it easy to start a petition drive, for virtually any cause, and obtain signatures online from anyone anywhere in the world. A few months ago, a petition begun on Change.org sparked the consumer revolt that forced Bank of America to retreat from its plan to charge a fee on debit-card transactions.
Check out the Change.org website (including the “We’re Hiring” link at the bottom of the home page) and this article about Change.org from the Washington Post. Note the qualifications Change.org is looking for in hiring communications managers and directors and a “Director of Storytelling.”
Any lessons here about how to rally support for a cause? Would you sign an online petition? Have you signed one? Why or why not? Interested in working for Change.org? Can you think of any other ways that the Internet could facilitate social movements – and that might be the basis for a new business?
Posted at 08:56 AM in CMJR 371 | Permalink | Comments (14)