Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts
Monday, August 29, 2011
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Graphic Warning Labels
The new cigarette packaging, with highly graphic labels, is intended to discourage smoking by associating cigarettes with strong images of disease and other consequences of smoking. This success of this campaign will likely lead to graphic association ads in other areas as well. Here are samples of ads and packaging consumers can expect to see in the near future.
This...
and this ...
and finally ...
This...
and this ...
and finally ...
Labels:
ad,
advertising,
cigarettes,
citi,
fox news,
smoking,
wendys
Friday, October 15, 2010
Ad Hokum
The local airport has "free" WiFi ... free, that is, if you agree to watch a sponsor's ad. You get a list of sponsors, and you can choose whose ad to watch.
We all know Google's billions are primarily advertising revenue. Is this the model of the future? Maybe we can eliminate lots of payments simply by agreeing to watch ads. Those folks in Tennessee whose house burned down because they failed to pay the annual fire department fee? Suppose they could simply have agreed to watch a Geico ad in exchange for fire fighting service? Okay, that's a bit cruel, but some insurance ad. As long as it wasn't an infomercial, some of their property and pets might have been saved.
Could this model be extended to cover police, sanitation and other services?
Isn't this really the best answer for health care? The more serious your condition, the longer you're likely to be laid up. And while you're taking up a hospital bed, you can be watching all the latest Nasonex or Cialis ads. (Of course, sponsors might not want to cover terminal patients.)
Ultimately, if you can pay for everything by watching ads, then even the goods and services that are advertised will be paid for by watching other ads. Hmmm. This has possibilities.
We all know Google's billions are primarily advertising revenue. Is this the model of the future? Maybe we can eliminate lots of payments simply by agreeing to watch ads. Those folks in Tennessee whose house burned down because they failed to pay the annual fire department fee? Suppose they could simply have agreed to watch a Geico ad in exchange for fire fighting service? Okay, that's a bit cruel, but some insurance ad. As long as it wasn't an infomercial, some of their property and pets might have been saved.
Could this model be extended to cover police, sanitation and other services?
Isn't this really the best answer for health care? The more serious your condition, the longer you're likely to be laid up. And while you're taking up a hospital bed, you can be watching all the latest Nasonex or Cialis ads. (Of course, sponsors might not want to cover terminal patients.)
Ultimately, if you can pay for everything by watching ads, then even the goods and services that are advertised will be paid for by watching other ads. Hmmm. This has possibilities.
Labels:
ads,
advertising,
google
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Saw Ad ... Must Buy
So NPR's Marketplace is reporting that Jay Leno may do live ads on his new 10:00 show next season. Rico Gagliano waxed nostalgic for the days when Johnny Carson used to plug products in the middle of the show. Apparently NBC, in desperation, is weighing having Leno do the same thing. The theory is that TiVo and DVR users will stop zapping through the commercials once they see Leno's face. Kenneth Wilbur, a professor of marketing (Isn't that an oxymoron?) at USC, points out that NBC's audience is "more tech-savvy," and has higher rates of DVR usage.
So, do they think all these tech-savvy users can't tell a plug from a monologue? Or that they'll appreciate being tricked into watching these ads? "Hey, I stopped zapping for this? Guess I'd better buy it!"
That's like "Gee, these Viagra sellers have really filled up my email box. I'd better get some."
Or "This movie was plastered over the whole side of a bus. It must be good!"
Or my personal favorite: "These Verizon ads are 6 decibels louder than everything else. I'd better subscribe. (I can hear them now!)"
How stupid do they think we are?
So, do they think all these tech-savvy users can't tell a plug from a monologue? Or that they'll appreciate being tricked into watching these ads? "Hey, I stopped zapping for this? Guess I'd better buy it!"
That's like "Gee, these Viagra sellers have really filled up my email box. I'd better get some."
Or "This movie was plastered over the whole side of a bus. It must be good!"
Or my personal favorite: "These Verizon ads are 6 decibels louder than everything else. I'd better subscribe. (I can hear them now!)"
How stupid do they think we are?
Labels:
advertising,
commercials,
jay leno,
live ads
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Media Critical Judgement -- YAFS
As I've railed previously on this blog, most recently here, advertising is the commodity on the Web. Or, more precisely, attention is the commodity. That's what all content providers and advertisers are after ... a bit of your attention.
That's fine. If that's what supports the creation of excellent content like this blog (I wish!), so be it. But as readers and viewers, we have a certain obligation to develop critical faculties and judgment. We need to acquire the ability to discriminate between the well argued and documented, and the merely loud.
This is no different from TV commercials. They're all louder than the programs they infest, so you can hear them even when you go to the fridge for a snack. And they all try to be cute and memorable, as opposed to persuasive. Think about the commercials that stick in your mind. Do you think Geico Insurance is better than any other because they have cavemen or a cute animated gecko? Does that horde of extras stalking the Verizon customer really prove their service is better?
Given that more research is done on the effectiveness of ads than probably any other aspect of human behavior, these techniques must work, despite their irrationality. That's why we all need to learn to evaluate advertising claims critically. And because of product placements, viral marketing, and other means of infiltrating seemingly innocuous content, we need to apply this critical thinking to all content. Otherwise, we're just supporting and encouraging more intrusive and misleading promotion, as Seth Godin describes on his blog.
My father used to sit in front of the TV and say "YAFS!" to the commercials. (This was in the days before mute buttons.) YAFS is an acronym for "You Are Full of ... well, something." No exaggeration. I grew up watching TV with this constant reminder to be skeptical of commercials. You can imagine the cynicism this engendered.
Now you know why I'm such a curmudgeon.
That's fine. If that's what supports the creation of excellent content like this blog (I wish!), so be it. But as readers and viewers, we have a certain obligation to develop critical faculties and judgment. We need to acquire the ability to discriminate between the well argued and documented, and the merely loud.
This is no different from TV commercials. They're all louder than the programs they infest, so you can hear them even when you go to the fridge for a snack. And they all try to be cute and memorable, as opposed to persuasive. Think about the commercials that stick in your mind. Do you think Geico Insurance is better than any other because they have cavemen or a cute animated gecko? Does that horde of extras stalking the Verizon customer really prove their service is better?
Given that more research is done on the effectiveness of ads than probably any other aspect of human behavior, these techniques must work, despite their irrationality. That's why we all need to learn to evaluate advertising claims critically. And because of product placements, viral marketing, and other means of infiltrating seemingly innocuous content, we need to apply this critical thinking to all content. Otherwise, we're just supporting and encouraging more intrusive and misleading promotion, as Seth Godin describes on his blog.
My father used to sit in front of the TV and say "YAFS!" to the commercials. (This was in the days before mute buttons.) YAFS is an acronym for "You Are Full of ... well, something." No exaggeration. I grew up watching TV with this constant reminder to be skeptical of commercials. You can imagine the cynicism this engendered.
Now you know why I'm such a curmudgeon.
Labels:
ads,
advertising,
commercials,
critical,
criticism,
digital media
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Mad Men And Even Madder Men
I grew up in the era depicted in the popular TV show Mad Men. Back then, advertising was the number one game in town. It was almost a cliche ... the corporate, suit-and-tied junior exec was in advertising. The number of books and movies portraying the advertising business is staggering. Movies like Lover Come Back, Good Neighbor Sam, and Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House, along with TV shows like Bewitched, all revolve around the ad business. So it's no surprise that shows like Mad Men fill us with nostalgia for those cut-throat, back-stabbing days when advertising was the prestige business in America.
Well, guess what, it still is. In the high-tech world, hardware companies like DEC and IBM were eclipsed by software giants like Microsoft and Adobe. Now those, too, are overshadowed by companies like Google, a company whose business is ... selling ads.
Well, guess what, it still is. In the high-tech world, hardware companies like DEC and IBM were eclipsed by software giants like Microsoft and Adobe. Now those, too, are overshadowed by companies like Google, a company whose business is ... selling ads.
Labels:
ad,
advertising,
mad men
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



