angus.todd

I had a blast working with my project team in developing a movie that summarized the work we had done thought the year. Given that, and this mainly directed at myself, our group was relatively technologically challenged (ludities, if you will) we were able to come together to overcome our struggles… no matter how corny that sounds.

The video was intended to act as a substitute for a presentation of the findings and conclusions we had made throughout the year. Additionally, while acting as a wrap-up for our year long group project, this video forced us to learn how to use the many technologies available to us in making a digital presentation. In this regard the video was a success. I can confidently say that I have learned the most basic skills required to produce a digital media presentation. Unfortunately, I would have preferred to have presented our findings to our professor, in a traditional oral form. Is this because I struggle to do even the most medial tasks on a computer, like connect to the Internet? Believe it or not, the struggle that was involved in working with my teammates to make a video presentation was challenging yet very much enjoyable. Having said that, there is something in a verbal interaction that cannot be replaced by a digital presentation, and that is… the interaction. Being able to gauge the responses of your audience while you present, and adjust your message accordingly is an invaluably important part of a presentation that is impossible to replace with a video.

Interestingly, this remark is applicable throughout the lessons of our Marketing class. If you are unable to adapt your messages to your audience, they are not nearly as affective.

I am undoubtedly guilty of procrastinating from assignments by wasting time away on Facebook, twitter and variable other forms of social media so I was more than happy to find another example of how Social media can be used to be productive and do good. I stumbled upon this blog post called Beremedy – #GivingTuesday  and was once again struck by the potential Facebook and Twitter have in changing so many things around us.

Beremedy was started when Blake Canterbury realized he really wanted to help people but didn’t know who to help, or how to help them. The idea is that people can use the social network they have built on either Facebook or Twitter to help spread the word about non profit organizations that are lacking the means to promote and publicize their movements.

It is really quite a simple idea that takes advantage a low cost means to spread word about an idea. Take a look:

While this example might not be known too well, the use of social media to help CHEAPLY promote and idea or product is beginning to be used more and more widely. Here’s an example that people will definitely have heard about:

Founded in March of 2006, Twitter was originally intended to act as an SMS service to communicate with a small group of people. While it is impressive to think that for some people (Justin Bieber) that ‘small group of people’ has grown to be up to 36+ million followers, whats more impressive is to try to understand the effect that Twitter has had on some companies and their marketing campaigns. Take Air Canada’s corporate Twitter account for example, which replies to anyone and everyone who tweets at them regardless of the nature of their message. Whether a complaint, compliment or just a regular statement that includes @AirCanada, you can expect a response. This PR has been a huge help in working to maintain a positive public image.

Air Canada’s Twitter page

Despite the fact that they are able to carry hundreds of people over thousands of kilometres in a matter of hours, people absolutely hate airlines. Uncomfortably confined seats, delays, layovers, overbooked flights, and baggage fees. These things all upset customers and Air Canada is no exception to this sentiment. By responding to customer tweets, Air Canada attempts to add an element of personableness to an otherwise faceless multibillion dollar corporation that’s seen as trying to maximize profits by taking advantage of customers. When someone complains about their flight and the complaint is dealt with in a matter of minutes, suddenly this customer feels a whole lot more important.

Having said all that, people who have just had their flight delayed for  hours might not be as taken by this Twitter account as I am. Unfortunate realities of the airline business are that flights get delayed, baggage gets misplaced, and customers become unhappy. While Air Canada is by no means able to solve every customer’s complaint, it is able to quickly explain its side of the problem and take ownership for any mistakes that may have been made by the employees.

Air Canada has used Twitter as a platform to speed up and personalize the management of complaints they receive. Previously, customers would receive the same answers they now receive via twitter, only after waiting on the hold for hours on end. The problems in customer service that face all airlines might be near impossible to fix, however the PR that Air Canada does on Twitter is successful in mitigating public disgruntlement.

Serendipitous that I stumble across Liam’s blog post about coffee, as my favourite time of year comes to an end (I speak of course about Roll Up The Rim). A little more than a year ago I made a post that talked about McDonalds’ foray into the caffeinated beverage market, and ever since then (then being the first time I ever consciously thought about why companies did what they did when selling coffee) I can’t help but notice all these promotions that specifically Starbucks, Tim Hortons, and McDonalds have used to try to gain an edge.

Liam talked about customer retention programs like the Starbucks card, but in a market where customers usually stick to the drink (and cafe/company) they already like, how can customers be enticed to switching over to other kinds of coffee. I remember when a friend of mine, who was previously a dedicated Tim Hortons coffee drinker, first made the switch to Starbucks. Unlike some people, he made the switch not because the coffee or service was better, but because of a promotion that allowed him to get a free refill while he was still in the store. When the promotional period came to an end, however, my friend continued to go to Starbucks. He was now a dedicated Starbucks customer… no longer because of free refills but because “The coffee is just way better.” He’d gone from loving Timmy’s’ coffee to calling it “dirty water that was heated up, and served in a cup.”

I have also witnessed people make similar changes from Tim Hortons and Starbucks to McDonalds after being sucked in by all the free coffee promotions Mcdonalds frequently has. Eventually they too have been hooked by their coffee that is “so cheap, and actually really good!”

I personally was one of the suckers who got hooked to Tim Hortons by the lethal combination of addictions to caffeine and gambling that magically comes together every year in the gift to the world we call Roll Up The Rim.

The point being, maybe (given that caffeine is a drug and therefore addictive) winning over customers isn’t about keeping them happy once you’ve got them, but finding the best way to get them hooked.

When Apple launched the iPhone 5, the public response was extremely positive. Within the first 24 hours, there were over two million pre-orders and this was a typical scene outside of retail stores:

In 2012 the most viewed advertisement on YouTube was Nike Football’s “My Time Is Now” ad, that had a staggering 20,884,282 views. Here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMv8g8CO4cQ

Both Apple and  Nike have phenomenal brands that are recognizable the world over – the Nike and Apple brands are estimated to be worth roughly $14.9 billion and $87.3 billion respectively. There is no doubting that these companies have done an amazing job establishing and maintaing their brands. But so what!? As someone who is interested in learning how to address the challenges that might arise when working in Marketing, I find the interesting stories not to be associated with successes, but with stories of failure and the campaigns that result from failure.

Take for example GM, who, after being $172.81 billion in debt, needed a $49.5 billion bailout from taxpayers. After this bailout American taxpayers were outraged and felt that the company did not deserve such an expensive second chance, particularly as the economic downturn that had effected GM also affected 55% of the American people (non of which suffered as lenient consequences).

In 2009  GM released the following commercial,  titled ‘Thank You (We all fall down)’, intended to make people think of GM  not as the evil corporation that’s stealing tax dollars but instead as a human being that, like the other 313 million American citizens, makes mistakes from time to time. Here it is:

Roughly a year later, GM released a follow up commercial that acted as proof to the public that they had not made a mistake in helping GM in its times of difficulty. This is the commercial:

The effect these campaigns had was most accurately described by Heidi Moore, a journalist from The Guardian, who said “After you watch a batch of post-bailout thank-you ads from [GM], it seems that the only patriotic thing to do is storm the White House, asking why we aren’t bailing out more companies. It’s our duty as Americans.”.

It is interesting that the public opinion of GM was (arguably) changed with but a few thoughtfully planned ads.

Gasoline, petroleum and other petroleum byproducts are a monumental part of our lives. Whether people realize it or not, they are used by everyone, in hundreds of way every day. For whatever reason, however, a lot of people hate oil companies and their practices despite the invaluable products and services they provide.  Oil companies are criticized for their extraction and transportation methods that are considered by many to be unsustainable and a liability for the environment. Consequently these companies are fighting a huge uphill battle when it comes to marketing themselves to the public. For the most part, the largest companies in this industry simply extract and refine the product and never interact with the end consumer, so why bother trying to win them over?! The problem arises when there is large enough negative public sentiment toward an oil and gas company, or one of their potential projects. This public sentiment causes governments to be hesitant in issuing licenses and permits to allow the companies to carry out there exploration plans.

Take for example the recent public reaction to the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. While the pipeline is estimated to bring $10 million to the Canadian economy every year, the premier of British Columbia opposes the pipeline because there is an overwhelming public consensus that the pipeline should not be constructed. In order to try to sway this public opinion, Enbridge has launched a large campaign consisting mainly of radio and television advertisement and social mediums like YouTube and Facebook.

One of the most important parts of this campaign has been an attempt to inform the public of the benefits that will come to the end consumers (because after-all the consumers aren’t buying crude oil, they’re buying things like gasoline, and other petroleum byproducts).

Take a look at one of these videos, which does a good job of demonstrating the benefits that come from petroleum and specifically pipelines (also interesting to note that the video never mentions Enbridge, or the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x_WuWs5PB4

In North America, nearly 70% of adults are overweight, and that number is constantly on the rise. Consequently there is an ever increasing number of products and services that promise to deliver quick, easy, and effective weight-loss to those who need it. There is certainly nothing ethically wrong with trying to help people improve their heath and lifestyle… and if you are able to make a profit while doing so, more power to ya! Having said that, in effort to turn a profit on their product or service, companies walk the very thin line that is ethical marketing.

Take for example this advertisement for the ‘Bowflex Treadclimber’.

Sure this workout machine might be able to help people lose weight, but by putting models on the Treadclimber who are clearly doing more physical exercise than just using this machine, is Bowflex unethically and falsely bolstering its claims about the the potential results that come from using the Treadclimber?

Granted, it might not be wrong for Bowflex to put a fit man or women on one of their products to help convince people that the best thing for them is the Treadclimber, but making blatantly false claims about the results of a product is undoubtedly unethical. In the documentary “Bigger, Faster, Stronger” director Chris Bell helps bring to light techniques sometimes used to help sell weight-loss supplements. This clip about before and after pictures shows just how unethical some marketing can be.

While there probably always be some unethical marketing in our society, hopefully this will prompt you to question the motives and realities behind the many forms of marketing that you consume on a daily basis.

Cam Frick wrote a blog that talked about Gordie Dutka’s blog on Product Placement. I always thought product placement was blatant and obvious, somewhat like this farcicle example in the movie ‘Wayne’s World’:

Cam talks about the “Junior Mint” Seinfeld episode as product placement, and this is something I never even noticed. I began to think, if things like this had slipped past me, what else. And I relised that although product placement you do notice is effective, product placement you don’t is even more so. For example, when I think about the movie Transformers, I think about the blatant product placement of the yellow Chevy Camaro, however after doing some digging, I came to realise that there are many other products which ‘happened’ to slip into shots. Ipods, HP computers, Porsche, eBay, USA today, Panasonic, Burger King, Cadillac, Hummers, GM, Apple, Pepto Bysmol, Furbys, Mountain Dew and X-Box 360 all make appearances. Don’t believe me? Take a look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LFQIoc49ZM

But what other products have I been tricked into thinking were cool because of their parts in movies! Were the Herbie movies VolksWagen ads? The scene in ET where the boy leaves a trail of Skittles, Will Smith driving his Auddi TT in IRobot, James Bond’s Aston Martin, the Dr Pepper can Tobey Maguire learns how to shoot webs on in Spiderman, The Fedex plane or the Wilson ball in Castaway… are these all product placements?

Product placement is everywhere, and usually you only see it till you start looking.

Devon Hardie made a blog which talked about how bad it was that companies were marketing their products as ‘green’ and ‘environmentally friendly’, which is true… it is bad. The question is, can you blame them?

The blog talks about how there are companies who market their water bottles as environmentally friendly because they use recycled materials in the production of their bottles, when in reality the product isn’t very friendly at all. This is a bad thing, I will agree, however I think whats even worse is why they CAN do it.

There has been a recent trend  toward being environmentally friendly and while this is a good thing, most people do not genuinely care about the environment, they care about THEIR brand. They are more concerned with how others think of them, than the well being of our Earth. People who buy these ‘green’ disposable water bottles aren’t thinking about the benefit to the environment, they are worrying about the bottles benefit to their image. Someone who did care about the environment would not have bought a plastic bottle that they planned on throwing away after one use, they would have used a permanent water bottle.

The Toyota Prius, a genuinely green product, has seen its sales booming over recent years while other hybrids cars are seeing declining sales. Why, because the Prius has a shape which is globally recognized as being ‘hybrid’. When people see a Prius, they think green. CNW Marketing Research did a study that found 34% of people who own a Prius admit they do because it makes them look good(and thats only the people that admit to it).

While it is bad that companies market themselves as green when they aren’t, they can do this because people are falsely marketing themselves as green and because that allows the companies to continue selling ‘faux-green’ products, it is worse.

With ads in TV shows , newspapers, billboards, magazines, radio programs, bus stops and on the internet, consumers see hundreds, even thousands of ads a day.

There was a time when a single ad could have a huge impact on consumers. Take for example this iconic Marlboro cigarette ad from the 1950’s which over two years increased sales 300%:

Times have changed, however, and as a result of the constant flow of ads which consumers encounter, they have become numb to the effect of an ordinary ad. Companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year to try to influence you to buy their product, yet, we, as consumers, pay little attention to any ad unless they are remarkable.

About a year ago, State Farm teamed up with the musicians “Ok Go” to produce an ad that stood out… An ad that was worthy of you taking the time out of your busy life to show it to a friend. The result was a music video for the group’s song This Too Shall Pass, which briefly displays the State Farm logo twice throughout the video and thanks them at the end.

Because the ad was so different, people noticed it, and within 48 hours it received over 1.4 million views. The add went viral all because it was stood out. Marketers need to stop trying to address masses with cookie cutter advertisements and begin standing out for being different.