A Marketing plan a day; at work, rest and play
I chose this article because I think it gives us a good overview of the online child consumer. Calvert discusses the differences between television and film, saying that:
knowledge is constructed through interactions between the knower and the known. Although such interactions do occur as children view television and film, including advertisements, they are different in the newer interactive technologies, which allow for greater user control and interchanges. Interactive technologies are based on dialogue and turn-taking- a child takes a turn, then a computer responds and takes a turn, then the child takes a turn again. In essence, a conversation is taking place in which each response made by a child leads to potentially different content being shared. (215-216)
Keeping in mind some of the principles of marketing that Calvert discusses in this article, I’d like if you took some time exploring these sites for children. What age group does the site focused on? What do you take away as the main messages from the site? What are some of the more subtle messages? Looking back on what we’ve already looked at, how do these sites play with consumer identity? What kind of privacy issues stick out for you? Also, try out some of the advergames on the sites. How much time do you spend playing the game?
http://www.hasbro.com/playskool/en_CA/
http://store.playmobilusa.com/on/demandware.store/Sites-CA-Site
As grad students are wont to do, I spent my Saturday afternoon playing children’s advergames.
I played around with gotmilk.com and luckycharms.com. I was struck by the homepage of the Lucky Charms website; the banner in the bottom right corner proudly states “Hey kids, this is advertising!” I though this was interesting in relation to Calvert’s article, when she talks about children’s awareness of commercial intent. If children are at all ignorant of the fact that they are being sold something, the website clears it all up instantaneously.
I also thought it was interesting that General Mills reassures parents that the site is “fun and safe for kids!” I think this is interesting in terms of the privacy issues that Calvert talks about (which reminded me a lot of M.T. Anderson’s “fictional” world in Feed). The site doesn’t ask for names or email addresses in order to play the games – it only asks for screen names to keep your score in the racing game.
Speaking of games – this site definitely held my attention for a while. Barbie, clearly targeted towards a girl audience, is super boring. But the racing games, which were simple to play but still required a level of skill, were awesome. When I was a kid, these were exactly the types of things I wanted from free websites.
I also spent some time on gotmilk.com. Even though its games were really lame and confusing to play, I thought the graphics were great. I also think its interesting that they’ve included instructions on how to do crafts with left over milk cartons; games of an offline nature, as it were. This website is also obviously health-concious, as it offers recipes for healthy snacks and reminds kids, and presumably parents, that milk has got calcium – you know, in case we’ve all forgotten that important fact.
This website is interesting, too, in that I’m not sure if it’s advertising a particular brand of milk (I don’t think it is), the idea of drinking milk, or the “got milk” slogan that has rocked the western world. So more than selling a brand, it’s selling an idea – which is evidenced from the store link, where you can buy stuff that says “got milk?” on it.
jillian
5 Mar 11 at 3:43 pm
I also picked up on the “Hey kids, this is advertising!” notice on the Luck Charms site. I thought it was somewhat ironic that the “fun and safe for kids!” notice was right below it, especially since some parents may find that level of advertising unsafe for kids in general.
I found the Calvert article quite interesting. It seemed to me that she wasn’t all that familiar with digital media at times, such as assuming that “humor,
games, and hip language” necessarily are there to appeal to minors, when we’ve seen that gaming is definitely an all-ages activity at this point. There also seemed to be a few calls for regulation that to me seemed completely impractical, such as regulating the depiction of tobacco use as “a hip activity”, when I’m sure you can find sites depicting racism or terrorism as hip activities.
I also think that the interactive nature of the web means traditional methods of limiting children’s exposure to advertising just won’t work. When kids are watching commercials on TV, they’re essentially a captive audience. They can look away or do something else, but they can’t get back to their show until the commercial is over. Still, I don’t think the current regulations make it illegal to record that Trix commercial and watch it on repeat for 24 hours a day. That’s where interactivity comes in. Kids can always choose to do something else with their attention online (that doesn’t mean they will, of course), so the extent of being a captive audience is somewhat less.
I think that limiting the amount of advertising that children are exposed to is very important. You can bet that I’ll have ad-blockers installed on my browser if I ever have kids of my own. Still, I don’t think regulation is going to work, especially, as Calvert admits, that national regulations are hard to enforce when a site’s servers could be anywhere in the world.
kifty
6 Mar 11 at 2:55 am
Great, I wasn’t the only one who was playing on Saturday evening!
First I entered to Lucky Charms and I found it fascinating; mainly because of the page layout. It really has striking colors, designs (I think that this may represent the “attention-getting production features” in Calvert words). Apparently, the site is designed for young children.
Since I am not well versed in terms of games, I think I spent at least 20 minutes playing the game of racing before understanding how to dominate the different skills (through countless and shameful repetitions) and how every time I won I had more stars which gave me the power to beat my competitors. Others games of the page are interesting too. They first “teach” you (model your basic skills) to play the game and then let you get in.
The second site I found more interesting was the www. gotmilk.com. The graphics and design of the site are beautiful and the game “Get the glass!” is wonderful! I think that after half an hour of playing the game (I do not know how I did not lose all my lives before that), I managed to get to the glass of milk, but I don’t know how to ask the question to win the game. Anyway, I noticed that the recipes of the site are rich in calories and fat, which not makes them very healthy, even though, the Spanish version of the site have healthy recipes.
The latter sites that I visited were Barbie and TeenVogue. The first one I did not find it very interesting, perhaps because I had entered in the virtual world before, or maybe because I am a little bit saturated by the character. The age range for this site, I think, might be up to 10 and it is interesting because the dolls can be purchased through the same site (here you can see the idea of the pressure from children to their parents).
Following this merchandise logic, on the top of the page you can see how Mattel is promoting its other brands. Reviewing the page I noticed the game “I can be …”. I gives the children different professional options to do in their future. The list of professions is symptomatic and stereotypical: Ballerina, Ballet Teacher, Teacher, Life Guard, Movie Star, Doctor, Chef, Computer Engineer, Dolphin Trainer, Pet Vet, which certainly vary from the professions that girls can choose in the Spanish version (including Nanny and Dentist).
Although I tried to surf in Teen Vogue, I could not find the games, but learned a lot from the fashion week in New York and the new chapter of Gossip Girl.
Thanks Stacey for a Saturday of games and mass culture! 🙂
magdalena
6 Mar 11 at 5:09 pm
Although it seems that I missed out on the group Saturday-night advergaming session, I spent some time tinkering around with the games yesterday and was somewhat surprised to find that some of them were quite entertaining. I started off with the Playmobil games, and the first few that I clicked through were pretty uninspiring; ‘Supertuning’ had a pretty rockin’ hip-hop intro, but the game itself proved to be a tedious mix-and-match digital coloring book, and there really isn’t anything positive to say about the “Ostrich Challenge.” However, whatever effort Playmobil didn’t put into their other games seems to have all been concentrated on the pirate game (I should have known, with the pirate character right there next to the game menu). This one had a surprisingly long and involved intro movie with graphics that felt on par with most child-targeted console videogames I’ve seen, and it functioned well to get the player involved in the story and the action (as well as demonstrating a whole lot of different Playmobil toys). The gameplay was similarly well-executed and even challenging; it took me several attempts to beat the first level.
I appreciate that Jonathan brought up the challenge of advertising online vs. on television and the fact that children are no longer a captive audience online. In this New Media environment advertisers can no longer afford to provide passive content and expect that children (or anyone) will pay it any attention; they must instead provide some sort of value in order to hold their audience, and from the look of some of these games marketers are starting to understand this.
The other game that I felt did well in this regard (at least for me) was the lucky charms racing game. Even though it was relatively easy, the inclusion of trophies and multiple levels of difficulty provided a motivation for continuing to play. I won’t claim to know much about subliminal messaging in marketing, but those huge pink heart-shaped marshmallows floating through space in the background of the race course are making me hungry for (sugary) cereal…
I found approaching this topic through the lens of gender studies to be quite interesting. Marshall observed in the reading that most videogames are developed and created by men and targeted at young teen boys. Although it could be argued that this age demographic is shifting (or has already shifted) to an older group as the gamers themselves age, my own experience working in the gaming industry definitely supports the existence of this gender bias. In many ways I feel that the bias is perpetuated by the business-driven nature of the industry; they know that boys buy more games; so they make games for boys; so boys play more games, and more boys end up becoming game designers and making games for boys: it is self-perpetuating. The focus on ‘advergaming,’ however, draws us out of this loop because marketers of products like Barbie are targeting girls. While the games on the Barbie site were pretty weak and didn’t hold my attention, the same might not be said for their target audience. In this sense, somewhat ironically, the pressure to create content through which their customers can connect with their brand online is more of a motivation for the creation of ‘girls’ games than the traditional ‘sales’ model. However, advertisers may need to step up their efforts and produce good games (maybe Adventure/ story games?) if they really want to develop this audience.
schuyler
7 Mar 11 at 8:12 am
Okay, so as the last person to comment this week, I feel like most of my points have been already said or at least touched upon. But will I let that stop me? I don’t think so!
I too went to the Lucky Charms website, and while I didn’t find the flying game easy (probably because I really have no hand-eye coordination), I did appreciate the possibility that kids would find it “fun.” I noticed the banner at the bottom relatively quickly (This is Advertising!), and thought it quite smart on their part. By not attempting to hide the fact, they are marketing themselves to young people and adults as being truthful and open as a company. How many companies do you know that like to state outright that they are advertising? I think this would draw a lot of people to a certain product if the company behind it gives off an aura of truth-telling.
I also tried out the Milk website and had a fun time relieving Mrs. Hen’s PMS symptoms and rocking the owl to sleep. I’m not entirely sure how I feel about a PMS-riddle chicken as a central character for a children’s game, but I guess kids need to learn about this stuff at some point, right? Maybe? I don’t know…
Calvert’s article was interesting and enlightening in a few areas, but also felt a little repetitive (marketing strategy, anyone?) and simplistic. Her use of the term “hip” made me wonder if she knew what she was talking about, and the reference to teen wireless devices such as cellphones and… pagers? Really? I didn’t know anyone besides doctors carried around pagers. Not only that, but how would one play an interactive game on such a device? Sorry, I know it’s nit-picky, but you all asked for it by being thorough with your responses.
On the whole, however, I did find this foray into children’s marketing and online advergames quite interesting and a nice change of pace. I do have to agree with Schuyler at this point, though, and assert that these games do have a long way to go if they want to step beyond mere gimmick. And of course there is the gender issue that is so prevalent in all of these games. The racing games are fun and everyone may enjoy them, but it does seem as though there is a male gender bias existing in that space. The more girl-centred sites (such as teen vogue) are not quite at the same level in terms of interactive content (in my view.) These games seem to perpetuate views that boys want action and adventure while girls want to dress up and learn about fashion (and save Mrs. Hen from the nefarious symptoms of PMS.)
All in all a fascinating topic and I hope the class discussion will be just as enlightening as the articles and blog comments! Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to get back to Teen Vogue, there’s an article on Alex Pettyfer that I simply have to finish.
Rob
7 Mar 11 at 10:44 am