Category Archives: Uncategorized

11/29/13

On Marketing-Plan Teamwork

Over the past few weeks, I have been working with my fellow COMM 296 teammates to make a marketing plan on The Coca Cola Company.

Marketing plans in general require a lot of work to make. When I first heard about the assignment, I was afraid that I would have to struggle through it. However, once I got into it, I was surprised by how doable it was. The two things that helped me the most were (1)clear explanation and outline  given by my professor and (2)my helpful teammates. The outline guided me and my team members through the assignment step by step, while my surprisingly friendly and considerate teammates enabled my team to work efficiently.

The third part of our assignment was to make a video summarizing marketing mix analysis. After long hours of meetings, we adopted my idea of using interview style as an outline and brainstormed ideas for the script. Everyone was very active in sharing ideas and doing things for the team. Some even came to help when it was  not their turn to film. I was surprised by the willingness of everyone to work and do more than what they are expected to. Everyone was very flexible and mindful of each other. Although even the smallest issues, such as deciding the time for a group meeting, may cause some setbacks in other groups (in one of my other groups, in fact), my teammates were not selfish enough to make that a problem in ours. We adjusted our schedules to other members’ and we did not force our ideas on others. Overall, I am glad that I got to be a part of this amazing, selfless and hardworking team.

Alex and Paula

Elyssa and Tim

Tiffany and Carmen

Doing a reflective blog post for the assignment, I think that it is only fair for me to share what my fellow teammates say as well, so here are some sentences that serve as a brief summary of what they think:

  1. Burke, Tim – “I thought I had lucked out with my group since we were, for the most part on the same page with our thoughts, which made decisions in the group a lot easier. … None of the disagreements left the meeting, rather all were resolved and for the most part the group was happy with what was decided upon amongst the group.”
  2. Heng, Elyssa – “Despite coming from diverse backgrounds and cultures, I think my team worked very well together and I think that it’s this very diversity that helped us amalgamate varying perspectives and consumer experiences around the world.”
  3. Meisner, Alexandra – “My team for the designated marketing assignment #3, consisted of people who were both task-oriented and creative.”
  4. Liu, Carmen – “Everyone is friendly, easygoing and creative which makes me learn a lot from our work.”
  5. Luo, Paula – “We didn’t assign anyone anything, but just to do what you could do. No one just lean back, crossed the arms, and sat there. Everyone made a great effort. We did our best.” [sic]

What I found interesting is how each of them thinks that our third assignment is the thing that brought us closest together. I also feel that doing the video together brought out our creative sides and melted our awkwardness away. It would not be a stretch to say that I agree with everything they have written on their blogs, and I, as well, feel fortunate to have been blessed with such a hardworking team. I especially like how Paula said that “no one just [leaned] back, crossed [their] arms, and sat” during our assignment, because I feel that it summarizes our team perfectly. Everyone had the initiative to give their all.

All in all, I feel that the marketing plan assignment is a great tool to make us put what we learned from textbooks to practice, marketing-wise and teamwork-wise.

11/15/13

Telekinetic Surprise: Carrie

As a Stephen King enthusiast, I was very excited when the third film adaptation of his novel Carrie was released. Prior to the release, there were, of course, multiple kinds of promotions done to advertise the movie. Among these advertisements, one of them was featured in my fellow COMM 296 classmate (Elaine Ho)’s blog post titled “Your daily dose of coffee [sic]”. It was an interactive advertisement in the form of a prank.

I agree with what Ho comments: “this marketing tactic is absolutely brilliant” as it is very unique and leaves a deep impression to potential customers. When I first came across this advertisement on YouTube, I was impressed by the amount of work and time invested in setting up this elaborate prank. Here are some of the things that I think the advertisement utilises well:

Word of Mouth
Needless to say, an elaborate prank such as this would get people talking, especially the people who were involved in the prank. If there is one thing that I have learnt from the marketing business, it is that you want people to talk. No publicity is a bad publicity in the entertainment world.

Social Media
Posting the video of the prank on YouTube was a brilliant idea. Props to the marketing department for realising that prank videos are the in thing at the moment. Prank videos are very popular and goes viral very quickly, and a prank video like this gets shared very frequently.

Surprise
The people behind the prank caught people off-guard and  a good surprise always draws attention. The 2013 Carrie is basically a remake of the two preceding film adaptations. A normal 3-4 minutes trailer would not have caught anyone’s attention. The idea of using a prank for publicity is very fresh, as it is not used often, and people definitely do not expect a horror movie like Carrie would be advertised in such a mischievous way.

Comedy
Humans are funny creatures; they find amusement in watching other people confused and outwitted. The Telekinetic Coffee Shop Surprise has done well to attract potential customers by providing amusement in this way.

Overall, it is a prank gone right! The Internet has really changed the way that things are being promoted. Nowadays, there are so many informations available to potential customers that companies have to find a way to stand out. The marketing department of the Carrie (2013) movie has set themselves apart well.

11/1/13

Controversy Marketing: Even Better than Sex

Some say that rejection is not marketing’s greatest nemesis; indifference is. It seems that more and more people are starting to grasp this concept. Let’s recall Miley Cyrus’s and Robin Thicke’s joint performance in the MTV Video Music Awards (VMA).

The previous child star known as Hannah Montana’s performance was criticised as “embarrassing”, “raunchy” and “really, really disturbing”. If she had wanted to shock the media, she definitely succeeded. Although people all over the world condemned her in one way or the other, it surely got her noticed, and any attention is good attention! All over the web, people are either supporting her or against her. The nonstop argument effectively increases her popularity. In fact, when she hosted the Saturday Night Live (SNL) on October 5th, 2013, she actually got a high rating in par with Tina Fey’s!

Nowadays, nothing seems more powerful than the word of mouth. To survive in this global, social world, we have to utilise it well. In the words of the Queen of Social Media, Lady GaGa, “people will always talk, so let’s give them something to talk about”.  It does not matter how good you are or how good your product is. If people do not know you, then you cannot market yourself to them. Creating a controversy is the easiest way to make people talk.

Controversy marketing is used by a lot of successful celebrities and brands as well. Lady GaGa, for example, wears unusual outfits and does unconventional things.

Lady GaGa drenched in fake blood, wearing a meat dress and impersonating a guy

Lady GaGa supporting LGBT

Remember Britney Spears? She was the Queen of Pop and the talk of the town just a few years ago. Her sexy music videos and performances are hardly forgettable.

Britney Spears’s “Toxic” Music Video, 2003

But what happened to her? When did she start slipping off the radar? She is still the same sexy Britney, yet Lady GaGa, Miley Cyrus and other female artists seem to have “outfamed” her.

Britney Spears’s “Work Bitch” Music Video, 2013

She still uses “sex” marketing, but it does not seem to have the same effect as 10 years ago. Why? Ten years ago, “sex” marketing was a new thing and thus, Britney Spears showing up on VMA stage wearing a nude, glittery outfit creates a controversy and got people talking. However, nowadays, “sex” marketing is so common that it hardly makes a ripple on the society. To be noticeable, celebrities need to constantly create controversies that will shock the media in a way that has never been done before. For example, Miley Cyrus breaking out of her “good girl” shell and riding nude on a wrecking ball or Lady GaGa promoting LGBT. “Sex” marketing simply does not cut it anymore. Controversy marketing is the way to gain recognition.

Sex sells, but controversy sells better!

10/14/13

PETA Thanksgiving Turkey Terrorism

First of all, Happy Thanksgiving!

This post is in response to PETA’s blog post about  NBC Nixes Family-Friendly Thanksgiving Day Parade Ad.

In the aforementioned article, PETA complains about NBC’s decision to ban their “family-friendly” 2009 Thanksgiving Day Parade Ad, “Grace”. They further claims that their ad is made “with the parade’s kid-centric audience in mind, hoping to empower children to make informed, healthy, and humane decisions about their diets”. Here is the controversial advertisement banned by NBC:

I have to say that I disagree with what PETA is saying. Besides missing the point of what a “family-friendly” ad is supposed to be like, PETA does not demonstrate professionalism in responding to a legal decision. I mean, what is so “family-friendly” about the sinister, sarcastic advertisement? The part where the girl grotesquely describing an exaggerated version about the slaughtering of an animal? Or perhaps, it is the part where the whole family looks very uncomfortable and loses their appetite? I do not see how this advertisement can “empower children” in any way unless making them confused and appetite-less is empowering.

PETA surely has had its inspiring moments in fighting abusive manner towards animals. However, this advertisement is taking it a little bit too far. It is ironic how an organisation fighting for the ethical rights of animals is surprisingly unethical in dealing with humans. By publishing an ad that is both insulting the old-age tradition of America and terrorising children in the pretence of being “family-friendly”, PETA has dragged its name deeper into the mud. A writer in Houston, Mark R. Whittington, remarks that “PETA is not respectful of any belief but the one it holds”. As an organisation trying to make a change, PETA should have known better than to campaign itself in such a confrontational manner that decreases its value in the public’s eye.

10/7/13

Frighteningly Fruitful: Snickers Halloween

There is only one thing in my mind when October comes up: Halloween is just around the corner! Kids trick-or-treating in the streets with their cute costumes, adults dressing up to parties, and Fright Nights at the PNE. All the excitements are packed into one thrilling night!

It is apparently an exciting time for companies as well. Halloween is always a terrifyingly profitable celebration. It is hardly surprising that consumer spending sales on Halloween is second only to Christmas. I mean, who does not love scaring themselves silly and eating candies while pretending to be someone else?

Since the second half of the eighteenth century, America has been celebrating Halloween nationally. Besides the ever-increasing sales of Halloween costumes, companies are exploiting the popular holiday by incorporating the ideas into their advertisement. Nowadays, companies are elbowing each other in trying to come up with the best advertisement to attract more customers. Some of them are really creative; they are spooky yet engaging. Snickers‘s advertisements are definitely amongst my favourites.

“It’s what you would want.”

“It’s what you would want.”

“It’s what you would want.”

This advertisement is a good example of how to utilize a good combination of fear, disgust, and comedy in marketing. It is no wonder that they won a Gold Lion at Cannes in 2007 for this campaign.

Here is another creepy-licious advertisement from Snickers:

“Grocery Store Lady”

Ending Spoiler

Watch it: Snickers Halloween: “Grocery Store Lady”

Although Snickers since then has released a few more less-outdated advertisements, this particular one from 2010 is my favourite. As a closet horror fanatic, I find this advertisement genius, especially with a twist at the ending.

Snickers really grasps the concept of attracting consumer’s attention, as it created an online buzz. Another plus point, the costume donned by the creepy “Grocery Store Lady” was later auctioned at celebrity clothing auction site Clothes Off Our Back for hundreds of dollars!

09/11/13

Distorted Beauty: Ethical or Unethical?

The thing that we often come across in marketing, specifically commercials, is Digital Photo Manipulations (DPM) — although it is now more well-known as “photoshopping”. Fashion magazines, in particular, are known to frequently doctor photographs. As an avid follower of ANTM (America’s Next Top Model), I have always been very aware that a promotional picture almost always requires long processes of digital manipulation. Normally, they would just adjust the colours so that the pictures turn out nice and eye-catching. However, some magazines go a billion steps further and actually distort the shapes of the face and the body of a model. It is almost like a temporary, painless plastic surgery.

Ps: PhotoShop or Plastic Surgery?

The use of DPM has always been a controversial issue. Some people love it and some people despise it. There are pros and cons in using DPM to market a product. On one hand, some customers might like it, since this act of fakery actually makes pictures look more attractive and interesting. However, on the other hand, other customers absolutely hate these deceptive pictures.

The question is, “Where do we draw the line?” At what point does DPM become an ethical marketing issue? We need to ask ourselves two questions to answer that one.

First of all, does photoshopping count as false advertising? Yes and no. It really depends on what product is advertised. For example, if Dove put an ad in a magazine, claiming that its soap can make a woman’s skin glow like in the promoting picture while in fact, the picture is photoshopped to give the woman a glow, it is false advertising, especially if Dove does not put up a disclosure.

An example of “glowing skin” attained through PhotoShop.

Similarly, if Tiffany & Co. somehow decides to advertise a line of bracelet and they manipulate its shape on the print ad, it is also false advertising. The bottom line is, if a brand gives a false impression of by misrepresenting its goods/services/commercial activity, it is false advertising, and false advertising is unethical in marketing. Otherwise, it can still be considered ethical.

Second, how does DPM affect the society? Some photoshopped promotion pictures can be considered pretty “harmless”. However, there are some that teach the wrong values. The most controversial issue of all is “thinnification”. A good recent example is the poster of The Heat, a movie featuring Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy, where its designer photoshopped approximately 30lbs off McCarthy’s face.

The Heat's poster.
“Thinnification”s such as this teach women the wrong value that being large is not beautiful, and that is unethical.

Deceptive perception of “Perfect”.

Similarly, other advertisements have distorted the social definition of “beauty”.

So here is the line: DPM is an ethical marketing issue if it is used as a tool to falsely advertise and promote unethical messages.