branding

by jenks

rated for irony

do 11 year olds really talk like sitcom writers now? i mean, it’s kinda funny… in a mildly disturbing sort of way. like one-liners are the next evolution of jr.’s “first words”…an eventually unmanageably annoying evolution, but, like the kids say… whatever.

check out these little Red “characters” (such as chill, grumpy, whatever, flirty) that were developed for beRed.com (now teens.aol.com) by ATTIK.

how to step up to the challenge of creating campaign elements that let kids know RED is the place for them?

http://www.darnellworks.com/attik/images/br-wp1m.jpg

when you show up at teens.aol.com, by the way, you’re greeted with a paparazzi shot of britney in a car with some guy obscured by the rear view mirror and big sunglasses, with the caption, “who’s that guy? run, guy we don’t know. run!”

so it’s nice at least that the messaging tone is consistent.

http://www.darnellworks.com/attik/images/br-wp2m.jpg

oh, chill also has a different aspect to his personality in other settings, like “why should i worry when my parents do it for me?” it’s like that fairy tale… you know, be Red and the seven obnoxious tween dwarfs? classic. originally these were developed as door hangers too:

now you can also find them as banners at profgilzot.com. (and while you’re doing that, check out the stunningly rock and roll SAT prep tutor illustrated there. seriously, like straight outta williamsburg.)

it’s undoubtedly great identity marketing: gotta speak to the audience on their own terms if you want to get across that your product is for them. unfortunately, why are those the terms? anyone remember all those post 9/11 predictions about “the death of irony”? yeah…. THERE was a trend forecast that was spot on, evidently.

tho… i guess i’m not helping any. but i mean, irony’s ok for adults, right? so maybe you should have to be over a certain age for us to allow ourselves to subject you to it?

irony: like violence and sexual content.

    



Subscribe for more like this.






by jenks

state of the art of flight

you know, back in the day, people used to get dressed up to fly on an airplane? it wasn’t simply about getting from point a to point b, it was actually–before the concept even really existed in the kind of marketing sense it does today–an experience. same like when movie theaters were once movie “palaces” and likewise, banks were too. participating in this space-age activity of flight somehow commanded respect for the sheer wonder of human mastery over the laws of physics themselves.

now, the entire process of flying is like the biggest pain in the ass ever, ranging in degree of horror from irritating teeth cleaning to root canal without anesthesia. it may still be the safest way to travel, or whatever, but the whole experience is so fucking antiquated, it’s like…who cares? i mean… everything about it is a holdover from a bygone era, from those arm rests that still have ash trays built in, to the whole centralized process of having to get to an airport. somehow, in comparison to, for example, having to drive for three hours to get to the closest commercial airplane from santa barbara, even the NYC subway system is more progressive in terms of the decentralization of its accessibility.

and that’s all before i even bring up the T-E-R-R-O-R-I-S-M thing.

wasn’t the teleporter supposed to have already been invented by this point?

anyway, short of that, it’s nice to know that someone out there’s giving any kind of crap about addressing the fact that the air-travel experience that once upon a time carried as much weight as dressing up for sunday mass has essentially turned into the equivalent of taking a greyhoud in the sky.

the boeing 787 dreamliner:

thanks boeing, for–at least coming off like you’re–taking this issue seriously. we’ll see how well it flies (badumching).

maybe boeing should start its own airline? but they’re probably way too smart to think about dealing with all THAT noise.

** side note, speaking of antiquated, i’d just like to reiterate again, how ridiculous it is that all the brands and publications out there producing dynamic online content INSIST on chaining it down to their sites, without considering any way to let that shit move, by making sure it’s branded and embeddalbe. (i had to go looking for the video on youtube instead of being able to get the code right on the boeing site.**

    



Subscribe for more like this.






by jenks

how to correctly appropriate a media controversy

completely hilarious!

it actually made me want to buy dr. bronner’s soap! and i NEVER wanted to buy it before, cuz the packaging is so personality-less, and spouts those weird quasi-culty hippie messages.

but hey, anything punk-rock endorsed can’t possibly be as hippie as i thought, right? and their great sense of humor totally absolves them of their merchandising sins as far as i’m concerned.

they had me at: “driving while weird.”

i’m absolutely stealing that phrase from now on.

    



Subscribe for more like this.






by jenks

if the shoe fits…

ok, i admit it, i totally love reebok’s new ($30 million, multi-platform) reebok-run-easy.jpgcampaign announcing their community site www.goruneasy.com. i’ve been seeing their billboards all over town, and even just watched an ad on their site, and it’s so fucking clever and cute and makes me laugh every time i see some new bit of their creative.

here’s one of my favorite images from the campaign:

best jab at nike ever!

from: thirdwayblog.com:

The Run Easy campaign is a breath of fresh air from Reebok in a category obsessed with an obsessive attitude towards athletics. Nike has been successful positioning its brand to serious athletes, thus attracting millions of other consumers who admire but do not imitate this level of dedication. Too often both Reebok and Adidas ad campaigns have looked like pale clones of the original Nike strategy. This new multimedia campaign from Reebok aims to position Reebok squarely with casual athletes. It is a risky but worthwhile endeavor.

way to draw the running-shoe consumer identity line, and fucking stake your claim, reebok!

interestingly, here’s nike’s community site: www.joga.com. a site for hardcore soccer enthusiasts, and with a definitvely non-english url… what is it? i’m guessing like…. portuguese for “game”? (it’s juego in spanish… anyone speak portuguese?)

could the community sites of two companies that sell essentially the SAME freakin’ thing be ANY more different?

good to keep that in mind, that the community strategy approach can be just as varied as any other aspect of a campaign, and depend just as much on the kind of user you’re aiming to engage.

yet another question to throw into to the cauldron where that “how to measure the effectiveness of social engagement” mess is stewing: well, did your strategy engage the right audience in the right way?

one shoe doesn’t fit all, remember?

    



Subscribe for more like this.