Hasta La Creative!

With Walt Disney taking the reigns in Austin, TX, there is going to be a whole new way to test the effects of advertising on the viewer. Disney ultimately wants to find out if consumers are more impacted by interactive ads and if their money would be well spent on these high-tech ads.

“TV is not a rational medium, it’s an emotional medium,” Varan said. “We can get to a deeper layer of what’s motivating people by seeing how they behave, observing them in experimental settings and seeing how their body reacts.”

Biometric testing has been used when testing print ads as it gauges a reaction that focus groups and surveys don’t always catch. Now, should Disney’s new lab open by year’s end, we’ll know the same thing about TV spots, mobile and interactive ads. Depending on the outcome, this could mean that for ads of this high-tech calibur, agencies could ideally charge more since they will be more effective. Is it really making someone’s heart beat faster? Are they truly feeling the emotional connection you are trying to convey? ABC and ESPN may just be the first to know.

Read more about it here.

Technorati Tags: Disney, ABC, ESPN, advertising, testing, focus groups, biometrics, television, interactive

I wanted to write a response to Jessica’s great coverage on the One Show

The first lesson you learn when you pursue a creative endeavor for money is that you have to be willing to “kill your darlings” to set aside your great idea should someone want to change it.

When I was first taking concepting classes, I was the only one not working in the industry in some capacity, and also the only one not able to recite line and verse of last year’s One Show winners. I found it almost freakish in a way.

I’m not totally against using these as a guide post for your work. In fact, my class partner at Book Shop, Kari Yu was a finalist this year in the college competition and I was happy to see her on the list.

I didn’t start in advertising, it honestly wasn’t my lifelong dream. I got my start in another creative field and then got into advertising. Something I’ve learned–acting classes, screenwriting trade magazines, etc. can be a helpful tool and help you with the technical aspects of your craft, but if they also make you second guess your natural creative instincts.

I also find if you watch or immerse yourself too much in some creative endeavor, two things can happen–you become a less interesting person, as all you talk about is “your passion for the industry” which after a while is the equivalent talking about how sausage is made. No one’s interested in how the pig gets to market, they just matter if it tastes good. There’s a natural progression that happens–start learning craft, get to the point where it’s all you can talk about with each other, eventually get the point where you burn out talking about it.

The other danger, which I learned the hard way doing stand up comedy in my late teens and early twenties is you’ll find other people’s great ideas seeping into your own work, either consciously, by people who have no soul, or unconsciously, by well meaning people who make an honest mistake and honestly think they came up with the idea. Then you fight a two front battle, coming up with your own great ideas, while systematically fighting off other people’s ideas that enter your head.

Imitation is only flattery if everyone knows you did it first.

Or even worse, you start comparing your work and feeling inadequate, which can be more harmful in the long run.

Like anything else, being a well rounded individual can only feed your creativity, so I shudder when people tell me I “have to” look at the new Communication Arts and hear them deconstructing every ad that’s between the covers. In my case, ignorance may be bliss.

Conversation is always welcome.

Technorati Tags: One Show, Communication Arts, Cannes, Golden Pencils, Ad Shows, Sacred Cows, I like talking about myself, How much you wanna bet I can throw this football over them mountains

HDTV is coming. The routine ads on broadcast TV continually remind us of that fact. But BBC is reminding their viewers in a slightly different fashion:

Kind of blows other “introducing HD” ads out of the water. And while it vaguely reminded me the Michael Bay Verizon FIOS ad, it leaves me with a different feeling (i.e. more HD, less Bay). I’m willing to bet as HD channels proliferate and broadcast switches over to HD, we’ll be seeing more explosions and special effects in commercials.

But for the moment, I’m just going to kick back and enjoy it.

[via the Lunar BBDO blog]

This week has hosted the 2008 One Show, hosted by the One Club. Although the official last day is tomorrow, last night was the One Show Awards. These awards and winners are known to shape advertising for the next year to come. Here are just a couple of my favorites:Gold – Newspaper or Magazine Single Ad – WWF Thailand “Tree”, Ogilvy & Mather Bangkok Gold – Single TV Commercial – Halo 3 “Diorama”, McCann Worldgroup San Francisco For a full list of winners, Gold through Bronze as well as as Merit, click here then select the link for Download One Show Winners List.

Technorati Tags: One Show, awards, advertising, marketing, branding, campaigns

This morning, I checked my email as usual and opened up my daily AdAge email. The first thing I read is an article about how Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty might not be so… real. It has come out that renowned photo retoucher, Pascal Dangin, may have had something to do with Annie Liebowitz’s final photos. After Dangin was featured in an article for The New Yorker, the writer, Lauren Collins, found out that Real Beauty was a Dangin job. Of course, there is still doubt out there about the extent, if any, of Dangin’s involvement and if he worked with Liebowitz this time around.

 

So what will this mean for Dove and even Ogilvy? While something like this could definitely cause an uproar, I wonder, from a personal stance, how this will really affect how women will look at Dove products. In my opinion, okay, so they were touched up. But when I look at the photos I still see women who aren’t stick thin, have curves, wrinkles, tattoos and other “imperfections.” I still see real women. I see a woman, that if I walked out of my house right now and started walking down the street, I would run into in my little town.

 

In the same breath, we all remember the award-winning “Evolution” viral video, one that takes a stab at the act of photo-retouching.

 

Hello, hypocrisy. So, as a woman, what am I supposed to think about this? What is Dove trying to tell me? It’s okay to be real but only so real? Maybe I should be okay with not being a size two but not too okay with it? Maybe I should be self-conscious about a blemish but that tattoo I regret is okay? I’m interested to see how this story unfolds but in the meantime, how do you all feel about this coming out? 

Technorati Tags: Dove, Real Beauty, viral, campaign, beauty products, photo retouching, airbrushing, controversy

I am not one to rain on another man/woman’s parade but do you wish that all your media folks worked as hard on your plans as they did on getting tickets to concerts and the like? I mean, if the effort and energy put in to calling multiple reps and vetting seats boxes, open bars and previous gifting was directed into creating unique and interesting programs…wow the thought of it. (And here’s the disclaimer) I know a lot of hard working media folks and I know that they bust their asses but there are a couple of folks in every agency with hands like cups. Not cool man, not cool.

For those of you not savvy on tv lingo, every year the major networks parade out their new shows for the media and advertisers in something called “upfronts”
These were generally used to generate buzz for their showcase shows and get advertisers on board with the “next hot thing” before anyone else

the problem is in this day and age of the video, video on demand, tivo, the internet, even cable’s shows, which are becoming edgier and attracting major talent are outdrawing the networks

So far this season, according to the Nielsen Company, ABC (DIS, Fortune 500) has a 5.2% share of the TV-viewing households, down from 6.4% from the 2006-2007 season. CBS (CBS, Fortune 500) has a 5.6% tally, down from 7.9% last season. Fox (NWS, Fortune 500) has garnered 5.3% of households so far this season, down from 6.4% last year. And NBC (GE, Fortune 500) has captured 4.8% of the viewership, down from 5.8 during all of last season. Meanwhile, many of the largest cable networks have seen an upsurge in viewers.

Broadcast networks typically generate about half of their ad income during the upfronts. During the 2006-2007 television season, the upfronts brought in $9 billion of the U.S. broadcast networks’ combined $18.6 billion in ad revenues. But that take has fallen by 4% and 3% respectively over the last two seasons.

So the question is, for the savvy media planner, is network advertising still the way to get your product seen by the most people? Remember more than half of these new shows at the upfronts won’t even make it out of their first season.

My guess is that this trend will continue, much as blogs and the internet have replaced “old media” such as newspapers, the more options given to people, the more they will be drawn away from network television

More at CNN Money

Technorati Tags: CNN, advertising, television, state of the industry, networks, dinosaur media

We all know for a fact that paying immediately for all ads that we have produced would need payment in the worst way. All companies including the advertising agencies need to financially resolve their current standing and while some of them may not be as liquid as many would hope large companies would be, the alternative mode of payment today has been in the form of offering company shares.

If you think about it, what will you do with shares in these times where it seems that everyone is in need of cash? Further, it may be risky to take shares in lieu of cash for advertising services and if concerned parties tasked in business and advertising projects are concerned are not careful, they may end up in the losing end.

ONE of India’s leading newspapers launched an unusual advertising drive last month. “Money cannot buy our integrity” read a front-page slogan in Daily News & Analysis (DNA), a Mumbai daily. “Make the headlines tomorrow.

By paying for it,” it added, in reference to some other papers’ supposed tendency to give favourable coverage to firms that place advertisements. That charge is hard to prove.

But an increasingly popular practice is exposing Indian newspapers to growing conflicts of interest: accepting payments for ads in the form of shares in the advertiser’s firm.

(Source) Economist.com

Facebook chat went live last week and the jury is still out on how—or if—people are going to use it. Right now it seems to mostly be in the “Hey, is this thing on?” stage, where people are testing it out and seeing how it works.

 Many people I’ve spoken with feel the same way about it that I do: it’s a useful tool, but we’re wary because our Facebook friend list is much broader than our IM list and we’re living in fear of those casual acquaintances you had to spend fifteen minutes to remember when they first friended you will be the ones popping up to chat with you on Facebook.

 While that fear is likely unfounded, there is the very real issue of a shift in how we use Facebook. Until now, it was a solitary activity where your interactions with people—via messages, wall postings and the like– did not occur in real time. Adding a real time chat element changes how you use the site: no more clicking back and forth, on and off the site, if you are in the middle of a conversation. And suddenly you are very aware of which of your friends is spending all their time on Facebook. (there was always the option to check to see who else was online, but people rarely did, since there was no upside to it other than satisfaction of curiousity.)

 The interface itself is fairly basic, though it does allow for emoticons and clickable links. Personally, I have not found much use for it—I have many other ways (IM, Twitter, Email, phone) of reaching the people I know on Facebook. But I’m curious as to how many of you view Facebook chat and if you’ve found yourselves using it. Because given the popularity and ubiquity of Facebook, it wouldn’t surprise me if it really caught on.

 

 

Audi has been creating (or rather constructing) some fascinating spots lately, like the “strings” spot I wrote about a few months back.

This most recent spot from BBH London continues along the deconstruction & construction path, stylizing the internal workings of the Audi RS6 via Hugarian Gymnasts. Certainly not the first thing I would think of, but the suspension of reality and the acceptance of the gymnasts loosely representing the internals of an RS6 engine does something fairly powerful, and certainly creates an interesting spot.

So the ultimate question: do gymnastics, string figures, and automotive orchestras work to sell cars and change brand awareness? Or does it simply yield commercials that are interesting to watch?