[ paul isakson ]

How Brands Can Get Ahead In A Recession

First, if you haven't read either of the above, I highly recommend them. (Clicking on either of the quotes above will take you to their respective pages on Amazon.com.) Now then...

Every day, I'm convinced these statements are increasingly true. Especially today in our open-source, collaborative, conversation culture. The more good things you do for people, the more of your thinking and ideas that you share, and the more you help people out, the more good things will come back to you.

I've personally experienced this throughout my life, but none more so than in sharing things here. (Just as I'm sure many of you have.) Now we're in a situation where this mantra could create significant returns for brands if they are willing to take heed.

With growing talks of a global recession and reports of consumer confidence sinking around the globe, people are looking for ways to make their dollars go further. Brands that truly try to help people get through this period solely for the purpose of wanting to help make peoples' lives a little bit easier will come out significantly ahead of the pack when things turn around.

Almost everyone has natural tendencies that kick in when money starts getting short which tell them to hang on to as much as possible. This is just as true for businesses as it is for people. But if a business is willing to take a little less profit now in order to create greater savings for people and help them get what they want, it will come back to them when people have more money to spend.

It's not an easy decision to make. Especially when there are outside demands from stockholders and parent companies. But I have no doubts that those who approach this the right way - by doing what's best for the people who buy their products or services - will end up far better off than if they just try to ride it out by cutting costs that do not get passed through to consumers/customers.

On a related note, David Armano has turned a smart post titled "10 Ways Digital Can Help You Thrive In A Recession" into an easy to view slide show. You can view it below, on Logic + Emotion, or in glorious full-screen mode through SlideShare.

--

I'm certain there are several great examples out there that show this and I know I've heard or read them several times before. Right now, I'm simply too tired to look them up. Ha. Sorry, but just being honest. So, if you know of any off-hand, please share them in the comments...

Modernista! Gets Some New Digital Digs

Gareth put up a post to announce that Modernista! has "finally" put up their new site.

I have to say, I like it. I think it makes a strong statement (more on this to come in a second.)

In my brief chats with people around the office who have seen it and with friends over IM, most are liking it as well, but some are thinking it's just like Zeus Jones' site. I say it's not. It's different.

Zeus Jones' approach uses various social and web 2.0 sites to say, here's who we are. The key being that they own the content to most of those pages. They control the message of who they are.

This isn't to say I don't think Zeus Jones' site is good. I actually like it a lot. When they launched it, I thought it was one of the most interesting ideas I'd seen by an agency for how to present themselves online. I still do. It says, "Here's how people are presenting themselves online and connecting with others, so that's how we're doing it because we want to connect with people too." (My words, not theirs.)

But here's where I think Modernista! has approached it differently.

Wikipedia is a site for people, by people. It's not controlled by Modernista! It is controlled by subject matter experts and people who are passionate about the independent subjects within Wikipedia's pages. In setting the Wikipedia page as their main page, Modernista! says, "People define what brands are, so we want people to have a say in defining who we are - you tell us who we are."

It may not be what they are intending to communicate, but that is my interpretation of it. To me, it reflects their view of how products and services become brands. It's not about the company that creates those products or services controlling the message. It's about them putting their products and/or services out there and inviting others to take part in shaping what the brand is through their shared experiences with them.

Yep. I like it. Looks like plenty of others agree.

My favorite quotes from those posts:

"Not brilliant because it's based on an amazing piece of technology, design, etc. Brilliant because they had the balls to do it." - Mitch Caplan's What's Next In Marketing

"The Web2.0 as your Agency web site. F@#$@ this is good. Just can’t believe it yet." - 6ixpassions.com

Nice work Modernista!

Converse wants to converse

Gareth called my attention to these Converse videos/commercials making big, bold statements. In addition to the above video, there are five more on their conversetv YouTube channel. These same videos plus an additional one appear on their web site with the following statement:

"These short films are about being original. Feel free to share them, question them or better them. Just don't do nothing."

Below each of the videos on the Converse site, they link to a Facebook fan group that started in December of 2006 and encourage people to discuss them there. At least one person has taken them up on the request to "better them." Interesting conversations about the videos are taking place in the YouTube comments for each as well.

There is a lot I like about this campaign. They are using TV commercials to start a dialogue. They are pointing out the elephants in the room. They are recognizing fans of the brand where they already exist instead of trying to force the conversation on their own terms/own site. They are freely inviting people to challenge, alter or share their videos. They are provoking conversation and encouraging action.

All of this seems very appropriate for a brand whose name means, "to talk informally with another or others; exchange views, opinions, etc., by talking." And let's not forget the courage it took to see this approach through.

My challenge is, what is Converse doing to help right the things they're calling out? I can see that those who wear Chucks might have an anti-marketing voice. But let's not forget that Converse is a brand that sells product, I don't know if calling these things out into the open to start a dialogue between people is enough. I think people might expect more if you're going to make statements like these.

Yes, they're participating in (PRODUCT) RED™. But that doesn't really relate to what they're saying in these videos. As you can see in some of the comment threads on YouTube, more than a few people are calling them out for being hypocritical.

I'd love to know what others think. Comments are very, very welcome and encouraged...

the results are in. kind of.

An article on Financial Times today states that Cadbury Schweppes is reporting an up-tick in sales of their Dairly Milk Chocolate brand.

Are they thanking their recent percussion-loving primate ad? Not entirely. But that's not shocking really. It seems fairly common in many companies that advertising is quickly blamed for poor sales but when things go well, everyone is looking for some place else to give the credit.

One of the highlights of the article for me:

Laurence Green, chairman of Fallon London, the advertising agency behind the campaign, said: "The link between a man in a gorilla suit and a chocolate bar is the one the man in the street finds easily, rather than people in the ad industry. Like the chocolate, this is just a bit of harmless fun. That may not strike people as logical, but when people see the ad they are not scrutinising it for meaning, they are doing the ironing or waiting for the rugby to start. They want to be entertained."

Hmm. Is that a polite way of telling those in the ad industry who wrote questioning posts and articles on the spot when it first aired/broke to bugger off?

Personally, I'm glad to hear that Cadbury's numbers were up on the heels of this advertisement. It's clear from the number of remixes created (my favorite) and the well-produced spoof from another widely known brand that this ad struck a chord with people - it brought them joy, just as intended.

What I'm most interested in seeing now is if Glass And A Half Full Productions lives beyond this one spot. Looks like we'll just have to be patient and see what comes in 2008.

write this down

"I don't mind being off the wall as long as we're not off the mark." - Charles "Chick" McKinney

JetBlue: A Brand Being Honest

JetBlue's struggles of late have been very well documented. So what do you do if you're JetBlue? You come out and admit you screwed up and explain what you are doing to try to fix it. Thank you for your courage and honesty JetBlue & David Neeleman. I find it quite refreshing.

A Brilliant Kodak Moment

How do you spell courage? K-O-D-A-K. Thank you Kodak. Not only for having the guts to make fun of yourself for jumping in the digital game so late but also for putting this out there for the public to see when it was originally just created for internal use. Even more applause if indeed one of your employees pulled it off an internal server and posted it as speculated by your executives in Ad Age, and not requesting to have it pulled down from the viral video sites. (Download the AdAge article here.) And by the looks of the comments on YouTube, most of the people watching it agree that it was a good move.

Bravo Kodak! Bravo!

Embrace Your Ugly

One of the things I want to do with this blog is recognize brands with courage. This is my first of such recognitions and it's for a local company. Crocs is showing some real teeth here (bad pun intended) by taking a jab at themselves and recognizing that most people do call their footwear ugly. I don't know many brands who would even think about admitting something negative about their brand in a meeting, let alone in an ad.

Thank you for being honest with us and yourselves Crocs!

campaign by tda advertising & design, boulder, co.