The Power(?) of Comparison Ads

In just one day this week, I saw three TV spots from Progressive, GEICO, and State Farm, each declaring that you can save money by switching from one of the aforementioned brands. We're all familiar with these kinds of claims, but seeing them in such quick succession, it finally sunk in that they can't all be telling the truth, or at least there's more to the story.

And it became immediately obvious, even though I've thought about these ads for ages and even spent 15 weeks working on a project for GEICO. Ultimately, they weren't comparing Progressive with GEICO, or State Farm with Progressive--they were comparing your current plan with switching. If you're price conscious and wondering if you could get a better deal elsewhere and you'd be willing to switch, you're pretty certain to choose a cheaper plan, even if it doesn't provide the same kind of coverage as before. The act of switching itself is likely to result in lower costs, regardless of which companies you start and end with.

Similarly, both Progresso and Campbell's Select have TV spots out right now saying that 7 out of 10 consumers preferred their soup...though in small print, Campbell's Select says that they're referencing the INGREDIENTS in the soup. 

So what's the deal? Are we really getting anywhere with our consumers when our competition can make the same claims as we can? Are we asking too much of consumers to notice the subtle differences? 

Yet another- Domino's and Subway have been at odds over CP+B's recent comparison ads. But in this case, Domino's was saying twice as many people preferred the taste of their sandwiches to Subway's. Well no shit! Subway's subs are the HEALTHY alternative--they're the tastiest of the healthy fast food options, but its no surprise that the Domino's subs would be tastier. I think the ads are really really smart on Domino's part, it's just hard for Subway to counteract their effect...if they have any that is.

The "Perfect" Brief

The brief is, at the best of times, a fickle mistress. It's hard to know what our creatives want and expect, and our media team, and our clients. What's the perfect brief to please all parties?

Well, I think we can all agree that there's unfortunately no right answer, and from agency to agency and even client to client, the layout may change. But I've come across a few briefs that I've really loved, and they've all come down to persuasion. Not in some sinister, "hoodwink them" kind of way, but in the sense that in any conversation, there may be questions, and our communication should have already considered them and prepared to respond.

So what if we considered two pieces: Questions/Objections, and Answers/Rebuttals, ie:

"I've always had my taxes done by a personal accountant, but this year I'm looking to save money. H&R Block says that I've 'got people,' but I don't know exactly what that means for me. Does that mean they'll take care of it all for me, even finding deductions?"

Yup. H&R Block will prepare your taxes and check twice to make sure you're getting all of the deductions for which you're eligible.

"Ok, but it's just a one-time deal, right? It's not like the relationship I had with my personal accountant."

Actually, H&R Block will stand by you if you get audited. We're not your partner for just April 15th.

"Well then you must be as expensive as my accountant."

Definitely not. And besides being cheap, you can even take advantage of all of our free services online, like filing your federal taxes, or getting tax tips.

At this point, I'm sold. And that's honestly the conversation I've had in my head. Taxes, for me and probably for most folks, mean lots of questions and a lot of stress about getting it right. So far, the communication I've gotten from H&R Block directly addressed many of the questions I've had in choosing how to file my taxes this year, and that's why I feel completely confident that they can handle my completely messy taxes this year, having worked in four different states with freelancing income to boot. It's complicated and confusing, but their communication has given me the confidence that they can handle it. They answered my questions, calmed my fears, and showed me they've thought about it from my point of view and the things that are important to me. I think that says a lot.

Do you think this could be helpful on your brief? Or perhaps something you'd like the creatives to consider as they execute their ideas? Or is it just so darn intuitive that we shouldn't have to be considering it at all? Please share your thoughts.

Building Bridges

In interviews, I'm often asked what I'm looking for in a position. And amongst other things (a strategic plan to make it through the recession, open-mindedness about product innovation and business solutions in the place of/in conjunction with advertising as a solution, etc) I've been talking about collaboration. And I'm not just talking about a collaborative environment where planners want to talk to each other and work together. I want to know what creatives are working off of my brief, and have, if not an ongoing conversation with them, and open, healthy relationship. I feel that in a perfect world, planning would be considered the first part of the creative process and thus be an opportunity for collaboration. 

I recently had the chance to discuss this viewpoint with a copywriter, and though we disagreed on some points, we both agreed that the idea is king. I absolutely think that if a great idea communicates to our target and gets them thinking about our brand, it's successful, even if the brief had noted a different direction. (Of course, it must still meet the client's objectives, blah blah blah you get the idea). But what exactly that means to each of us is different. To me, it means that a creative idea could come feasibly from a planner, and that the strategic direction can inspire a creative as a jumping off point. For the copywriter, it means that when you get the brief you should use the facts given and consider the target, and use that as inspiration to begin the creative process. He feels the strategy is formed in the creative idea itself. They are a part of each other and inseparable. The role of the planner is to act as a sounding board and confirm that the idea can be backed by research and fit the client's needs. Now I'm sure some of our disagreement was caused by semantics but I think that generally speaking, our viewpoints are somewhat representative of our roles within the industry as a whole--there's definitely friction between planners and creatives in many agencies.

While speaking with Rod, a copywriter from Fallon's glory days, he brought up such a great point for mitigating interdepartmental friction that I had to write it down: Make it known that you're in it for the same thing. Sure, there's more at play--everyone wants to keep their job, save face, get promoted, win awards, etc. There's a number of motivations for the things we do, but if we can all recognize that we're in it for the same thing--to help our client's business and make great advertising--it will undoubtedly be a smoother road. Creatives will "back into" strategies that are more successful by leaps and bounds than what the planners suggested and us planners need to recognize that success and support the campaign. Planners will present great creative ideas that creatives will find they couldn't improve upon if they spent weeks trying, and they too need to celebrate that success. It's all a team effort. A client doesn't care who came up with the idea. To the client, we are The Agency and whatever The Agency presents is what they know. They don't know, or care, who came up with idea, just that The Agency stands behind it. Why shouldn't we all?

Remember this race? They needed just a few seconds of running together. That's all it takes. Instead Team USA failed to make a successful pass and they were unable to finish.

Now I know this post is probably  pretty clearly written from the planners point of view and there's probably a faux pas or two in here, but I wanted to get this idea across. We're hired to do one thing. Now let's do it, together. 

Review of Trust Me- Reprise

Nope. Execution isn't there.  Started with too broad a strategy and left us assuming they had something up their sleeve. Nope. No pay off. Just exaggerated personalities and situations. 

I dunno about you guys, but when my CD calls a meeting to say the tag line is dead, it ALWAYS ends with the neurotic must-prove-myself woman being too eager for another chance to come out on top, the juniors being sullen and spurned, and the rest of the crazy creative department going ape shit 'til someone yells over them all.

But hey! Good to know that if I was single (and bisexual) I could be getting hot chicks during the work day. Then again, I'm the one engaged to a copywriter. Guess I win after all.

(Who knows? Maybe people who like TV more than I do will be into it. But I won't go out of my way to watch next week.)

Requisite Super Bowl Reflections

I had intended to just ignore the whole Super Bowl commercial buzz and not add to all the noise that we all make over and over again like records on repeat, but I've caved. You got me.

Loved it:

Teleflora- "No one likes to see you naked." Placement packed a punch with a strong male audience and close proximity to Valentine's Day. SO awesome.

Cash4Gold- I had NO idea they could possibly have a Super Bowl budget, not to mention actually get MC Hammer and Ed McMahon--"Goodbye old friend..."

Monkeys! Too bad the Castrol ad was otherwise forgettable. I still liked it for the adorable kiss.

Hang in there, Jack- I usually hate JitB ads, but I LOVED this. Hilarious, and I actually want to go to the website now. 

Doritos- Can't explain why, but I enjoyed the snow globe spot. Crotch joke meh, but whatever.

NFL/Sprint Mobile "football season never ends" spot- AWESOME communication of the value, and reward, of having Sprint mobile all year. Beautiful AND strategic. I would have liked it even if it hadn't been strategically strong. Sprint mobile ad at the beginning was really beautiful too, when it opened up into a stadium--really loved it.

Denny's- Ok, I hated the one that's been showing recently when they're talking about hard times, but I loved the new spot with our mobster trio. And what a great call to action, getting people in for a free grand slam on Tuesday? Perfect. Cheers to GSP for that one.

Coke Zero- New Mean Joe Green spot was GREAT, and it finally starts tying all the Coke Zero advertising efforts together. Hey Pepsi! This is how you REFRESH, not by showing people dancing in the 50's. For more on Pepsi, check out Reflushed from my man Anthony.

Career Builder- Just the right amount of crazy--DEFINITELY memorable.

Disappointing:

Bud Light w/ Conan- How can you mess up with Conan?

G- Meh. I haven't been big on the campaign in general, though.

Go Daddy- This idea is so tired...

Comcast Fastest Speed Ever- I get that its trying to be just ridiculous, but it's still boring.

Captain Morgan apparently offered to donate $ to charity every time one of the players did the Cap't Morgan stand. I didn't see it happen a single time. No buzz about it either. Eek.

Cars.com- They could have gone ANYWHERE with this (including launching a new Wes Anderson flick) but they totally killed it with a lame ending.

Sobe- Sorry but this was boring, and I couldn't quite tell if it was supposed to be in 3D or not. The glasses didn't do anything, but the picture otherwise looked like crap.

Coke avatars- "Ooo! New* technology! There's an ad in that!" Nope. 

*Right.

Vizio- poorly produced, really boring, and actually had tech stats on the screen. If someone understood those stats, they wouldn't be considering a value tv like a Vizio. (That said, I have a Vizio and I LOVE it, and apparently their site had more traffic than it could handle)

In general, they just weren't enough to interest me. I still found myself getting up to help with the food, grab a drink, or talk to everyone, and I was actively taking NOTES on the commercials. That's bad.

I expected more from the Super Bowl. Now to find out if consumers did too, or if I'm being overly critical.

What is it that we remember?

I saw an ad for Schick perhaps two weeks ago that prompted me to check out their website. By the time I grabbed my computer and took the time to get a look at the site, I couldn't remember which brand it was (first problem). So I googled "Free Your Skin" which I recalled from the commercial. This is what google gave me:

Yup, you read that right. The very first result is "Free Your-Skin Tapeless Foreskin Restoration Cone for Penis" (second problem). Now I understand that being the second search choice is pretty good, but if you're going to produce ads driving to a website for which the brand is forgettable, you better make damn sure that the first search response isn't for foreskin restoration (Improving the world- one penis at a time!) 

On top of it all, when I set out to write this post, I couldn't remember the brand OR the campaign name, only the sensational search result (third problem). I had to search out my original screen shot in order to validate my memory of the foreskin restoration, and that, my friends at Schick, is most certainly a problem you might want to get working on.

Trust Me: The first client meeting

The Suit and the Creative: For every tie, a carefully crafted chin of two-day stubble.

In keeping with today's theme of breaking the mold a bit on the range of my blog posts, I wanted to put down a few thoughts about the new TNT series, Trust Me, which premiered tonight (SPOILER ALERT).

As with any pilot, the creator's immediately set to set the stage of context and the various characters of the play. While they clearly sought very hard to portray Mason (Eric McCormack) as the responsible, older brother type and Connor (Tom Cavanaugh) as his immature-but-don't-you-dare-get-in-the-way-of-a-good-idea partner, I appreciated that it wasn't just a caricature of the people they'd play through the series and instead paid off in the episode when Mason gets promoted. 

While the development of Sarah (Monica Potter) leaves a bit to be desired up to this point, I can see her going places. And I love the way Sarah and all the other characters were introduced with supers with their name and role. There was just something very charming about the little notes "It's her first day" and "Everybody's boss." I hope these continue to be used in the series and aren't just a tool for getting the ball rolling.

A lot of folks have been preparing to compare Trust Me with its period piece counterpart Mad Men, but after having seen the first episode, I've decided the comparison is really quite irrelevant. If anything, Trust Me reminded me more of Scrubs--taking a diversified group of folks and highlighting their interactions with themselves and each other as they work through shared cases--and perhaps I just described really every series in the history of series, but bear with me.

With this modern tale of the men and women of advertising, there's always a hint of dark cynicism you see in many comedians underneath their witty banter and sharp speech. (Connor=Perry? Anyone else see it?) And there's a certain lightness to the way they approach more serious themes. Of course Connor would call Stu an asshole in his eulogy. Of course there'd be a quick flashback to Connor picking a fight with some random Todd on the street to quickly explain how he got the shiner. But truthfully I like it. The supers, the flashbacks, they're all nice touches to add a little something, and I think it'll open up a lot of opportunities.

While there were a lot of jokes that strike a chord for ad folks (hello, focus group scene and failure to reach first class), I think that this show has a chance to appeal to all audiences. Everyone get advertising because we're all consumers. Further, there's a certain glamour to advertising that has made the profession a common thread in lots of movies and shows, and while Mad Men has played to the idea of the power of advertising, Trust Me really fleshes out the egos, the speed, the competition, and the insecurity that comes with the territory (don't tell me you didn't wince when the word "hack" started flying). And everyone can appreciate the dynamics of partner relationships, and for all the animosity that went between Mason and Connor, I think everyone gave a little internal "aww" when he said "I'm a better writer when I know you're gonna be reading it." Even though Trust Me can find some depth, you don't feel the weight of it afterwards the same way as at the end of Mad Men.

All in all, I think the pilot really served as a well-written brief: it's setting the series up for some great work, but we'll have to wait to see if it can truly inspire the creatives to take it to the next level or if the execution will fall. I'm certainly looking forward to the first round of work.

Note: I've only just remembered that Cavanaugh was also in Scrubs, as JD's brother. And I can't help but note my disappointment that the annoying woman from the Zyrtec commercial ("They should put that on the label: Two hours you didn't have before.") will be a part of the show. Oh well, maybe she'll wow us. If Flo from the Progressive commercials can rock it on Mad Men, I'll give Zyrtec gal a free pass.