One quick note before I get into the actual post: Michael Phelps (aka The Man From Atlantis) is one ridiculous athlete. I mean he just toyed with those guys in the 200 Free last night. I think his competitors should be allowed to strap on Evinrude 250s just to make things fair.

Okay…

I’ve been watching a great deal more of the XXIXth Olympiad than I was expecting to, and it’s been great. The Olympics is the one time outside of the Super Bowl and the Oscars (and possibly the “American Idol” finale) when advertisers can count on millions of eyeballs glued to the TV, and their work reflects this fact.

I’ve been especially impressed by the Coca-Cola spot featuring Lebron James and Yao Ming and the Oreo commercial featuring the two little girls on the trains. Both spots are eye-catching, reflect the spirit of The Games and do a good job of pitching the product.

Mass media advertising is on life support, no doubt, but big brand image stuff still makes sense, provided you’ve got enough people tuned in to notice.

According to a recent survey conducted by Manning Selvage & Lee and PR Week magazine, nearly one in five chief marketing officers report that their organizations had purchased an ad in return for a news story about their companies.

It gets worse.

Maybe it’s because I’m approaching my 40th birthday (August 16; iTunes Gift Certificates would be great), but this whole development really depresses me.

It used to be that the fastest way to get a reporter to hang up on your pitch call was to say, “you know, my client is an advertiser in your publication…” Now, it’s not uncommon for a meeting with a journalist to include a representative from her publication’s advertising department.

she is to believe your multi-million-dollar ad campaign or the carefully crafted statements from your PR department.

That’s actually a good thing (I hope). Perhaps we’ll all be forced to tell the truth and actually respond to the wants and needs of our customers. Maybe we’ll see some actual news reporting. Or….not.

I’m stockpiling fresh water and canned goods just in case.

Thank you for your insightful commentary on CBS This Morning this morning.

Having a member of the legal profession slam the public relations industry for its (lack of) truthfulness is right up there with the pot calling the kettle black. Are you freaking serious?

Did you—a lawyer—really just call me a liar in front of millions of viewers?

And to think you’re a fellow Boston University Terrier. WTF, man?

Seems to me we walked the same stretch of Commonwealth Avenue in the late 80s but I’ll be damned if I ever met you. Or you me. But you call me a liar?

You don’t even know me. You don’t know what I stand for or how I’ve conducted my business for the past 20 years. You don’t know my clients or what we’ve been through together. You don’t know my standards or the standards I’ve established for my company and my people.

And you call me a liar?

Calling all PR professionals liars is akin to any ethnic slur you can pile on any race of people. I don’t suppose anybody’s ever hurled a blanket statement at a person named Cohen, have they?

But I guess the rules of decency, fairness and ethics don’t really apply to you as you say in this 2002 interview:

“I have a little more leeway as an analyst. I try not to say, ‘This is outrageous,’ because people who offer more heat than light tend to tick people off. I’m held to standards of accuracy and fairness, of course. But provided my legal training, role and experience, fairness is defined a little more broadly than a correspondent’s position would be.”

How broadly would you define fairness in this instance, Mr. Cohen? Are you suggesting that lawyers have a broader standard fo fairness than the average journalist? And how do your standards of fairness for journalists and lawyers stack up to those governing PR pros?

I’m curious. 

Give me a call sometime and we’ll talk about it.

Yours sincerely,

BP 

Along with childhood friend and partner Earle Radford, the late Mr. Valentine founded Kansas City’s first great ad agency, Valentine-Radford, in 1946. For years, “V-R” was Kansas City’s flagship agency, and many of us trace our careers one way or another back to Messrs. Radford and Valentine.

I never met Mr. Valetine, but I did get my start in advertising in his offices back in junior high, when I went to V-R to interview a man named Dave Holt (who was running the Pizza Hut business at the time) as part of a “career day” assignment.

Dave Holt later gave me my first job in advertising when he hired me as a summer intern at Hickerson-Powell-Phelps in 1987. I returned to what became Hickerson-Phelps (Powell left in the late 80s) in 1994 as an AE in their PR division, Henderson/HP.

Reading about Mr. Valentine in this morning’s paper, I am truly sorry that I never had the opportunity to meet him. He was a special person and I’d like to send a special shout out to his family, most notably his son John, who’s been kind enough to share his wisdom with me from time to time, and grandson West.

Rest in peace. 

Although their research focuses on free trade coffee and organic cotton T-shirts, one could easily extrapolate the data for just about any business, product or service. The bottom line: consumers care about how you conduct business and “doing the right thing” matters.

And doing the wrong thing will hurt you worse than doing the right thing will benefit you. While consumers express a willingness to pay a premium for ethically produced products, they assign a much steeper discount to unethical companies’ products. 

One other tidbit of note: consumers have come to expect some level of commitment to ethical behavior, be it in the form of environmental responsibility or fair labor practices.

Incorporating “good behavior” into your everyday operations and actively promoting your good deeds is no longer optional.

Your brand promise now extends to every action your company takes. And rest assured that your failure to make or keep your promises has a more profound impact on your business than ever before. 

(I had previously met Mr. Hesse when he was head of Embarq and that company had been named winner of the 2007 Kansas City Business Ethics Award.) Good guy.

I asked him how using his own e-mail was working and he said that he’s getting about 500 e-mails a day from a wide range of folks. Some commenting on how Sprint’s new all-in-one service should work; others to wish him well; still others to express their overall displeasure with the company and its services.

I imagine there are a number of e-mails he receives that are unprintable.

Sprint’s customer service (or lack thereof) is well-documented, including the time they “fired” a customer for complaining too much. By publishing their CEO’s e-mail address, Sprint is at least making an effort to engage their customers.

I myself haven’t e-mailed Mr. Hesse, but I hope that those who have do indeed receive a response that at least looks and feels as though it’s coming from The Man himself. Receiving a personal response fom a corporate big wig means a lot to Average Joe. And Sprint’s reputation could certainly use the help.

It’s similar to the steps Dell computer took a few years back after the “Dell Sucks” movement took hold. After ignoring its critics, the company finally learned how to embrace its critics through the blogosphere and ultimately created an envrionment where its detractors were inside the tent urinating out, rather than outside urinating in. Michael Dell launched his own blog and Dell’s product reviews and customer service ratings have both dramatically improved.

Coincidence? I think not.

Based on his on-camera performance, I doubt Mr. Hesse would make it in Hollywood should things not work out for him at the Sprint Minimum Security Penitentiary (aka World Headquarters). But seeing as his predecessor parachuted out with $40 million, I’m sure he’ll land on his feet one way or the other.

I, for one, am hoping that he succeeds. Engaging custoemrs one-on-one is a nice first step.

Good luck, Mr. H. 

Godin’s blog turns up on blogs and blasts I get from the PRSA (Public Relations Society of America), so I’m not totally unfamiliar with his points-of-view, and I generally agree with just about everything he says.

But. I’m not 100-percent on board.

In Meatball Sundae, Godin speaks of how the new Web 2.0 marketing will not work for companies who continue to conduct business according to the old methods in which Company X creates a mediocre product for the mass market, shoves said product down the public’s throats using TV advertising, and then uses revenues from sales to manufacture more product. (I have called this method the “media industrial complex,” he calls it the “TV industrial complex”…and I’d like to state for the record that I arrived at my term independently…so please don’t try to label me a plagiarist.)

And of course, he’s dead on.

There is no middle market anymore, it is difficult and costly to efficiently reach individual consumers through mass media marketing, using these methods won’t necessarily generate the desired sales revenues, and you’ll soon be on the bread line.

The basic thrust of Godin’s message in both books that in order to market most effectively, we need not change the marketing as much as we need to change the companies (or the products and services) we market.

Be remarkable, market your remarkable-ness and the world will beat a path to your door, is his charge.

Which is sort of like saying, be Michael Jordan, practice really hard, and you can win some basketball games.

Marketers should be remarkable. We should be creating products and services that serve the needs of a narrowly selected group of customers who share our passions. We should engage them via the Web or other resources in conversations (over coffee, perhaps?) that enable us to further refine and improve our products and services and enhance long-term customer loyalty.

And we should also exercise more, drink less and mix in a salad now and again.

Web 2.0 is the future, but I depart from Godin when it comes to the so-called mass media, as I feel he places too much faith in individuals’ abilities to find remarkable products and services via the Web. It’s still a numbers game.

And while it helps to be remarkable, I think you can still sell Miller Lite, a Saturn Vue or a moss-covered, three-handled family credenza if you know how to leverage the old ways using the new media.

My last post suggested that by examining online communities, marketers could create online channels within MySpace, for example, that allow for mass marketing on a micro scale, which in turn enable a marketer (remarkable or not) to efficiently generate awareness for his products or services (either through advertising or PR-generated editorial) via channels that appeal to very specific customer segments (e.g., affluent gay men ages 25-29 who love NASCAR).

The goal is to convert these suspects/prospects into customers and then convert customers into advocates. I agree with Godin that an engaging, interactive Web 2.0 site is the best place in which to host the dialogue that enables a marketer to respond to customer demands, improve products/services, engender long-term loyalty and ensure revenue growth and viability.

The dialogue must be customer-driven, but unless you cast a wide enough net or have the resources to wait forever for your customers to find you, you’ll die bored and broke is you do not incorporate some form of mass media marketing strategy in your overall plan.

I’ve been reading a lot about how the big boys are losing their collective butts trying to figure out a way to make money on advertising through social networking sites:

Google is said to be tanking on its $900 million deal to sell advertising on MySpace (owned by media giant News Corporation).

Microsoft dropped $240 million for a 1.6 percent stake in Facebook, only to have chairman Bill Gates erase his own Facebook profile a few months later out of frustration with his 8,000 daily “friend” requests and other issues. Not to mention the 75,000-user uprising over their Beacon service, which essentially turns Facebook members into “sell-outs” by sending information about their purchases to their online friends.

BusinessWeek reported last week that the average amount of time the average user spends on social networking sites has decreased by 14 percent in the past year, according to ComScore, who also notes that MySpace has slipped from 72 million users last October to 69.2 million in December. And then there’s the notoriously low response rate (click-throughs) for ads placed on social networking sites, which makes advertising highly ineffective.

A better strategy may be one profiled in the Los Angeles Times not too far back: e-mail newsletters. According to the story, there’s a whole universe of highly targeted, advertising-supported electronic publications that arrive via e-mail on a precitable basis.

One such publication, Thrillist.com, which targets affluent men, boasts a readership with a household median income of $107,000, or nearly 40 percent higher than that of Sports Illustrated or Maxim.

E-newsletters cost practically nothing to produce and mail, have highly targeted audiences, offer some level of “trackability” for advertisers seeking to measure their return on investment, and can be easily cancelled or repurposed when readership wanes.

Perhaps the lesson for the “media industrial complex” (as I like to call the big media companies and advertising conglomerates who run the world), is to take another look at the communities that develop within social networking sites and begin to develop specific content channels that appeal to sub-communities on these sites, and then have advertising support the content on these channels.

Imagine a MySpace network consisting of “narrowcasts” that members can subscribe to free-of-charge and where advertisers have the opportunity to engage individuals with highly appealing news, information and entertainment that would help them secure and enhance relationships with customers in a non-threatening manner.

It’s probably easier to violate our privacy and just force-feed unsolicited messages to us based on our Web-surfing behavior, but developing advertiser-supported content would be a lot more fun. 

And how ‘bout Eli Manning?  Man, am I happy for him.

Here are my thoughts on last night’s ads, presented in chronological order:

Bud Light. I was disappointed with all of the Bud Light spots, with the exception of the George Lopez ESL (English as a second language) follow-up to last year’s spot, and the spot featuring Will Farrell, which was more a promotion for his new movie than a beer commercial.  Bud LIght used to have some of the funniest and most memorable stuff out there, but “firebreather,” “wine-and-cheese party,” “flying” and “caveman” were all pretty lame, in my opinion….and did they have to use the word “suck” in the caveman spot? C- Lopez gets a B+ and Farrell gets an A

Audi R8.  I loved the “Godfather” parody and it’s a hot car.  I think they did a nice job of getting their name prominently into the ad so that you knew it was a spot for Audi and the did a nice job of pimping the truthinengineering.com web address. B+

Pepsi Max.  Hello?  Ripping off a ten-year-old Saturday Night Live skit that wasn’t funny the first time.  And how badly does Joe Buck need the money to get wrapped up in the whole head-bob gag.  Turn down the suck, people. D

Sales Genie.  A real head-scratcher.  First they slam Indian people and then come back to take a swipe at the Chinese. I kept waiting for them to come back with a third spot wondering where the “wheel of bigotry” would stop next. D-

Under Armor.  I suppose UA sees this spot as their coming out party, similar to Apple’s famous 1984 spot.  I liked them better when it was a bunch of footballers screaming “we must protect this house!” B-

Bridgestone Tires. The screaming animal animation is a bit tired, but I did like the second spot featuring Alice Cooper and Richard Simmons.  Although I gotta be honest.  I wouldn’t have swerved to avoid the latter and would have offered the former a ride to the nearest golf course. B

Doritos. I’m not their target, but I understand that they’ve been soliciting music videos and homemade spots via their website for a while now and the winners got their due last night. OK, whatever.  I really didn’t understand the “mousetrap” spot at all. Incomplete

Gatorade 2.  They should have saved their money. They’ve got the entire baseball season to hock Derek Jeter and G2. I think they took this course Pass/Fail.

Go Daddy.  Okay, how many people went to their website hoping to see Danica Patrick naked? And of those of you who did, was she? Or did they do one of those “made you look” things like when we were kids and did the whole “turn to page…” in our textbooks? C-

Dell/Red. What? I thought Dell was for dudes? C-

FedEx.  I liked the “carrier pigeons” spots.  A nice extension of their existing campaign.  It was edgy and clever and makes the point that shipping is a heck of a lot simpler if you just call FedEx. A-

Cars.com.  Wow. Possibly the worst commercials of the night. I know that nobody likes car salesmen, but the “ring of fire” and “witch doctor” spots were awful. F

Tide Stain Stick. We have a winner! Finally! The talking stain was a crack-up and actually does a good job of selling the frickin product. God Bless P&G. A+

Budweiser. I did like the ad featuring the Clydesdale training to the strains of the “Rocky” theme, but I really think the spot is a grand departure from their new effort to sell Bud as “the great American lager.” The brand’s in trouble and they know it. C

Toyota Corolla.  My good friend Steve is nicknamed “The Badger,” so I of course loved their use of sleeping badgers to demonstrate the quiet interior of the new Corolla. A decent demonstration spot showcasing feature and benefits. Solid. A-

Garmin. Napolean.  Love the music, although the hand-in-the-jacket gag was underplayed. An okay spot, but nothing special. B

Career Builder. Both the “follow your heart” and “Jiminy Cricket” spot left me cold. I mean, we’re selling the hope that comes with having a new job and all you can show me is a disembodied heart and scenes from Animal Planet? Yuck. C-

Lifewater. I really love the “Thriller” dance but I guess they were counting on me being really drunk when this spot aired.  I really don’t understand what the product has to do with dancing lizards. Too bad for them the first quarter went by so quickly. B-

Partnership for a Drug-Free America. And all this time I’ve been buying drugs off the street, when all I had to do was snake some of mom’s Xanax. Thanks for the tip-off, bro. B

GMC Yukon Hybrid. I hear that Sisyphus’ next job is going to be designing vehicles for GM that people actually want to buy. This ain’t one of them. C+

Planters Cashews. I’ve heard of beer goggles, but cashew goggles? D-

T-Mobile. Charles Barkley/Dwayne Wade. I’ve never really liked this campaign, but I couldn’t help cracking up watching Charles call up D-Wade at all hours of the day and night. Nice spot. Well done. And consistent with their overall campaign. A

Pepsi. Justin Timberlake. I hope that they nadded old JT against that mailbox enough to keep him from procreating. Didn’t do much for me, but there were some funny visual elements and I’m sure the core message appeals to the average Pepsi drinker. B+

Honda Element. The return of “I pinch.” I liked it the first time….ho hum the second time. C

Helzberg Diamonds. There’s a reason “That Guy” doesn’t need to go to Helzberg. He’s gay. (By way of disclosure, my firm has conducted business with Helzberg in the past….not branding, but issues management.) C-

Vitamin Water. I like the visual gag of Shaq as a jockey. But shouldn’t the horse have been drinking that stuff? Can’t wait for PETA to weigh in on this spot. B

Ice Breakers. Carmen Electra. Creepy guys. Sure, penalize the normal guy. C-

Hyundai Genesis. I liked this spot, although I wonder if Hyundai shouldn’t come up with a new brand to promote this “premium” model. The sales effort was straightforward and the pay-off was strong.  I’m still not going to buy one. A

E-Trade. The talking baby thing is tired, but they did a really nice job. I think the sales message came through, too.  I hate myself, but I give it a B+

NFL. I LOVED the spot about the teammates from the Houston Texans. It almost made me forget about all the thugs and felons employed by the league. A

McDonald’s. I thought they did a great job of going after Starbucks by positioning themselves as a place where an everyday guy can go for a quality cup of coffee. Nice job. A

Jeep/Dodge/Chrysler. It’s a new day? And it’ll suck just like yesterday. Love the animation…don’t buy the message. D

Sunsilk. I really don’t get it, but at least they don’t have that annoying voice-over anymore. C-

Coke. I have been down on Coke’s advertising for a long time, but I really liked the spots featuring the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade balloons and Bill Frist/James Carville.  It was great to see Charlie Brown actually get the Coke and even though I’m a hardcore red-stater, I always get a kick out of Carville. A

Toyota Sequoia. A fun ad…but whatever. Most of America was too hammered to remember it anyway. B-

Taco Bell Fiesta Platters. Last year’s ad. Why bother? D

Gatorade. Man’s Best Friend. Huh? Can’t wait till Fido wets the rug. F

Victoria’s Secret. Sure, Valentine’s Day is coming, which means that you’ve got six months of football payback coming and your wife wants you nowhere near a Victoria’s Secret store. Trust me fellas, if you buy it, she is not going to wear it and she’s not going to appreciate your buying it. Love the eye candy but the message is all wrong. DD (get it?)

AMP energy drink.  A good laugh that makes the point. But if I could get that much boost out of my man-boobs, I’d join the circus. C+

Assuming that our economy will slide into recession in the near future, Babej and Pollock offer words of wisdom that all CEOs would be wise to heed (I am paraphrasing):

1. Companies selling necessities should focus on growth; companies selling luxury goods should focus on holding onto revenues.
2. Prioritze promotion to essential vs. non-essential products.
3. Be aware of recession-induced changes in consumer behavior….such as staying home more and dining out less.
   
4. Be mindful of changed in consumer mood, and their possible negative reaction to pitches that are flippant or focus on unimportant product attributes.
5. Shift dollars to accountable media. 

My own experience (and I’ve been “blessed” to not only begin my career but also launch a new business during recessions) is that recessions generally suck, but that they also offer opportunity for companies, provided they don’t completely pull the plug on their marketing programs.

In the early ’90s, I worked on the Morton’s The Steakhouse account, focused on a campaign positioning a big steak dinner as an affordable luxury…something a person could enjoy in lieu of a weekend getaway or other more expensive extravagance. Our message was “you deserve a treat even if times are bad.”

We’ve also seen recessions do good things for places such as MIssouri, which has fared pretty well during tough economic times. Families who’d ordinarily head for the Gulf coast or Disneyworld instead take their vacations at the Lake of the Ozarks or head for Branson.

While Babej and Pollock talk in terms of mass marketing strategies, when times get tough the true value of a good cusotmer database, stellar service and what we PR types call “a reservoir of goodwill” can come to your rescue.

Most marketers do cut ad spending during tough times, but there are ways to sustain revenues and even grow market share by focusing on your existing customer base through e-marketing, direct mail or by simply delivering white glove service and personal follow-through.

The point is that you should balance your marketing portfolio in the same way that you balance the holdings in your financial portfolio. You should always maintain an investment in service training, direct marketing, PR and web-based strategies as well as advertising so that you can make adjustments as necessary to meet economic and market challenges. I’ve got a white paper on the subject that you can read by clicking here.