Public relations consultant /blog

When it comes to media relations everything you submit has to be tailored to the medium you’re targeting, but that’s rarely the case in advertising. When you’re paying to appear you expect full control.

So I find it strangely refreshing that GlaxoSmithKline has been forced to re-shoot a Lucozade ad for FHM after the editor said it was not in keeping with the publication. The original (right, top) features an older woman and her toy boys while the new ad reverses the sexes. The point being that FHM is a lads’ mag and seeing an older woman getting the better of them might upset the lads’ fragile egos.

Strangely this reminds me Viz which, a poor Wikipedia entry explains, often carries spoof adverts. Except some of the apparently spoof ads are paid for. Advertisers submit to a creative treatment from Viz rather than ruin the magazine by inserting their usual stuff. They don’t get the chance to approve the final copy and things don’t always work out: Wikipedia mentions a film studio withdrawing a competition prize.

The Viz model sounds bizarre and ever so risky for the advertiser. Yet they take the risk because Viz reaches an audience they can’t easily get at through other media. Moreover, advertising on blogs is following the Viz model. My personal blog includes ‘reader offers’ for a diverse range of businesses including credit reference agency Experian, leading internet retailer Amazon Jersey and online astrology and bingo service Astrobingo. As far as I know, none of these businesses have actually read, let alone approved, the copy. But all pay to appear on the blog.

Some call this Open Source Marketing. The advertiser provides a little creative (akin to a computer program’s source code) in the form of a few banners and pays a commission each time someone who clicks a link to them goes on to make a purchase. The blogger is free to write almost anything about the advertiser, which means I can populate my blog with reader offers in the same style as the editorial. And regular visitors actually read and comment on them in a way they would never respond to normal advertising (see 2006 calendars, diaries & annuals for Amazon and Letters & phone calls from Santa for Father Christmas Ltd).

But this is not ‘open source marketing’ as has been claimed. It is merely open source advertising. Responsibility for a brand’s image and personality remains with brand owners who now find themselves at the centre of a conversation with consumers. Sure the brands dress differently depending on the occasion, but underneath they must remain themselves or risk losing their appeal in a fudge of ambiguity.
Contact Stephen Newton

Bookmarks:

Posted at : November 3rd, 2005 - 11:14 am
Navigate : Previous post / Next post