WSJ Features: Burger King ad stirs buzz with racy camp
"Like an Old Navy ad on acid, with some Playboy and Penthouse thrown in," writes Jane Goldman, a Boston-based ad copywriter, on the advertising weblog (www.ad-rag.com) she helps run.
If the entire business community understood the value of good design, and saw the effect we can actually have on their bottom line, there wouldn't be nearly enough design firms to handle all of the business. But when any creative firm reiterates to a business client that it's okay to give away what we do on a gamble of a big payoff, it's a huge setback. So I'm raising the horn again and sounding the rallying cry- if we all band together and tell the business community that, like any other professional service, we provide something of great value that is worth paying for, only then can we win the war. Fellow designers, please join me in saying no to spec work.
There are quite a few good links about the arguement against spec at the beginning of the post as well as in the comments.
Slate's Seth Stevenson seemingly has a crush on the Overstock.com lady, and so does the rest of the web. Or not. What's With That Overstock.com Ad?, yes what is with her? While Clayton dubbed it "Worst Attempt at Appearing All-Sexy-Like" ad of the year in the 2004 roundup the rest of the web can't seem to take their eyes off her. Seth's conclusion at slate:
I'm not saying this is a work of art. At base, this is a classic spokesperson spot, with an actor who looks at the camera and touts the product. My grade here is about brand awareness. Before Sabine's spots launched in October 2003, Overstock.com had a measly 12 percent brand recognition. By November 2004, recognition was at 46 percent. I know I remember the brand. And I know why. Love her or hate her, in the end it's all about Sabine.
Well, not banned per se, nothing Oprah or Dr. Phil says is that scandalous. However the product placements in each show are so many and so sneaky that channel four which shows them gets fined for nearly every show that they air. Oprah Winfrey is constantly talking about products and often giving them away to audiences, this is illegal on Swedish television so TV4 decided to cancel the show after being fined one too many times. Now Dr. Phil is getting TV4 in trouble.
"This means that it is difficult for us to send popular American shows. We can control our own productions, but we can't affect things that the viewers want to see that we have not produced" said Richard Wallentin to Resume.
While the fines may be troublesome for channel four, I wonder how the product placements affect the costs of the shows when they are sold to other countries. Do worldwide products bring down the price of buying a season of Oprah? Do viewers get annoyed when the products on the shows are US only brands? Does anyone notice the placements at all except the TV legal board in Sweden?
The upcoming film "Robots the Movie" is the latest collaboration between 20th Century Fox and Blue Sky Studios. Apparently Fox's movie marketing department has gone gangbusters to get the word out about their upcoming film. From video games to co-marketing with supermarket chains and premade kids meals like Kid Cuisine, Robots are everywhere. Not that this is anything new in the world of movie marketing.