Wednesday, August 21st, 2013

The Future of Schools

In market-totalitarian America, everything must serve the overclass, and increasingly so. Hence, the latest marketing platform? The institution known as school. Per Ad Age:

Kleenex (an ecocidal marketing/waste endeavor of Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc.) had approached Studiocom with an interesting challenge: create a back-to-school push promoting the brand’s “stronger, more absorbent tissues.” Problem was, “No one cares when a brand says something like this,” said Creative Director Todd Slutzky. “It’s basically a meaningless statement like ‘new and improved.’” So the Studiocom team decided to put the brand to the ultimate test–in the hands of some science savvy kids. The agency went out to the top 100 science elementary and middle schools around the U.S. and asked them to come up with creative ideas to test the strength of the new tissues.

Ten of the schools took part, each backed by $5,000 funding from Kleenex. The Studiocom team then captured the most creative and compelling “Xperiments” on film.

Here’s the smarm and teacher prostitution that “positions” this appalling trick:

Gosh, I wonder how Kleenexes would do in a strength test against the cloth handkerchieves they are designed to obscure. Science anybody?

Share Button

Posted by Michael Dawson | Filed in Bad Products, Commodification, Private-Sector Boondoggles, Waste


2 Responses to “The Future of Schools”

  1. August 21st, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    Marla Singer said:

    F*** these people. Also, sloppy, sloppy “science”:
    - no comparison group (e.g. alternative tissues)
    - no systematic record/testing of tissue configurations and of loads and forces applied
    - bland, narrow minded, middle class a**holes, future designers of next generation military drones

  2. August 22nd, 2013 at 9:37 am

    Michael Dawson said:

    Quite so, Marla. It’s really anti-science posing as science, as if science is merely making complicated gizmos. Science is, first and foremost, an attempt to answer a real question about a real problem. “How could we help Kimberly-Clark sell tree pulp?” That’s marketing, not science. Real science would be “Why does Kimberly-Clark want us to portray its product as ‘strong’?” or “Why are cloth handkerchieves rare these days?”

    Shame on the fuckhead teacher for doing this, and double shame on the parents and school board for selling their kids.



Please leave a Comment