Archive for the 'Bad Products' Category
Monday, May 7th, 2012
Age of Wonders
Good news, fellow Earthicans: Our heroic epoch’s leading minds shall never cease their valiant, world-historic labors to solve the great challenges of the perilous times. According to the latest Advertising Age:
Few people would suspect that what’s inside an unmarked building some 30 miles north of New York could change __(a)__, even the entire __(b)__. But that’s what __(c)__’s ambitious, high-energy __(d)__ are promising.
This unassuming office park houses the __(e)__ Lab, and inside are the results of months of intense research. __(f)__ have been working to chart a new course for a __(g)__ that has endured __(h)__, just behind __(i)__.
Over several weeks early this year, Brad Jakeman, president-__(j)__ officer, has walked key __(k)__ constituents around the lab, talking about ideas and showing off mock-ups of new __(l)__ machines, samples of __(m)__ and new __(n)__ concepts. It’s a world where __(o)__ specifically — and the __(p)__ generally — is __(q)__ again.
He insists it’s not a pipe dream.
Answer key:
(a) = the way consumers view a soda brand
(b) = cola category
(c) = Pepsi
(d) = marketers
(e) = Beverage
(f) = Pepsi execs
(g) = brand
(h) = an embarrassing slip to the No. 3 soda
(i) = Diet Coke
(j) = global enjoyment and chief creative
(k) = Pepsi
(l) = new vending and fountain
(m) = licensed products
(n) = marketing
(o) = Pepsi
(p) = cola category
(q) = cool
And some dare question the entrepreneurial system!
Thursday, April 26th, 2012
President Coke (or is it Pepsi?)
ROFL! Unwilling and unable to suggest a single compelling reason why people should care about his re-election (“Defend the individual mandate!”), Brand Obama has apparently settled on boilerplate “consumer goods” marketing techniques this time around. The latest campaign combines celebrity endorsement and a sweepstakes:
Interestingly, while the landing site for this click-through ad conveys the impression that one must make a donation to win the grand “prize” of being admitted to the fundraising soiree at Clooney’s California mansion, the Official Contest Rules (again, Orwell couldn’t have thought this stuff up) say otherwise.
Fraud is as fraud does, down to the last detail.
Tuesday, April 17th, 2012
The Truth Remains Unspeakable
The New York Times yesterday profiled inequality researchers Saez and Piketty. In doing so, the paper of record says, regarding the country’s basic economic history, “income inequality in the United States fell after World War II.”
This familiar liberal trope is complete jive, as we TCTers know:
As this elementary graph, built from the data of none other than Saez and Picketty themselves, shows, income inequality has only ever seen a meaningful decline during, during, DURING World War II! I mean how fricking stupid can these apologists get? The basic fact literally screams in your face. Left to its own devices, corporate capitalism never equalizes the income distribution. The best it can do on that front is tread water for a couple decades after a freak intervention by the public.
This, of course, should come as no surprise. Capitalists obtained the right to run their affairs via oligopolies in order to maximize their own ROI, not to improve society.
Sunday, April 15th, 2012
Pushing Pablum With Mental Pablum
Coke isn’t alone, of course. One wonders which will give you diabetes faster — regularly eating the food at McDonald’s, or “following” its Twitter feed.
Marketing news site contently glowingly reports the following:
Aside from when Mickey D’s is promoting its newest products or the comeback of a favorite menu item (McRibs or Shamrock Shakes, anyone?), the Twitter resembles that of any other user. The company posts updates such as, “’If we didn’t have birthdays, you wouldn’t be you. If you’d never been born, well then what would you do?’ Happy Birthday Dr. Seuss!” and “Happy Thursday everyone! Hope your day is off to a great start!”
It even re-tweets updates unrelated to the company like “Those small words someone can say that makes your day ten times better. #LittleThings” and “I try to be the 1 person to stand up and do something for someone when everyone else sits and watches. #littlethings.”
It’s fitting that McDonald’s Twitter updates are positive and uplifting, considering that its trademark colors are bright, it serves Happy Meals, and its slogan is “I’m lovin’ it.” The company is all about happiness, and this effectively translates over to its presence on Twitter.
Along with never posting negative content, the McDonald’s Twitter feed is clearly run by everyday people. Its ten Twitter representatives sign their tweets with their initials, posting statuses like “It’s Friday! How is everyone this morning? ^MO” and “Good morning and happy Tuesday! Very grateful for the McCafé Mocha that’s about to help me get my day started! ^MO.”
The advertising is in there, but it’s not so direct — people update their Facebooks or Twitter accounts all the time mentioning restaurants or products. Rick Wion, McDonald’s social media director, told PR Daily, “People want to connect with actual people on Twitter.” Instead of sounding like an automated machine, the company’s account is personal and heartfelt.
Over 300,000 people “follow” this line of brand-building condescension and lies, by the way. “The company is all about happiness!” I’m sure that news will go over really well at the next shareholders meeting.
What a culture we get.
Thursday, April 12th, 2012
Coke Tries to Flatter a Continent
Our friend Nercules passes along this breathtaking piece of marketing tripe:
It is, of course, an attempt at flattery. That’s a classic marketing ploy. It also reveals that the Coca-Cola Company sees the entire population of Africa as mental children.
Meanwhile, one ponders which is more offensive: selling sugar-water to poor people, or a corporation based on selling sugar-water to poor people having a net income greater than the gross domestic product of 28 African nations.
Wednesday, April 11th, 2012
Fraud You Can’t Believe In
It’s kind of funny to watch the mainstream commentariat tripping over itself trying to explain the massively obvious truth that nobody sane believes Barack Obama ever stood for change of any kind.
Everyone knows what Barack Obama’s campaign slogan was in 2008. No one seems to know what it will be for 2012.
The White House has been cycling through catchphrases since announcing his reelection bid a year ago: Winning the Future, We Can’t Wait [ROFL: wait for what?], An America Built to Last, An Economy Built to Last, A Fair Shot [ROFL x2: politics as the chance to buy a lottery ticket?]. They seem to be looking for one to resonate — and the constant unveiling of new ones suggests that so far, none of them have. To communications experts, the kaleidoscope of slogans is the latest reflection of the difficulties finding and marketing a message that Obama has faced almost since his inauguration.
To date, Obama and his advisers have largely been defining themselves through contrast messaging — senior adviser David Plouffe called the GOP field a “clown show,” and Obama’s been casting of himself as the sober voice arrayed against irresponsible and hapless opponents.
[All the advisers] agree: The window for Obama to settle on a strong — and consistent — slogan is closing, no matter the continuing Republican primary campaign.
What an irritant these election shows are for the empty vessels who want to sell themselves as the system’s pitchfork catchers! As wondrous a strategy as squatting on the corporate nest is for collecting the monies that buy the ads, selling oneself as the sober voice of stasis in a time of clear popular outrage is simply hard to do.
Apparently, it’s equally difficult for the mainstream media to come within a mile of describing this eminently simple conundrum. (After all, doing so would risk irking the source of not just political but also commercial advertising dollars.) Politico, the vile website in which the above story appears, chalks the sales dilemma up as “another challenge that came with the shift from insurgent outsider to sitting president.”
Advertising Age, soliciting its readers for slogan proposals for the candibots, concurs, commenting that “Change We Can Believe In” will not work for an incumbent candidate.
Of course, neither publication acknowledges the rank illogic of their proffered explanation. What if Obama had been what he sold himself as in 2008? What if he’d passed single payer medical insurance, ended wars, stopped the slide into a police state, overturned Citzens United, imposed peace and disarmament on Israel, taken energy and environment seriously, and actually helped working class people (to say nothing of African-Americans)? Wouldn’t “Defending Change” then make an even better slogan than the one he used in his first election?
But, of course, this tube of toothpaste was always filled with snake oil, wasn’t it? Hence, the slogan problem.
Now that all politics have been completely reduced to marketing campaigns, this is no trivial matter, either. In the balance hangs the salability of the brand:
Its importance, [Obama advisor] Newman explained, shouldn’t be understated. “That [the slogan] becomes the branding of the whole campaign,” he said. “That becomes the anchor to bring together disparate voter segments. It’s the glue, if you will.”
