Fast Company’s list of The 100 Most Creative People in Business 2011 is home to some of the most ambitious, incredible, and innovative people on our planet. As mongers of creative, we are more than pleased to share some of our favorites… (more…)
I’m not sure if anybody has seen the latest Ace Hardware commercials but it’s hysterical and well done. As I’m watching the Godfather on TBS for the thousandth time, a new Ace Hardware commercial comes on. It clearly spoofs the scene in Braveheart when Mel/William Wallace is spurring on his warriors in their first major battle with the English. To the responsible agency – great job. Not only was it funny, but it also gave me a different image of the Ace Hardware brand.
And since we’re talking brand, lets discuss Scotland’s brand a bit. I’ve done a few talks in Edinburgh and Glasgow about branding. One of the biggest brand misconceptions is about Braveheart and how it represents Scotland. My initial impression was that Braveheart was a great brand ambassador for the nation and its people. But to my surprise, most Scots did NOT like the William Wallace connection. When I probed why, Scots stated it was less about the attention that it brought Scotland (tourism increased) and more about the limitations it placed on the rich culture and history of Scotland. Bottom line – Scotland is more than Braveheart.
But if you’re a Braveheart fan, then definitely watch this commercial for a laugh.
You’ve seen them on billboards and bus stops, in magazines, and on the subway: advice that would make your grandfolks shudder.
Launched by Anomaly London, Diesel’s “Be Stupid” ad campaign spans print, outdoor ads, and the internet. Most of the ads in the campaign feature photos of attractive young models engaging in various stupid behaviors, all supported by an array of catchy slogans pitting smartness against stupidity:
It’s clear which of the two sides Diesel takes. But when I first saw the ads, I wondered, does “stupid” mean spontaneous and creative, or reckless and inappropriate?
I set out on the streets of Manhattan to ask the general public about their opinions of the Be Stupid campaign. One elderly gentleman railed against the immorality of the campaign and its celebration of the obscene. “This is…it’s immoral. They’re taking chances with photographs. What do they think they’re doing? You can’t do this and then be shocked at, you know, a wife beating or something.” he told me.
But not everyone was so opposed to the idea of “being stupid.” “I think it’s more about opening yourself to new styles or something like that,” said one young woman in her early twenties–right in the bullseye of Diesel’s target audience.
The target audience for this ad campaign doesn’t seem confined only to age groups–other young people I interviewed just didn’t get Diesel’s philosophy at all. “I guess I don’t really get it,” said another young woman.
Apparently, being stupid means different things to different people. Individual factors, such as age, gender, cultural values, and socio-economic status surely play a part in how these ads are interpreted. For some, “stupid” can mean idiotic, irrational or a lack of intelligence. For others, it can mean to be funky or fresh, outrageous, or to act crazy and have a good time. It’s also interesting to note that both the ad agency that created this campaign, Anomaly London, and Diesel’s Creative Director, Wilbert Das, are both European.
A few clips of my interviews:
For Diesel’s target audience, it means living life without regrets and giving in to a sense of freedom and creativity. For others, it means, well, being stupid.
In the eyes of the latter group, the campaign’s accompanying video ad might seem particularly set on preaching a gospel of stupidity. Is Big Brother commanding you to BE STUPID?
One blogger in Europe picked apart the campaign in an insightful analysis. Based on Diesel’s ad campaign, would you rather be SMART or STUPID?
Back when this blog first started, I intended to have my first post address the question, “where have all the jingles gone?” Feeling nostalgic in today’s world of viral marketing, I suppose I began to mourn the loss of advertising’s earlier “simplicity,” laden with corny lyrics and imagery that have come to shape my own personality and sense of humor (much to my chagrin of course).
Realizing the limits of my expertise in the history of advertising and the research necessary to do justice to the topic, I put the post on the back burner and blogged about something else. Well I still haven’t read Steve Karmen’s Who Killed the Jingle? – How a Unique American Art Form Disappeared, but I think it’s time to at least voice some thoughts and open up a discussion on the subject.
At first I thought a virus killed the jingle: our postmodern culture required we move away from the corny to the cool, get rid of those kiddy tunes and hit today’s tuned-out consumer with clever videos and special effects, or else with the ironic distance that is so hip nowadays, then get them to disperse the ad via social media. In essence: viral marketing. I couldn’t get out of my head the inherent differences between even the words ‘jingle’ and ‘viral’. One, friendly and singsong, frank in its nature. The other, harmful and corrupting, its true workings veiled. I saw it as a hostile takeover rather than the slow socio-cultural evolution it most likely was. Then something strange happened: McCann Erickson made this spot for Verizon:
Here, my two worlds collided. In fact, so many worlds collided with this spot. First of all, we have the return of not just the jingle as a motif and a format, but of a jingle – a classic jingle for Big Red that we all know (and love?). Second, this classic jingle is being parodied, though also mined for its nostalgic gold, ushering it into today’s postmodern advertising realm. Then you factor in that Big Red’s jingle is being re-appropriated by Verizon and things get really wacky. Just when I thought the jingle was back, I realized it’s just a kitschy take on the jingle, which, of course, has gone viral. But I suppose this is the only way for the jingle to survive in today’s world.
It makes me wonder what Verizon’s commercial is doing for Big Red’s sales. And if we shall soon witness an onslaught of advertising that plays on our nostalgia while simultaneously poking fun at it. I think we’ve always had a love-hate relationship with jingles. We, to some extent, love when they come on TV, perhaps because we can sing along, but we curse them when we’re still singing on the train, and in the bathroom, and at work, and while cooking dinner, etc. So maybe the jingle wasn’t killed by the viral. Maybe the jingle was the original virus. (Think about the catch-on effect of singing something like KitKat’s “Gimme a break,” or any one of the millions of jingles that were made to get stuck in your head and then become a shared experience). It makes sense: we, as viewers, built up an immunity to the jingle, thus the mutation into the viral ad campaign. I guess Verizon/McCann Erickson has managed to tap into the ideal niche then: a viral jingle. But since remakes or revivals of classic jingles probably have a very limited lifespan, maybe it’s a matter of simply updating our idea of what a jingle is. Perhaps Toyota has the answer:
Originally only meant to be shown in-house at DK Publishing (UK), this is one truly smart and inspired short video worth watching.
No skipping ahead!
Despite the fact that the futuristic Rubik’s Cube was grounded more in fantasy than reality, the visual effects company Digital Domain had to make sure that the parts fit together seamlessly and logically as they would in real life. To put the piece together the creatives faced a challenge to design and orchestrate each movement so that the logic remained true.
The piece was directed by Carl Erik Rinsch and produced by Markenfilm GMbH & Co. The creative agency for the project was Kempertrautmann Gmbh.
The video below shows the making of the film.
Content © CO-OP 2011.
