#GrandNewBrew

Okay, call it what you will -- narcissism, shameless advertising, whatever -- but there is no way that I could miss the chance to blog about the epic-ness that was last night's show, Grand New Brew.

Featuring the Gold 'n Blues, The Studio 13 Refugees and Hype Dance, the show was a myriad of collegiate talent on Marquette's campus.

The most impressive thing, however, was not the singing, dancing or improv comedy. The real showstopper was the marketing and advertising that preceded the event!

Grand New Brew was, in my opinion, a perfect example of the power of social media advertising. With the combined force of Twitter and Facebook, the Gold 'n Blues produced what could be called Marquette's most successful student marketing campaign to date.

Their tactics included a numbered countdown for all the members Facebook profile pictures, multiple daily status changes with the links to the Facebook event page and Gold 'n Blues website, and Twitter promotions including discounted tickets for Twitpics of our sidewalk chalk advertisements.

The turnout for the show was one which made history for the Gold 'n Blues and for the venue, The Varisty Theatre. Thanks to the relentless social media advertising by the Gold 'n Blues, the Fugees and Hype Dance, almost 900 people came to watch Grand New Brew.

As of yesterday #GrandNewBrew was still out-trending Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn and Thanksgiving in Milwaukee.

You can sue me later for such a blatant pat on the back, but to say the least, I think that this show perfectly encapsulated how much social media has changed our society and the way we give and receive news and publicity.

For all those who came, thank you for helping make Gold 'n Blues' history.

"Serve"-ing up controversy

Serve Marketing -- the country's only volunteer, nonprofit advertising agency, which gives under-served charitable causes a stronger voice in the community -- has received much media attention in the past week because of their newest public service campaign for the Milwaukee Health Department. 


The agency, headquartered in downtown Milwaukee, created ads about the dangers of co-sleeping with infants which frightened and engraged some parents. 


The ads, like the one below, feature infants sleeping in their parent's bed gently tucked next to an enormous butcher knife. 

Now, I am not a mother, so I can only imagine how terrifying it would be to look at this ad and picture your own child sleeping next to a gigantic butcher knife. The ads are most definitely scary and controversial and I am not surprised that they have received so much backlash from parents. 


That being said, I have to admit that the ads are, in my opinion, incredibly effective. 


Whatever anyone has to say about the imagery used, the next time any parent who has seen these ads thinks about co-sleeping with their baby, I am pretty positive the first thing that will pop into their heads is a big, gleaming butcher knife. 

Selfish Saving

There seems to be a theme emerging this week. While watching TV last night, I happened to see yet another commercial utilizing controversial methods to sell their product. 

The advertisement was Groupon's 2011 Super Bowl Commercial, "Tibet." 

The ad starts off almost as a public service announcement, saying that Tibet is in trouble, that their culture is in danger and needs our help. It then cuts to a restaurant scene where Timothy Hutton explains that regardless of that fact, they still "whip up an amazing fish curry." He continues talking about Groupon and all the money people saved on Tibetan food by using the website. The unsavory tagline of the commercial is, "Save the money."

I must say that I was incredibly disappointed with Groupon's commercial. The entire point of the website is to offer people discounts on various merchandise, restaurants, concerts, activities, etc. The message should, in my opinion, be something that encourages saving money, one that tells Groupon customers, "we understand that everyone is on a budget these days, here's a way to save some money." Wanting to cut back on spending should be considered a good thing, especially by a company whose MO is offering discounts. 

What this commercial does, however, is portray users of Groupon as selfish, greedy and without empathy. It implies that the "struggles of Tibet" don't matter to Groupon users, they don't want to save or help anyone else, they simply was to "Save the money." 

I think that this ad does a poor job of shedding a positive light on Groupon. Instead of promoting saving, i.e. their livelihood, they are mocking it and making it into a selfish and greedy act. 

Sexism Sells

A pattern seems to be emerging in this blog because I was, yet again, inspired this week by an advertisement shown and discussed in one of my communications classes.

The ad in question is Dr. Peppers commercial for their newest soft drink Dr. Pepper Ten.

Just as a short introduction, I would like to say that I hate this advertisement.

I can honestly say that I have ever seen an ad -- print, television, billboard, or otherwise -- that is more sexist in my entire life. The main reason being because it is not just offensive to females, the tagline is "Not for women," but also stereotypes and degrades males, as well.

I consider myself something of an advertising nerd, so it's no surprise to me that sometimes shock-value and controversy are exactly what a company needs to sell products. It's hard to leave a lasting impression on a consumer in only 30 seconds, and pushing the envelope does greatly increase probability of information retention.

That being said, I can concede to the argument that Dr. Pepper's ad was effective. It certainly pushed enough buttons to get a people talking. And, in the advertising world, a lot of the time, all buzz is good buzz.

What I won't concede to, however, is the argument that this advertisement is funny, or entertaining, or good.

Not only does it stereotype women -- you're right, Dr. Pepper, no woman in the history of the world has ever liked an action movie. You got us -- but it also stereotypes men.

Or perhaps, like Dr. Pepper advertised, real men would never drink "girly drinks," all they want are explosions and guns and big, manly calories.

I understand why Dr. Peppers advertisement is effective. It uses it's controversy to create a lasting impression in viewers minds. But I believe they could have come up with a concept that was less offensive to it's target audience.

All airbrushing is NOT created equal...

So I might be breaking a couple rules of Feminism by saying this, but....is Julia Robert's Lancome ad really THAT bad?

If you don't know, the ad I am referring to is the following:

The ad was banned in the UK by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for being too "misleading," and not giving a true representation of what the product could actually do. In addition to the ASA, women around the world bashed the ad for being overly perfected and unrealistic.

While I am the first to complain about our society's standards for female beauty -- correction: our society's completely unrealistic standards for female beauty -- I cannot say that I agree with those who were truly offended by this ad.

The main reason for this is because I honestly cannot see the difference between this ad and every other makeup ad. The way I see it is that EVERYONE is airbrushed in makeup advertisements. I'd like one of these outraged women to show me a makeup ad featuring a model who isn't airbrushed to within an inch of her life. I can tell you right now that they won't be able to find one, becuase they don't exist.

The point of every makeup ad, and even more broadly, every ad in general, is to make the product look like the best product on the market, to make the product look like exactly what it's target market is looking for. Why, then, would Lancome want to produce an ad featuring a model who didn't look the best she could possibly look?

I know that I may be offending some by saying that, but when it comes down to it, in this day and age, shouldn't we know by now that advertisements are not the best representations of reality?

Misunderstood: Kenneth Cole's Ad Campaign

I was so inspired after a class discussion about a controversial Kenneth Cole ad that I decided to blog about it this week. Our class discussion stemmed out of the following advertisement and campaign website:


The class was, for the most part, extremely opposed to the ad campaign and didn't see the connection between fashion and politics. They thought that it was too controversial, too risky, too distant from traditional fashion brands.

I could not have disagreed more with my classes' general consensus.

I think that with this ad campaign, Kenneth Cole has really tried to create a brand, not just a fashion line. They are saying that the people that buy Kenneth Cole merchandise are people with a cause. People who shop at Kenneth Cole are looking for more than just clothes, they are people who care about politics and hot-topic issues like gay rights and abortion.

Some of my classmates thought that the ad campaign was Kenneth Cole's way of making a political statement, or rather THEIR political statement, but that was, in my opinion, completely opposite of their point. I believe the point that Kenneth Cole was trying to make is that their target audience has a stance, not that that stance should adhere to a certain end of the political spectrum, but that they should have opinions, whatever those opinions may be.

This political ambiguity can be seen in the issues that they chose to feature on the ad campaign's website. The four topics -- Gay rights, War, Pro-Life and Guns -- are issues from both sides of the political spectrum and each features it's own page with a discussion board where viewers can agree or disagree and explain why.

Kenneth Cole's ad campaign is obviously extremely controversial, and there are MANY people who would be completely turned off by their ads. Despite it's controversy, I still believe it is an incredible example of creating a true brand as opposed to simply a company.

Twitter Takeover

It's happened. 

Twitter has actually taken over the world.

....at least I think it has. Twitter is the social medium through which I get ALL of my news; it's where I communicate the most frequently with my friends and acquaintances and now, where I see the most effective use of advertising every day.

For example, one of the twitter accounts I follow is OnMilwaukee, Milwaukee's Daily Magazine. With their Twitter account, OnMilwaukee is able to tweet daily reminders about upcoming events and provide links for more information like they did with the weekend preview for September 23-25.

Another example of advertising on Twitter is the account of my own a cappella group here at Marquette, the Gold 'n Blues. We use our Twitter account almost entirely for advertising. Whether it's a reminder to buy one of our newly recorded CDs or an encouragement to attend one of our concerts [like the Tweet shown below], we rely heavily of Twitter's quick, accessible and easy nature to make the most of the small amount of attention expended by the average college student on a daily basis.

I think that the accessibility and speed of Twitter is what makes is so incredibly effective for advertising, and why I, in particular, find it so easy and, honestly, important to use. I can follow whoever I want, any company, any magazine, newspaper, website, organization, you name it, with just one click of a button I can have access to every bit of information I could ever need. I can get their tweets sent to my phone, I can click on links they provide to gain more knowledge of their brand/products/etc. And, by having the ability to Tweet at them, I can become more involved in the process of their business than ever before.

Stumbleupon for the win, yet again...

At the risk of sounding like a broken record or, God forbid, unimaginative and unoriginal, I must admit that another one of my blog posts was inspired by the incredibly addictive  procrastination tool Stumbleupon...

 After what seemed like days worth of boring home improvement and cooking websites I stumbled upon a website of the 13 most innovative ads in the world. 

The following advertisements we're among my favorites:

I absolutely love the way this billboard utilized 3-D design to really capture the viewers attention. It has a definite "wow" factor that I think is SO important in advertising, particularly, in print advertising. There aren't special effects in print advertising like there are in video advertising. You have to make an image or an idea jump off the page/billboard/etc. without the help of a catchy song or tricky editing. Heineken definitely captured that special something necessary for print ads to be truly memorable. 

This next ad is an advertising tool for a yoga studio in Hong Kong. The reason I chose this as one of my favorites was not only because it had the "wow" factor I discussed with the Heineken billboard, but also because it is so incredibly cost effective! I honestly can't think of a cheaper or more perfectly designed advertisement. Straws cost practically nothing and the fact that it uses an everyday object and connects it with what the studio does/provides via the image on the bended section of the straw is innovation in advertising at its finest. People will definitely not forget this one!

"Will It Blend?" has cult following written all over it

While aimlessly clicking through countless websites on my Stumbleupon account the other night, I miraculously came across one of the most entertaining videos I've seen in a very long time....

The "Will It Blend?" YouTube video series is the brainchild of the company Blendtec , a blender, mixer and mill manufacturing company based in Utah. Each video segment of "Will It Blend?" is hosted by Blendtec owner Tom Dickson and features one of the company's blenders annihilating one unbelievable object after another. Did you ever think that a blender could blend an iPad? What about an air soft gun or a Wii remote? Well Blendtec's blenders certainly can! 

The video series is innovative, it displays supreme knowledge of the importance of social media and, most importantly, is so funny and surprising that it has already become one of the most watched channels on YouTube.

Everyone Loses with American Apparel's Plus Size Ad Campaign...

 After reading last weeks edition of the Marquette Tribune, a rather disturbing ad campaign contest was brought to my attention by Viewpoints writer Bridget Gamble.

The contest she called into question in her article, "Fashion Industry Less Pro-Female Than It Looks", was run by the company everyone loved to hate this past year, American Apparel.

Famous for its racy advertisements, stick-thin models and morally bankrupt CEO, American Apparel has not made a particularly wholesome or positive name for itself in the past.

The introduction of a plus-size female line, however, seemed to be an attempt on their part to change their negative image. They created an online contest to find the model and concept for their new plus-size ad campaign. Women sent in pictures with the idea that whoever got the most online viewer votes would win the contest and be in their very own American Apparel ad campaign. The results of the contest, however, we're not to American Apparel's liking.

The winner was 24-year-old actress Nancy Upton. According to Rina Raphael's article for The Look Today, "American Apparel's plus-size contest winner minus prizes," Upton decided to submit "spoof" pictures to call attention to the "patronizing" and inappropriate tones of the contest's name ("The Next BIG Thing") and announcement. Upton's photos, which featured her in numerous scandalous poses, scantily clad and seductively eating food, were, in my opinion, her attempt to show how she interpreted American Apparel's image of plus size women.

American Apparel took offense to Upton's controversial ads, and despite the web's adoration of her, refused to give her the contest's prizes. 

I think that the result of American Apparel's ad campaign contest is an absolutely perfect example of how advertising and, particularly, language in advertising can infuriate and alienate a company's target audience. It is imperative to chose appropriate language and to make sure that the images representing the company are ones which portray the company in the best light possible. 

In my opinion, American Apparel REALLY dropped the ball on this ad campaign contest. Instead of creating the image that their ideal plus-size model is normal and beautiful they advertised it as almost a joke, with what Upton called, "fake, cutesy words like 'bootylicious' instead of positive ones like 'sexy' or 'gorgeous.'" They should have thought about how their target audience would interpret the language of their contest announcement. Perhaps if they had they would have been able to run a successful ad campaign instead of creating yet another PR mess to clean up.

What Brand Am I?

If I were a brand, I would be...Revlon Super Lustrous Lipstick.

For those who know me, my choice makes perfect sense because I have always been in love, I repeat in love, with lipstick.

But choosing one’s personal brand is about more than just liking a company’s products. I chose Revlon not simply because I love lipstick, but because of what their brand represents.

Founded in 1932, Revlon has made a name for itself in the cosmetics industry by offering classic, trustworthy products that come with a fresh and youthful twist. They continually create a plethora of advertisements featuring young, popular celebrities, such as Jessica Biel and Halle Berry, and are always coming out with new and innovative products that maintain the high level of quality which made Revlon famous.

Revlon’s brand of Super Lustrous Lipstick is like me because of all the aforementioned reasons -- I consider myself very youthful and fresh but also enjoy tradition and dependability -- but also because of the variety of colors it offers.

I am the type of person who can’t be nailed down to one genre of anything. I love classical music and rap. I love pink and blue, classic novels and trashy magazines, Andy Warhol and Claude Monet. The fact that Revlon’s Super Lustrous Lipstick offers so many different colors to choose from caters to my need for variety.

It also caters to my need of color and vibrancy. I am not one for bland, pastel shades, I live for oranges and reds and pinks and bright greens. Color, to me, is the most beautiful thing about life and I think that choosing Revlon’s Super Lustrous Lipstick as my brand really represents that.