Tuesday, November 25, 2008
But maybe you don't read the ad blogs.
I think it's a beautiful spot. As Adrants says:" Is it really that difficult to let two people who love each other live their lives they way they choose?"
In any case, this is a great spot. Unfortunately, it runs in Sweden, not here.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Monday, November 17, 2008
I've gone over this before. The whole "I'm offended" thing.
The online ad above ran over the weekend for Motrin, and apparently it started a total s***storm among Young Moms Who Like to Wear Their Children.
I've looked at the spot several times and read the Adfreak post that says the spot comes across as insulting to moms because it apparently implies that they wear their babies like "fashion accessories". I don't get it. I think it's a good spot. It merely points out -- in a lighthearted manner -- that if you get back pain from hauling junior around in a sling -- and it doesn't at all seem to me to imply that your reason for doing so is a bad one -- Motrin can help with the muscle pain. Exactly what in the spot is not true?
But apparently Twitter lit up with angry complaints about it.
Geeze ladies, Get over yourselves. Why is this a problem? After all, you do wear the child in a sling, right, right? What do you care if Motrin says so in an Internet spot? Seriously. I mean, check this out.
Of course, every time I see a woman or man hauling a child around in one of those slings where the kid is on their chest facing out (I suppose so the world can see what an adorable child they have), my first thought is of those scenes in the "Alien" movies where the space monster "hatches" by bursting out of somebody's chest.
But that movie totally offended me.
Adrants had a much better, more real-world post about it here.
" . . . yet again" the post reads, "America has lost its sense of humor and has gotten its underwear up its crack over an innocuous Motrin ad which pokes fun at babywearing."
Monday, November 10, 2008
Friday, November 7, 2008
I saw an ad for this in a magazine while I was waiting to get my haircut yesterday.
I'm not EXACTLY sure why it's funny, but it is. The claim is that with the sled-like thing pictured above, you can get a complete exercise workout in just 4 minutes. For a cool $14,615.
The web site is a scream all in itself. For example:
"Our excellent ROM machine has been a marketing nightmare since 1990 when it first came out on the market." No kidding. Maybe that's because it's $14,615.
"The biggest problem is that 4 minutes seems to good to be true . . " No kidding. Wonder why?
"An equally big marketing problem is the very high selling price . . ." Ya think?
I could go on, but you need to see for yourself. It's pretty funny. I especially the part discounting the "so-called experts."
FYI - $14,615 works out to about $20 a DAY.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
This will be relatively short and poorly typed.
(Maybe I'll develop a whole new style of writing -- sort of like how Lowell George became a great slide guitar player after he was forced to do so when he cut the tendons on his left hand and could no longer curl his fingers around the neck. That's also why Dr. John switched from guitar to piano. Right. Me, Dr. John and Lowell George.)
Anyway, how often do you hear about a client who is unhappy with their agency because the agency folk don't show enough initiative, don't suggest enough projects or come forth with enough unsolicited new ideas? That often seems to dwell near the top of a client's Things I Hate About My Agency list.
I'm of two minds about it. On one hand, I usually start to salivate a bit when I hear this, because we're good at initiative and pushing ideas, and that usually spells an opening for us.
But on the other hand, I have to wonder if the Other Agency is getting paid for all that desired original thinking. Or are they expected to throw a lot of what amounts to spec work for a current client up on the wall in hopes of making something on the production if the client buys into it? (But walking away empty-handed having invested time and resources in the Thinking It Up if they don't.)
I've said it before (and even offered to fight about it, I think -- and I'm a terrible fighter) and I'll say it again. Agencies do not and should not depend on production for their income. We should not be expected to give away what we have to offer that is of most value - our thinking and our ideas - for a production paycheck.
Want lots of ideas and thinking from your agency? Pay for it. Maybe pay a reasonable monthly fee and expect the flow of ideas to stay open. If the ideas you get continue to suck, something is wrong. Fix it or fire the agency.
An agency should be in the business of ideas - generating them as well as executing them. They should get paid for all of it.
Monday, November 3, 2008
One of the things I've been exposed to since hurting my hand is an "odynometer", a device for measuring pain. I guess the more the odys, the greater the pain.
I wonder how Ody Leonard, ACD at Bomstein, feels about this?