The Kmiec Ramblings

This news is just tragic to me. I’m completely bummed by this situation. Just bummed. Was really pulling for Fallon. Had they won the business this could have been a big turning point for Fallon. I’m just sad.

There I said it. The web is NOT a holy grail. Too many companies think they need to hurriedly abandon traditional advertising in favor of online marketing. That’s just silly and short sited. The key to success is finding the right mix of advertising vehicles. I stumbled upon this report about the impact of print advertising.

Oddly enough, magazines can drive an increase in web traffic. Shocked? I’m not. Sometimes print is the right medium. Other times it’s TV. And yes, sometimes it is the web. Understanding the objective should guide where we place the dollars and how we set up the creative.

I’ve worked on Pharma advertising in the past. My wife, worked for the FDA. So you can imagine I’ve got a lot of experience with Direct to Consumer Pharma advertising. The blow up over how Phizer “used” Dr. Jarvik in their ads is ridiculous. The full article of the situation can be found here.

The highlights are as follows:

1. The GOV believes that just because Dr. Jarvik created the artificial heart, that doesn’t make him a medical expert. Think about that for a second? Ok, so he didn’t study heart disease for 20 years. I get that. But the guy created the fucking artificial heart. I mean that’s gotta count for something.

2. The GOV is concerned that a body double was used in the ads. The body double was specifically used in a scene, where consumers are made to believe that he is rowing. In fact, Dr. Jarvik doesn’t row. Again, are you kidding me. Who gives a shit if he doesn’t row. They guy invented the artifical heart. What does rowing have to do with his endorsement of Lipitor?

I’m sure you can tell I think this whole thing is silly. I get the concept of why the GOV regulates DTC advertising. You don’t want companies making false or misleading claims. However, tell me how the use of Dr. Jarvik in ads is any different than say Gatorade’s use of Michael Jordan in an ad? In both scenarios, marketers are trying to find ways to connect with viewers. In both scenarios, advertisers are using one of the oldest forms of advertising: celebrity endorsement.

If the GOV is going to come down on Phizer, then they should come down on Nike, Gatorade, Buick, Rolex, etc., etc., etc.

When you ask a stupid question, you get a flipping fantastic answer!

Marketers, Brand Managers, Clients, Art Directors, etc. if there is one thing we all know, making the freaking logo bigger does not equal better or more branding. If you think it does, you are out of your mind. Branding is not your logo. Branding is simply put, your BRAND.

Next time you’re thinking about how to increase the branding, take a step back and consider if the visuals and/or type actually align with what your brand actually stands for.

This is what makes the internet so wonderful. Once you do something, however big or small, it literally becomes public record. Also, this is a great example of why public proposals are a seriously bad idea.

http://view.break.com/453711 - Watch more free videos

When I went through my project management certification classes I learned about PERT. It seems that we guestimate timing, effort, resources, and costs far too often. If producers/project managers used the PERT model more often we’d be able to provide clients more accurate costs and manage internal resources a lot better. If you aren’t familiar with PERT; check out a nice overview here.

Forget these silly hybrid cars…this is a real hybrid. It does land and water.

Last year I attended the iMedia Brand Summit in San Diego. Great show, and if you haven’t attended a summit you really should. Anyhow, I participated in a round table discussion about how Web 2.0 (which is total BS and I’ll address this pharce in another post) is screwing up our ability to track/measure impressions and clicks for online ad units. For those not in the know, the industry has been selling online adspace via an impressions based model an we’ve been reporting success on a clicks based model for years.

There have been some slight nuances. For example, rich Media service providers like PointRoll will give you an interaction rate metric in addition to the traditional impressions and clicks metrics. The idea being that while a consumer might not actually click thru they are still engaging (another silly word) with your brand.

For the last year or so you’ve probably seen alot about engaging consumers or measuring engagement. The industry has made it seem like engagement is some brand new concept that will revolutionize the world. Not surprisingly, I’m taking an alternate view point.

Engagement is simply a fancy word for time. What we really care about as advertisers is how much time consumers/targets are spending with our brands. There’s only 24 hours in a day; that constraint is fixed and it’s been that way since the dawn of time. We buy TV in 15 second increments; so in essence we are buying on time. If I can buy “time” for TV shouldn’t I be able to buy my online media in time based increments. For example, instead of buying 1,000,000 impressions shouldn’t I be able to vuy 1,000,000 minutes of brand exposure?

Hopefully, that’s given you something to think about the next time you’re thinking about how to measure your media.

Honestly, what the hell was Mama’s Pizza thinking?