Advertising Space

Advertising space.

The 60s were a time of economic prosperity, with disposable income and leisure time reaching new heights.

Although this was a decade of creativity, the ad industry was chastised for the way it promoted materialism and consumerism. Brands had to dig deep to come up with clever ways to connect with a new type of audience. That saw conventional approaches thrown out of the window, and replaced with new forms of advertising, frequently exemplified by comedy, irony, and self-deprecation.

Think small

Surely the best example of this is DDB’s work with VW. Celebrating the flaws of the Beetle; a car named after a bug, that was slow, weird looking, and took ages to manufacture. Headline gems including ‘Think Small’. ‘Lemon’. ‘It makes your house look bigger’. And ‘If you run out of gas, it’s easy to push’ were neatly placed alongside simple art direction, creating a thoroughly intriguing print ad that you needed to take notice of.

And with TV spend doubling, and print formats a popular choice for advertisers, this advertising was given the perfect platforms to make a real statement.

It was plucky messaging done big – blurring the lines between art and commerce. It started conversations. There was a point to it. Its appeal gave it longevity. And it led the charge for advertising courage.

Better value?

Fast forward 50 years and it’s a different story. Tech advances have boosted investment in insta-program-AI-real-time-sponsored-mobile-video-post-content. But this doesn’t mean it’s delivering better value. Evidence suggests so-called ‘dead’ channels including TV, radio, print and OOH are still the most effective. These allow brands to deliver messaging to a mass audience, and thus creating a common knowledge. In contrast, the granular targeting capabilities of modern digital advertising reaches consumers at an individual level, with lots of individual messages. They’re tiny ads that can only change one mind at a time. With engagement usually demonstrated via an empty ‘like’, rather than a memorable response.

Bravery

And as ads have shrunk, so too has the courage to do things differently. With content focusing on instant information delivery over brand building. Yes, there’s plenty of other social, political, economical and ethical factors that have affected this swing, but brand bravery has taken a hit. 

Picture a new ad revolution where creativity is always celebrated, nerve is rewarded, and rule-breaking is respected. 

When it comes to making a bold statement, the ad industry has taken one giant leap in some respects, and one small step in others.

Advertising space.

If you’d like to talk to us about how we think big even for the tineiest of media placements, drop us a note saying:. ‘I’d like you to big my brand up’ here.

Come on in, the water’s lovely.

Brand deep dive – Having trouble finding a team prepared to dive deep enough to understand your brand?
OBB could well be your lifeline.

Deep sea divers are in short supply.

The North Sea oil business offers rich pickings for those who brave its frigid depths to repair pipelines and the like – often in excess of £200k for 6 months work.

Cue sharp intake of breath.

So the money’s decent but it’s also highly dangerous. Once back on terra firma the decompression and recovery process is more lengthy than that of a returning astronaut.

The stress to complete a job before oxygen levels run thin is immense. Injuries are commonplace due to huge, submerged machinery and visibility is often extremely poor.

Not one for snowflakes then – that’s for sure.

As you’d expect, robots have replaced the more routine tasks however humans still do the more involved, exploratory exercises requiring huge experience and insight.

Something that sorts the good agencies from the others perhaps? Especially if this report is to be believed.

Often it’s tough finding those prepared to venture out further than the shoreline in order to really extol the virtues of  your brand.

But journey a bit further out and that’s where pearls are found.

Our band of intrepid adventurers remain calm around unearthly pressures or inclement deadlines.

So wave a hand to the ditherers in the shallows because you’ve just found a bunch of rare deep dive thinkers.

Thanks for reading. And breathe.

If you’d like to send us into the abyss, drop us a note saying: ‘How’s the visibility down there?’ here.

Banged to rights.

Can you trust the data?

Channel 4 have just launched a new series ‘Banged Up – Teens behind bars’.
The premise is: “Difficult Brits do time in a full-on Florida jail” and as a result will be scared into seeing the error of their ways and adjust their current behaviour and attitude to crime before it becomes too late.

In his book ‘Black Box Thinking’, Matthew Syed explains how the same experiment took place in the late 1970s in New York. In a programme titled ‘Scared Straight’, the idea was exactly the same. Take a bunch of delinquent (or near-delinquent) teens and introduce them to real inmates. These would both be intimidating and terrifying in delivering what real life is like for hardened criminals in one of the world’s most notorious prisons.

It makes for great television. Parents love it as a tool to hopefully cut through all the nagging. Kids love it as they watch and think they’re too cool or ‘hard’ to be intimidated by it. The exact same emotions of those families participating. However, the bravado soon turns to tears and on the face of it, they commit to change their ways.

Oscar winner

The 1979 film won an Oscar for best documentary feature and the programme was rolled out across the world. It was massively effective and backed by judges, prison warders and a whole host of experts. The data was amazing and Judge George Nicola said “When you view the programme and review the statistics that have been collected, there is no doubt in my mind… that the juvenile awareness project… is perhaps the most effective, inexpensive deterrent in the entire correctional process.”

20 years after the original broadcast, in 1999, the documentary crew revisited the original seventeen teenagers. The results did indeed appear to be as brilliant and solid as had been stated. When interviewed they talked about their new lives and how their visit to the prison had put them on the right track. Their stories were inspirational to all who watched, from stealing cars to becoming a preacher. From drug dealing to a book-keeper and mother. One by one they credited the programme with saving them from a life of crime.
The stats backed it all up too. Evidence presented spoke of an 80-90% of attendees going straight and was hailed as “An amazing success story… unequalled by traditional rehabilitation methods.”

Hold on a minute

Then something happened. A professor of Criminal Justice, named James Finckenauer decided to look a little deeper into the data and statistics. He wanted to know how the 80-90% success figure had been arrived at. It was through responses to a four question questionnaire sent to parents of the teenagers who had taken part in the prison visits.
He didn’t believe this method was particularly robust or reliable.
The organisations and agencies responsible for running the programme were asked to write letters of commendation. In essence, asked to mark their own homework and determine future investment.
The professor then looked into the background of the thousands of teenage participants before the visit. They found many of them were not delinquent before, so how solid was the assertion that they had changed their behaviour?
Finally, the questionnaires to parents were often sent out within a few weeks of the prison visit and only the ones who responded were included in the data. So it was entirely plausible that only the parents of kids who had shown a positive response to the visit actually bothered to fill them in.
Add to this, the data never looked to any other mitigating factors. What was happening at home? Was anything being done different at school? Even, how was the economy performing? All possible contributing elements that were ignored.

Evidence ignored

Finckenauer conducted his own research by holding treatment groups vs control groups. The evidence now was overwhelming that the programme DID NOT WORK. More than that, the teenagers who went through the programme were more likely to get caught up in a life of crime. The damage it did to them psychologically tipped the vulnerable over the edge. In some instances, crime amongst participant groups increased as much as 28%.

With rigorous research proving overwhelmingly that ‘Scared Straight’ didn’t work and even worse had the opposite effect to that desired, how did the authorities react? You’d expect them to instantly drop it but here’s the interesting thing. Cognitive dissonance kicked in. The top brass were so invested in it as they’d been doing it for years. They believed the data told them it was the right thing to do. They couldn’t admit it had been a waste of time and money and worse still, was even having an adverse effect. So much of them and their reputation was invested in the programme. There was no way they were going to allow themselves to look like they had got it wrong. That they had in fact been fooled by dodgy data and measuring techniques.
40 years later and here we go again. Sending British kids into a situation that is proven to be dangerous for their future. Having learned nothing because the data being used is selective and the emotion (and TV viewability) attached to it means we want to believe it works.

Data junkies

Sad really and of course we’d never blindly follow false and misleading data in our own world, would we?
We wouldn’t ignore the stats about digital ad-fraud because 10+ years ago we were promised a new era of advertising accountability.
Collectively we’d scoff at anyone who suggested last click data wasn’t the most important metric and anything before that moment was vitally important.
We’d de-friend anyone who exposed the latest social fad, showing it was misusing our personal information to hound us with awful information and change our voting habits.
We’d close our ears to the merest implication that voice activated devices were gathering information on what you want for dinner tonight.
And of course we would all take with a pinch of salt the amazing results generated in agency case studies. Presented on their spangly websites and whizz bang creds documents.
Agencies and clients up and down the land are so invested in the shiny new toys that we’re terrified that the uprising of real information will show us all to have been hoodwinked. The digital revolution made everything accountable but never more so has the old saying of ‘lies, damn lies and statistics’ been more relevant.

The Emporor has no clothes

How would we ever explain to the boardrooms holding the purse strings that we got it all wrong? We can’t, we daren’t. So we keep on doing it. Cognitive dissonance insists we pretend everything is okay. That if we don’t trust in the data, someone else will and in turn win the battle for expenditure.

Maybe it’s time to be fierce and get back to doing what we agencies have always done best. Creating work that shifts perceptions and product and concentrating on one metric. Sales.

You can and should get hold of a copy of Black Box Thinking here.

Can you trust the data?

If you’d like an honest appraisal of what metrics you should really be looking at, drop us a note saying:. ‘I just want to sell more stuff’ here.

Wake up and smell the coffee tax

Carrot or stick marketing

Pret offer 50p off a purchase if you bring in a reusable cup. Leon offer 45p, and Costa 25p reduction in price. A great approach to save these businesses and I money, whilst minimising waste to save the world at the same time. The second point being most poignant when you consider the UK throws away 5,000 coffee cups a minute!

Starbucks on the other hand went from offering 25p off (which saw a 126% increase in the use of reusable cups) to adding an extra 5p to the standard purchase price if you didn’t. Whilst this initiative seems to stem from a similar idea, to me the message is very different. Buy from Leon, Costa or Pret and I’m rewarded. But now buy from Starbucks and I’m penalised. It’s carrot and stick with added caffeine.

Pret reported a 10-fold increase is the use of reusable cups, and equally all chains seem to be reporting a positive behavioural change. They could all have the same ethics and positive intentions, but to me it doesn’t feel like they do. Varying offers suggest varying levels of commitment to a cause. Indeed, Pret’s CEO Clive Schlee stated the chain “would prefer to be generous to our customers than tax them”. Unlike our friends at Starbucks then?

The products for sale aren’t really that different, and I have no allegiance to one brand or another. But my perception of the brands differs a lot.

Let’s filter this a bit…

Whilst the term was initially used as a way for farmers to identify their animals, by the late 1880s the term ‘brand’ was used to differentiate products against their more generic competition. 100 years later, David Ogilvy defined a brand as ‘the intangible sum of a product’s attributes’. So, a brand essentially is, and apparently always has been, an artificial creation that helps consumers differentiate one product from another. So that’s pretty straightforward.

But there’s a fascinating relationship between brand and brand perception. The former being owned by a company and the latter owned by the consumer. Brand owners may feel they understand exactly what their brand represents by stamping their stamp on a product. However, this may be more reflective of their aspirations for the brand, rather than the reality of public opinion. Negative brand perception will not only make people more likely to turn to rival brands, but encourage them to share unfavourable opinions with others, fuelling further negative sentiment. Your real ‘brand’ could be released in to the wild before you can say frappé-caffé-mocha-chino. Not great when you consider humans use a lot more energy analysing and picking apart negative views and experiences than they do positive ones.

Bean counters

Back to the money point. Whilst there’s an environmental action that needs to be taken, these corporate giants will obviously have eyes on the money saving results these incentives bring. But brand perception is inextricably linked with a company’s bottom line, so actually negative reaction to these incentives could be doing more harm than good. And I know the money off idea doesn’t work every time. People only stopped using disposable carrier bags when the mandatory charge was introduced. Not because supermarkets said you could get your shopping any cheaper. And on the flip side, incentives don’t always rely on a money off approach anyway – you still collect stickers from paper cups at McDonalds – an incentive that actually encourages the use of more disposable cups. A pretty outdated approach considering today’s environmental concerns.

Reusable

Anyway reader, I got my coffee. In a reusable cup. At a reduced price. That’s one less cup in the bin, and a few pennies saved for me. And the decision of where I purchased this heavenly beverage was mine, not the brand’s. Their incentive got my interest, but it was the way they executed their incentive, and what I discovered while writing this that ultimately made my decision.

I guess like a decent coffee, to instil behavioural change through incentives, brands need to invest in incentives perceived as strong, full of body, and give you a warm, happy feeling. Not weak, milky, and leaving a bad taste in your mouth.

Carrot or stick marketing

If you’d like to have a coffee with us and discuss marketing incentives, drop us a note saying:. ‘Mine’s a frappé-caffé-mocha-chino please’ here.

Couldn’t get my Ed round it

The power of love or loathe advertising

September 2017 saw TMW Unlimited launch Kinder Bueno’s Adulting campaign, using social language to tap in to a grown up audience. Designed to resonate with Bueno’s majority audience who would “prefer to permanently remain 29 if they could”, vloggers and influencers are shown rewarding themselves for ‘adulting success’. So the concept was based on research, the idea seemed sound, it made sense, and was easy to understand.

Disagreement.

I didn’t like it. Definitely 100% didn’t like it. To me the characters felt weird and patronising. I didn’t like it so much that I decided to use it as an example of annoying ads in a monthly team meeting. I pressed play, turned to the team to absorb all the negative comments, and… disaster. Rich, one of our creative directors, said he really liked it. Oh. Balls. He’s much more creative than me, and more experienced. And taller. I knew my opinion was wrong, and sat very sheepishly for the next ten minutes until the pain and embarrassment subsided.

I realised afterwards that this was nonsense (apart from the height thing). It’s an ad for chocolate for goodness sake. But being a bear of many opinions, disagreeing felt devastating. But also quite good.

89% invisibility.

Impactful advertising generates emotional connection, but that doesn’t always mean the emotion is good. Research averages suggest 4% of advertising is remembered positively, 7% negatively, with 89% disappearing into an ad black hole. So Rich and I were in different groups here. Excellent. There’s some logic. I can rest easy and move on.

The tightrope to fall on the right side of though, is whether that ad is perceived to be SO annoying it actually harms the brand. Or whether it does its job and reinforces the brand despite the annoyance.

In 2009, GoCompare introduced Gio Compario, their controversial opera singing mascot that left the ‘Go Compaaaaaaare’ earworm firmly embedded in viewers minds. Refreshingly, in 2012 this character’s irritating qualities were acknowledged in a range of ads that showed high profile celebrities ‘Saving The Nation’ by killing him off before he could start warbling. Who knew gentle Sue Barker was partial to a rocket launcher?

Gio Compario made the ads annoying. Being annoying made them memorable. And this was cleverly manipulated to make them a winner. And after a two-year hiatus, the exasperating man was back – looks like the brand, and the people just couldn’t live without him. #GioReturns cemented GoCompare in first position of the UK’s most annoying ads in 2015, above serial penny cleaner Barry Scott, and the rather more disturbing Wonga puppets. There’s a common theme there though – I clearly remember all three characters, their brands, and would recognise them against their competitors.

Yours, Annoyed from Barking.

Annoying characters are annoying. But that’s the beauty of them I suppose. They’ll likely feature in a campaign based on solid research, audience insight, and the need to find a voice in a crowded space. So whilst I still can’t completely make my peace with Bueno’s grownups, I know it’s ok for other people not to feel the same. For now.

And OBB has taught me that ‘being fierce’ stems from having conviction and fighting for what we believe. It’s not about never backing down, it’s about having an opinion and not being afraid to voice it even if it is different to others.

Oh, and Ed Sheeran’s just there because his character was REALLY annoying in Game Of Thrones. I won’t retract that. Not even if Sue Barker goes after him.

The power of love or loathe advertising

If you would like us to create advertising that generates a reaction, drop us a note saying:. ‘I’m not going to mention Marmite… oh damn’ here.

It’s time I faced up to things

Advertising and the subconscious

I am working in my third agency. At my first agency, my manager always asked me to deliver information “In a nutshell please Beth!” when time was of the essence, and my detailed narrations were perceived to be a little much. In my second agency, it appeared I had mastered the art of verbal summary but to the detriment of my expressions.

Having observed my capabilities in a client meeting, this next manager took me to one side. She politely advised me that I had absolutely lost control of my face. She’d apparently observed a variety of eye widening, nostril flaring and brow furrowing movements. Unknown to me, these were explicitly showcasing my unimpressed-ness to everyone in the room.

When I joined One Black Bear, I warned the team about this impairment. I’m less Mona Lisa. More Mr. Bean.

But having explored how the way we communicate is changing in my last blog, maybe my face isn’t quite as dysfunctional as I originally thought. If what we see can truly convey emotion better than what we hear or read, then facial expressions could reveal more than what we say, and even what we think.

Take it at face value

Even when we try very hard to hide our real feelings, our faces will often display the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And the reason for this is pretty straightforward. Actors and pathological liars aside, human emotions are an unconscious reaction, typically lasting up to four seconds, and displayed via facial muscles. But four seconds is a long time, and there’s plenty that can go wrong in that time.

In the 1960s psychologists coined the term ‘Micro-expression’. Typically lasting a fraction of a second, micro-expressions are an innate result of an involuntary emotional response. Occurring when the brain responds appropriately to the stimulus that a person experiences, but need to hide. This results in a very brief display of a true emotion, followed by a false reaction to cover it up. It was originally thought that micro-expressions were mostly negative, encompassing disgust, anger, fear, contempt etc. Though in the 1990s, these were expanded to include more positive sentiments like pride, pleasure and amusement.

So, back to my face for a second. It could be that my micro-expressions are too long (though working in client management, I’m opting for the term ‘thorough’). My micro’s gone macro. But I am an honest person. And as neither a professional actor, nor pathological liar (though if I was both how would you know I was either?) I can only assume that while my face is broken, it is telling the truth. And if there is so much truth to uncover, could studying these facial reactions bring a new perspective to marketing research?

Say it to my face

The core of marketing research lies in understanding what people think and feel. But if people aren’t always aware of their own perceptions, they could be consciously saying one thing, but unconsciously really thinking another.

We already know that effective advertising appeals to emotions. Keeping in mind the fact that people aren’t always aware of their expressions, the use of things like eye tracking and facial coding can bring a new dimension to research. And thinking about other variables that can affect a ‘truthful’ verbal or written reaction (Is this what they want to hear? Will one answer benefit me over another? Am I in a good mood? Do I have time for this?) this could be really important.

Tui tested this out, asking people their thoughts on the impact, execution, and message of one of their ads. At the same time, they used facial coding to gauge the same insight. This second implicit approach uncovered that next to dominant expressions of mainly positive emotions towards the advert. People also showed signs of anger and sadness that weren’t apparent through explicit questioning. Aligning changes in facial expression with actual scenes in the advert also allowed Tui to pinpoint when particular emotions were displayed, delivering clear guidelines for optimisation. But advertisers still need a combination of the two. Analysis of facial expressions provide important insight, but will not explain why these reactions occurred. Feeding this information back to people will allow for emotional validation, but more importantly allow for a better understanding of the reasons behind them.

Time for a face off

I guess my face works at One Black Bear as the agency prides itself on intuition. We aren’t afraid to ask questions and dig deeper to find the real drivers behind what’s being said and, importantly, what isn’t.

So, as a message to my manager from agency two, maybe it’s ok that my face doesn’t always work, so long as I can explain why this is, and get myself out of any trouble when I need to. In fact, perhaps my face conveys so much information, I may never have to speak again – music to the ears of my manager from agency one.

Advertising and the subconscious

If you’d like to see our reaction to a shiny new brief, drop us a note saying:. ‘Is that a little glint of fire in your eye?’ here.

Carrot Wars

Christmas advertising

No Christmas blog would be complete without mentioning Elton John’s trailer for his 2019 Rocketman film…I mean the latest John Lewis ad. John Lewis’s Christmas ads are quite rightly held up as the shining example of how to do Christmas. Often emotive, occasionally funny and sometimes both – they’re ingrained in our Christmas psyche. Whether you love it or loathe it, is beside the point. You will watch it several times and you know it’s John Lewis and associate it with Christmas. The problem is that then you get other brands and agencies chasing the John Lewis legacy of owning Christmas. Before you know it you’re getting carried away in trying too hard to produce something overly emotive or funny rather than something that will do justice and fit with the brand you represent.

Heart strings

Looking generally at the supermarket ads over the last few years, with a couple of exceptions (Sainsbury’s WW1 ad from 2014 particularly comes to mind), they all seem to blend into one. It’s usually a nativity play or some montage of families with variations on Christmas. There’s the little nuances that make the big day familiar, cue dad falling asleep in the armchair…again. Or you get the other side of the John Lewis coin and see a succession of high street ads that pull at the heart strings. Often someone not getting to see a family member or friend, or seeing something that reminds them of someone special in their lives. Then surprise, surprise they’re reunited with said person at the end gift in hand, tears in eyes. Cut to standing by the Christmas tree and hugs all round.

Well trodden path

The point being is that most follow the well-trodden path of past successful Christmas ads. Producing a film that you hope people see and subsequently petition for a new category of Oscar, you actually end up producing wallpaper.

We’ve all been there, no matter which side of the agency / client fence you sit on. A briefing where you’re asked to mimic the characteristics of another brand. Whether that’s the emotion of John Lewis, the tone of voice of Innocent or the disruptive nature of Red Bull. It sucks the life out the brief, but more importantly the brand itself. And whilst it’s okay to follow a formula or take inspiration from a brand time to time, you must always keep the focus on yourself and how you want to do things.

Kevin!!!

The one supermarket exception is Aldi. Kevin the Carrot is the outside threat to the John Lewis crown in my humble opinion. And it’s all down to long term commitment and being distinctive and subsequently fighting against being wallpaper. They’ve broken away from the formula mentioned previously and produced a character that will now feature every Christmas. We even saw that lovely festive image of mass brawls and chaos down their aisles over stuffed Kevin toys last week. It sets Aldi apart from the pack and means that as soon as you see Kevin on screen you know immediately who you’re watching.

They were even brave enough to parody another member of Christmas ad royalty, Coca-Cola, with Kevin and his Christmas truck. Presumably they were waiting for Michael Caine to come up with a well-timed plan. It also helps demonstrate the point further when you consider that Coca-Cola, even with its vast budgets, re run the truck advert every year – why? Because there’s no reason to change it, its distinctive, you know its Coke and you come to expect it every Christmas.

Tradition

As part of Christmas tradition for marketers, we also must endure and accept this is a time where everyone becomes an expert in advertising. From living rooms, coffee shops and pubs, your ear will be chewed off by various relatives and friends giving you their opinions. What ads rock their stockings this year and which ones the agency deserve a lump of coal. Some of us may perform eye rolls and give a slight chuckle when this happens. Thinking “they don’t understand the proposition behind this” or “they don’t appreciate the craft or storytelling here”. What arses we are.

Pub chatter

However, this is totally why some of us miss the point. We should absolutely be listening before we disappear up our own chimneys. It’s the punters we’re advertising to and if they are saying things like “I don’t know which one it is, but it’s got dad AND mom sleeping in the arm chair”. Or, “I don’t know where I’m going to put a piano”, then it needs to be listened to. By listening to some of the pub chat it may help jolt some of us out of trying to create the usual mushy wallpaper that may win some pats on the back at an awards do. Instead we need to create stuff that helps make brands distinctive, famous and memorable at Christmas.

Being distinctive is something many of the big boys do consistently. It becomes particularly important when you’re squinting at the TV after a day on Turkey and wine between naps. It’s the same reason why McDonalds always have those famous golden arches and that whistle in their ads, who incidentally have rivalled Kevin on the best Christmas carrot 2018 award. Anyway, time for a mulled wine. It is 2pm on a Thursday after all.

Merry Christmas.

If you’d like us to unwrap your next exciting Christmas advertising campaign, drop us a note saying:. ‘How did you know, it’s just what I always wanted’ here.

Be Fierce

Agency mantra

We continued to win new business and awards across multiple sectors and made some excellent new staff hires, but it still left us in a very different place than where we had been at the start of the year.

However, my belief is that it’s how you face adversity that can truly set you apart. Rather than panic, we took the opportunity to really look at the business. Where it was, where we wanted it to be, the people we wanted working for us and the type of clients we wanted to work with. All the things we get our clients to do but never get around to doing ourselves.

Fiercely proud

We looked back at why Jon and Rich set up the agency in the first place. It wasn’t because they believed they could make more money by going it alone, it was because they were frustrated in their roles and were not being allowed to fight for work that they truly believed in. And one thing came out really strongly in looking at One Black Bear today. As an agency and a group of people we’re all still really passionate about what we do and the work we create. And we’re willing to stand up and fight for what we believe in; our people, the work and importantly our clients. We’re a fierce bunch – fiercely loyal, fiercely protective and fiercely proud of what we do.

Brexit uncertainty

This got us thinking to 2019. It is going to be a pig of a year. Quite literally as it’s the Chinese Year of the Pig, but more scarily because of all the uncertainty around Brexit. No-one really knows what is going to happen, but most people believe it won’t be good for consumers or for business. Prominent bellwethers like The Economist are predicting the next downturn and we don’t have years of growth behind us as a cushion.

But One Black Bear is ready. We’re rebuilding our agency into something stronger and better. A place with exceptional people who love what they do and aren’t afraid to stand up and fight for work that makes a difference. People who genuinely care about their clients and want to make a positive difference to their businesses and bottom line. And above all a place where clients and employees can thrive and face the coming uncertainties knowing they have a mighty fierce bear behind them.

Agency mantra

If you’re interested in working with an agency that fights your corner, drop us a note saying:. ‘Mum, the big boys are picking on me’ here.

 

Now that’s what I call music!

Advertising conversations

“You could tell me to my face, or even on the phone; You could write it in a letter, either way I have to know”. All Saints suggested several communication methods, though to little avail as they didn’t seem to get very far engaging their subject.

When I watched their reunion performance at Radio 2’s Festival In A Day last month. It left me wondering how different the lyrics might have been 20 years on. The way we’re communicating has massively changed, delivering more meaningful engagement than before. And pop culture has watched it happen.

I had a picture of you in my mind…

In the late 70’s Sting was sending messages in bottles, and at the start of the 80’s Steve Tyler was still learning how to fax in the mailroom. Since then, there’s been a noticeable shift away from these traditional verbal comms involving reading and writing. Now the use of visuals to convey information as technological advances have facilitated instantaneous image sharing.

An obvious example of this is the serious use of emojis as a primary way of communicating emotion. In fact, The OED’s 2015 word of the year was an emoji. Officially known as ‘Face with Tears of Joy’, this pictograph was chosen as it best reflected the ‘ethos, mood and preoccupations of 2015’. Does it worry anyone else that the best way to communicate feeling was without the use of words? I wonder what would have represented 1997 best *insert ‘Thinking Face’ emoji here*.

If I had a hammer

These little pictures are no longer the preserve of texting teens. Instead, they have been embraced as a nuanced form of expression that crosses language barriers and can sometimes convey intended messages in a clearer way. Voice modulation, intonation, body language etc. can get lost in text, where the written word is the only available medium to express ourselves. Sarcasm, for example, can be lost in emails and taken literally by the recipient, with unpredictable consequences. But adding an image can help steer comms in the intended direction.

Advertising and other forms of marketing are now loaded with images. But what a brand needs to succeed is a visual that reinforces its verbal positioning concept. Think of the concept as the ‘bolt’, and visual as the ‘spanner’ that gets it in to place. While the objective of a marketing programme is to put a word or a verbal concept into consumers’ minds, the best way to do that is not with words at all. It’s with a visual that has emotional appeal.

And this approach is translating to everyday life. Makaton, the universal pictorial language used in public services, uses signs and symbols. Designed to support spoken language that help people communicate, crossing both language and ability barriers.

OK Computer

Websites, mobile, social media, big data, gaming, etc. digital advances have created opportunities for customers and brands to connect in a completely new way. Ways that would have been considered impossible through conventional marketing techniques. None of this explains Kelly Roland’s attempt to lure Nelly using excel, this really is a dilemma.

In the past consumers were always on the ‘listening end’ with brands speaking at them. Digital gives people the opportunity to talk back, putting the power into their hands. This in turn has allowed brands to identify loyal consumers, and subsequently grow their profile. Brands no longer own or control consumers – it’s all about engagement and experience. And changes to communication priorities mean that brand objectives have also shifted. Furthermore, the move from local media to global electronic communications systems and social media has seen a move away from scheduled media to instantaneous communication. This also eliminates some of the ‘right time, right place’ restrictions associated with traditional marketing formats.

I’m only human

On the face of it it’s all positive, but take heed from Arctic Monkey’s ‘2013’. The lyrics “As for Instagram and Twitter, She got caught in both lassoes, And neither one will cut her loose” warn against getting too embroiled in digital comms, and thinking that the internet is the only source of information you need. And isn’t it ironic, don’t you think, that in an age of more sophisticated comms, people seem to be communicating with less of a human touch?

We’ve come to the end of the road…

The historic, linear relationship between brand and consumer, where one-way conversations delivered one-dimensional experiences, is a thing of the past. Today, brands also listen to consumers to encourage brand loyalty and advocacy, ultimately helping them understand their customers more and communicate with them in the most effective ways. Perhaps if All Saints had understood this, they wouldn’t have been left hanging.

In the early days of telecommunication, the platform was only used by the privileged, literate few. Digitisation of comms has broadened audiences so vastly that language itself has adapted to fit these needs. It is simple, concise, pictorial and universal.

Ultimately better understanding and use of communication should create more solid relationships, and engage with more people. Maybe video really did kill the radio star, but if it’s getting the cut through that’s needed, maybe that’s a good thing?

Advertising conversations

If you’d like to talk to us about a brief, you can send us a message in a bottle or if it’s easier, drop us a note here.

Is lying OK?

Honesty in communications

I was privileged to chair the Midlands Ethical Challenge event in Birmingham last week – organised jointly by CIPR and PRCA. The session was attended by around 50 PR practitioners and a number of questions were discussed.

Kindness

So, did the audience think lying is acceptable? The response was “Yes” from over 90%. I was surprised by this. Although it was qualified by the stipulation that lying is acceptable if the truth would cause upset or, in a work context, shatter an employee’s confidence. This case was made with much genuine empathy. Examples included telling a hardworking, valued agency account handler that she/he was being taken off an account to work on something new and exciting and a great career move. Not that their face did not fit with the client. Another example, which no one disagreed with, was keeping the Father Christmas myth alive. Alongside responding to a friend’s enquiry regarding: “Does my bum look big in this?” Indeed, the importance of kindness was regularly stressed at this event.

Other interesting resolutions from the floor included the view that, overall, influencers are self-regulating to a high standard. With a sensible eye on the long term and a commitment to ethical behaviour.

Reputation and responsibility

We were privileged to have Claire Walker on the panel – who chairs the PRCA’s National Professional Practice Committee. Her pragmatic approach in terms of advice boiled it all down to: “As your reputation and the responsibility you carry begins to grow, you need to ensure this growth is built on a strong ethical foundation that represents you well.”

This sentiment was a consistent theme on the night. It was felt that everyone must take responsibility for their actions. Most normal people, sociopaths and psychopaths excluded, have a moral compass and know what is acceptable and what is not. And if you believe it is wrong, do not do it. Passing on moral responsibility to a client, colleague, boss, friend or relative was not considered acceptable.

The Bell Pottinger scandal has, it was felt, gone some way to help put ethics higher up the agenda and help with the industry’s credibility.

The belief in the room was that Pret A Manger’s response to the Natasha Ednan-Laperouse tragedy was very disappointing from an ethical perspective. With a suspicion that it was being led by the legal team not the comms people.

Outrage

Overall, this was a heartening session that showed practitioners are committed to doing the right thing. The real sense of outrage was reserved for people who shirk their moral responsibilities. While credit being generously given to businesses who put the welfare of their people as a top priority. And always pay their bills.

As a reminder of best practice, here is the PRCA’s charter: A member firm shall have a positive duty to observe the highest standards in the practice of public relations. Furthermore, a member has the responsibility at all times to deal fairly and honestly with clients, past and present, fellow members and professionals, the public relations profession, other professions, suppliers, intermediaries, the media of communication, employees and above all else the public.

And if members do not comply, they will get booted out. Honest.

 

Do not read this blog

Psychology of opposite in comms

Don’t touch that. Don’t go there. Blimey, how many times have I been told “Don’t look now, but…” and subsequently stared at whatever I have been instructed to categorically avoid staring at.

During a recent commute, I noticed an advert for Dave that featured a simple flowchart – ‘Should I try and start a conversation on the train ⇒ No’. This instruction actually had the reverse affect as two people sat next to me started chatting about this amusing instruction. Doing what the ad had told them not to.

Insubordination? Nope, it’s just human nature.

Stop reading

Reverse psychology has always interested me. Getting someone to do what you want by pretending not to want it or pretending to want something else. To go social-science-y for a sec, this idea is largely tied in with the Reactance Theory. A psychological angle suggesting that people who feel their sense of control is being taken away from them will grab it back simply by not doing what they’re asked. Target audiences of course tend to be aware of what’s happening but will respond in the desired way anyway.

One of the best examples I saw of this working at my last agency was Karmarama’s 2016 Don’t Join The Army campaign instructing a target Gen Z audience not to better themselves by joining up.

And most of us are familiar with Nestlé’s controversial ‘It’s Not For Girls’ campaign. Which still drove sales up by 30%, even though the product was banned in some stores. But hey, there’s no such thing as bad publicity, right?

Seriously, stop reading

Capitalising on psychological principles isn’t anything new. But for ‘reverse psychology marketing’ to cut through in a noisy digital market, often daring ideas are required. You still need to stick to some key rules. Ensuring messaging is mechanistic, persuasive, projective and suggestive, but also make sure that it’s somehow flipped on its head. The approach relies on a consumer forming an emotional response to the creativity of an advert, and not just an empathetic attachment to the message itself. They need to feel like the brand they’re engaging with is somehow ahead of the game – breaking the mould and being unconventional. This rebellious approach should then feed through to a consumer’s reaction and bam, your campaign has worked.

I said stop reading

As a more recent example, the Canadian launch of Takis in a fiercely competitive snack market took the brave step of actively telling people not to eat them, using their selling points as reasons to stay away. To go all history-y for a sec, advertising exec Rosser Reeves who coined the term ‘unique selling proposition’ in the early 20^th century suggested that the use of anti-marketing sentiments could give companies a competitive advantage. And it seems he was right.

It’s good to provoke engagement in an unconventional way. And depending on what you’re looking to achieve, it can also be used as more than a gimmick to increase sales, but could be used to promote a deeper message like Patagonia’s stand against consumerism from 2011.

It’s pretty simple really – people like their freedom. If they feel rules imposed on them are too strict, or too restrictive, they often break them. A perfect opportunity for any brand, so long as they have the creative nous to make it work.

You read to the end

You’ve proved my point. I like you.

 

To talk to us about the power of subtle persuasion, DO NOT send us an email saying:. ‘I don’t expect a reply’ here.

All aboard the cyborgs.

Tech in travel

Swedes can now have their train pass implanted. So hands up who wants to be a Transhumanist.

In Sweden you can now have your train pass implanted into that small bridge of skin linking your thumb and forefinger. 

Implant Party

About the size of a grain of rice, commuters need only waft their hand for the smart turnstiles to fling open and swiftly board their train of choice. If you like, you can even have your chip inserted at an ‘implant party’ with your fellow ‘Transhumanists’ – an ideology that seeks to blur the lines between humans and tech’.

Neat idea right? No more scrabbling for your pass or leaving it in your other trousers or jacket, no-one using your pass who shouldn’t be. Plus they’re more secure than the now accepted payment method by mobile phone because the implanted chips are much harder to hack.

So all good then. Well not quite.

Bio-bot

Dissenting voices abound mourn the advent of the ‘Bio-bot’ and its inevitable fusion of humans and machines – the ultimate earthly manifestation of ‘The Beast’ some Nordic heretics are calling it. Conspiracy theorists go even further claiming the potential data saved by such a chip could be gold dust and that you’ll have another Cambridge Analytica on your hands before the train has reached it’s first stop. In fact, the chips do leave a digital trail and it’s been known for station guards to see LinkedIn profiles rather than an unhindered pass for travel.

Terminator just got real. Cyborgs finally in our midst. Skynet has finally won. Except hold on a second..haven’t we humans had machine bits stuck on us (or inside us) for years? 

What about pacemakers, titanium joints or amazingly advanced prosthetics? All have massively helped humankind hugely not brought about it’s downfall.

Just shows you the difference when invasive technology is used for other than purely clinical reasons I guess.

We’ve just launched a campaign for our client National Express Bus promoting contactless payment on buses themed ‘The change you’ve been looking for’.

We aren’t offering implanted microchips in the hand just yet but who knows what the future holds. One thing is for sure, you won’t need to be a Kardashian to get implants, just an everyday commuter.