Meaningful Media

 

Today in class we learned about media planning. We learned that media planners have to balance getting the message out into the public sphere with the amount of money in their budgets. Media planners aim to be as efficient as possible. They choose ads that can have a big effect without spending as much money. A media planner may choose to air a longer ad less frequently or a quick ad often in order to maximize the impact of the message. As we can see, most media planners opt for short and frequent ads, just think about the commercials you see or hear on a day to day basis. This strategy although still effective, is not necessary because viewers/consumers have youtube and other sharing sites to look up and share ads that speak to them. Companies should choose to allocate more of their media budgets towards producing quality advertisements because individuals are more likely to pay attention and internalize the message. If the ad is particularly entertaining, funny, meaningful, etc. viewers are more likely to share them with their friends. Furthermore, consumers have a greater trust in the opinion of their friends; by sharing the ad the friend is sending a message that they endorse this company.  This means that the company does not have to spend as much money trying to get the ad on the air. Consider the following advertisement as an example.

How Data Affects Advertising

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to go with my mom to Brazil. She was invited to speak at an international conference on the grocery business. While we were there she also toured some of the top grocery chains in the country. The company she works for, Kroger, is a top grocery chain in the US and one of the world’s largest retailers.   Lynn Marmer, my mother, is Vice President of Corporate Affairs for The Kroger Company. She was the first female officer for the company.   But enough bragging about my mom, the point is, my mom spoke about a data analytics company called dunnhumby and how this company transformed how Kroger relates to its customers. .

About ten years ago Kroger was not doing too well. They were having a hard time lowering prices while still satisfying their shareholders. How was Kroger going to stay in business? Well, the CEO of the company, Dave Dillon, hired dunnhumby to gather data about its shoppers—what were they buying every week.  Dunnhumby analyzed Kroger’s extensive data on their customer’s shopping behavior.

After collecting data, the researchers and statisticians were able to see patterns in the shopping behavior of Kroger customers.  People in charge of marketing, came up with new ways for the company to market to consumers.  Most effective, the company began sending to customers personalized offers and coupons.  Everyone likes to save money when they shop in the grocery store.  But who needs a coupon for cat food if you have a dog?  With dunnhumby’s analytics and Kroger’s extensive customer data, personalized coupons were created.   Each of Kroger’s millions of households began to receive coupons for the item they buy—specifically targeted to them.

The rest is history.  Kroger is very successful today with strong sales, profits and growing customer loyalty.  And my Mom gets to spend some of those profits on supporting organizations in the communities where Kroger operations—local non-profit organizations that matter to Kroger customers.

So what’s next for Kroger?  How does it continue to grow its sales and loyalty?   One way is to use new media—especially digital.   After a few years Kroger customers downloaded their 1 millionth digital coupon.   Shopping lists on your phone?  Yep.    Kroger keeps inventing new ways to connect with customers.  Dunnhumby continues to be engaged in helping Kroger understand their customers and connect with them.

 

Birthdays and Marketing

Today is my birthday. I turn 21 today. And while it doesn’t seem like a different day to you, to me, everything is different. Today even started differently with a happy birthday call from my parents. I opened cards that my friends sent me while staring at the fresh flowers that arrived at my dorm yesterday evening. (If you pause to think about it, birthdays are big business, a hallmark card is about $4! The flowers I got are likely another $40, not including the shipping.) I groaned thinking about having to walk across the street in the pouring down rain to class. Another reminder that today is no different from any other day. I am defiantly not the only to have ‘suffered’ from something like crappy weather on their birthday. Checking my phone I saw that I had two new emails, one from Starbucks and one from Sprinkles. I decided to head to Starbucks after my first class and enjoy a pumpkin spice latte on the house. The baristas wished me happy birthday. I felt special, I bought a pumpkin muffin to go with my free latte.  

If you look online, there are entire websites curated for the specific purpose of birthday freebies. Are these freebies effective? Even if you were not a huge fan of Starbucks would you go and get a drink? Probably yes. If for some reason you were not a fan of cupcakes would you go get a free one from Sprinkles? Also, likely yes. Then the next logical step would be to take a picture and show everyone on Facebook/Twitter the free stuff you got for your birthday.  How much positive publicity does a company get for these freebies? Once I share that, I got a free pumpkin spice latte from Starbucks for my birthday others will ask how they can get freebies too. Starbucks get my friends’ valuable information, including email, common purchases and locations, data that used to cost the company millions of dollars in market research, and we get a five-dollar latte free once a year.

So while the average consumer may take these ‘freebies’ as a gift, we know better. Birthday freebies are a great way to get free positive press for a company along with contributing to a feeling of community; it also brings customers into stores where they may buy something to go along with the birthday freebie. Despite knowing the marketing schemes behind these discounts, I think we are all going to go get a free cupcake from Sprinkles when our birthdays come around.

Spotify: Not Just Audio Anymore

            That’s right— Spotify is no longer limited to audio! Starting solidly with Ford, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Target, Wells Fargo and NBC Universal Pictures as its first takers, Spotify has begun hosting video advertising campaigns on both its desktop and mobile versions. In order to accommodate the multitude of users that stream music freely, Spotify has branched out from its solely audial and static visual forms of advertisements and extended into what it is calling “Sponsored Sessions.” Click here to watch a video ad on…video ads.

            “Sponsored Sessions” is a name for the exchange of 30 minutes of free commercial-less play for the viewing of one brand video. By testing out different time slots ranging from 15 minutes long to an hour long, Spotify was able decide on the sweet spot of 30 minutes. These sessions exist on mobile devices, tablets, and desktops. However, by holding a subscription for Spotify Premium ($9.99, but $4.99 for students), one can avoid advertisements entirely.

            From the point of view of a Spotify user, this digital advertising plan seems like a win-win-win for Spotify, Spotify users, and brands. Spotify is being compensated for the block of free listening it is giving its customers. In addition, the Sponsored Sessions might inspire users to join Spotify Premium as the scale of advertisements increases on the site. Spotify users, with the start of Sponsored Sessions, will be interrupted less and experience an increase of free streaming without ads. The brands benefitted by the Sponsored Sessions will be able to access a large and growing market of all ages and backgrounds. Brands will also be able to associate themselves with a company that maintains a good reputation.

            Launched in Stockholm, Sweden in 2008, Spotify is a music streaming service, accessible from computers, mobile devices, tablets, and home entertainment systems. Spotify began with offering paid subscriptions to everyone, but restricting the number of free accounts. Immediately after, the company simultaneously suffered massive losses, and announced the establishment of many licensing deals with record labels. By September 2011, the company had two million paying subscribers in Europe, and decided it was time to launch in America. Approximately a year later, Spotify recorded that 4 million people were subscribers. Over the course of two years, Spotify created and managed its own app, which now allows Premium users to access its repertoire of music freely from their phones, and lets anyone with the app access and shuffle their pre-made playlists.

            Spotify has grown quickly in the past and will continue to grow. They offer smart solutions that appeal to every stakeholder. Do you think this is a good move for Spotify? Will it affect the number of users that switch to Premium?

ON WEDNESDAYS WE WEAR PINK

What movie did that come from? Um just the oh so fetch movie mean girls! Mean Girls was the movie that changed the way high school was as we now know it! Who didn’t want to be a plastic? This year marked the 10 year anniversary of the movie and this year on Wednesdays girls across the world wear pink.   Many people believe mean girls might have just been a teen movie about silly girl drama in high school but it actually shed light on one pressing issue – bullying. I remember always being on the opposite end of the bullying spectrum; I was a mean girl. I was not your Regina George but I was Gretchen Weiners; I was just as guilty by association. I often think about what those people we made fun of are doing now. Are they successful? Are they married with children? Did they go to college? Most of all I think was I was wrong for not being nice to people? Or was it just apart of growing up? The thought that haunts me the most is what we had the choice to bully someone vis the internet?   The reason why the thought crosses my mind is because so often we see cases on cyber bullying and bullying within the schools. Kids commit suicide or cry themselves to sleep over words that someone else says about them. Studies show that bullying has taken a different turn because of the internet and social media. In mean girls it was just three way phone calls and a burn book; now you can post embarrassing pictures, screenshot text messages and harass someone via social media anonymously (Twitter, Instagram or Facebook). Many high school girls have no way to escape because it is constantly in their face; what someone else things about them, how they look or if everyone saw that picture of them doing who knows what. Cyberbullying-–-vs-–-Bullying   Many of us Gretchen Weiners never saw this an issue because we were not the ones being made fun of but bullying actually touches everyone and cyber bullying touches more kids than we know.   Here are some quick facts that many people may not have know about cyber bullying but may actually changes their views on the act of cyber bullying! 1. Nearly 43% of kids have been bullied online. 1 in 4 has had it happen more than once. 2. 70% of students report seeing frequent bullying online. 3. Over 80% of teens use a cell phone regularly, making it the most common medium for cyber bullying. 4. 68% of teens agree that cyber bullying is a serious problem. 5. 81% of young people think bullying online is easier to get away with than bullying in person. 6. 90% of teens who have seen social-media bullying say they have ignored it. 84% have seen others tell cyber bullies to stop. 7. Only 1 in 10 victims will inform a parent or trusted adult of their abuse. 8. Girls are about twice as likely as boys to be victims and perpetrators of cyber bullying. 9. About 58% of kids admit someone has said mean or hurtful things to them online. More than 4 out 10 say it has happened more than once. 10. Bullying victims are 2 to 9 times more likely to consider committing suicide. 11. About 75% of students admit they have visited a website bashing another student. The scary thing is that it is a trend that we follow unknowingly and have no choice to perpetuate. In this life you are either a bully or Regina George. Bullying extends way beyond high school; it follows you to college and adult life. There are mean girls everywhere! Have we not learned anything from mean girls?

Actually we have; On Wednesdays We Wear Pink!

Sources   11 Facts about Cyber Bullying. (2013, December 31). . Retrieved June 8, 2014, from https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-cyber-bullying Mean Girls. (2014, May 30). Retrieved June 8, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_Girls Donda, V. (2011, January 28). On Wednesdays We Were PInk. . Retrieved June 8, 2014, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6E85eO6lqQ

Privacy Policies in Social Media

It’s important for companies to concern themselves with the best privacy practices because it opens up clear communication with their audience. It’s important for businesses to be transparent, to avoid miscommunication and to build brand loyalty. Companies will accumulate revenue if their consumers trust them, and one way to build trust is to set up a clear, concise, and simple privacy policy. Companies must understand that consumers don’t like to read the fine print; they don’t want to spend too much time reading anything for that matter. So the key for a good private policy starts with knowing your audience. Let’s take Google Buzz’s privacy policy for example. Google created Google Buzz as a way to compete with Twitter and Facebook. People will automatically have suggestions of who to follow based on the people they chat and email with most. Google Buzz’s default settings made the user’s activities completely public with hidden options to opt out, so people freaked out when they realized their content was public. Their privacy setting shows the lack of transparency and lack of audience awareness. Google should have been aware of user behavior and that people just click defaults for all their settings when they are trying to check something out. People are not going to hassle themselves with reading the default settings, and it may sound silly and the fault of the consumer, but ultimately it’s the company that will suffer. This is why it’s important for companies to look beyond technicality, and pay attention to how their users will behave and what they will and will not notice.

            Twitter’s privacy policy, on the flip side, is broken down into sections; it’s organized and easy to follow. Twitter lays out what you are giving them consent to do when you choose an option. They tell you what information they can share of yours with or without consent. The language is easy to follow, and it’s not too long so consumers don’t zone out.

REFERENCE:

Boyd, D. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.danah.org/papers/talks/2010/SXSW2010.html

Carlson, N. (n.d.). Retrieved from

 http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-google-buzz-has-a-huge-privacy-flaw-2010-2

News Is Going Native

Last week there was a story online about an Apple delivery truck died in the middle of the street in Chicago and was blocking traffic. The street was one way and was causing huge backup which was delaying some other important city traffic, but an amazing neighbor who is now a local hero is being praised for their quick response because tow trucks could not get to the truck to help. The neighbor heard the shouts and immediately came out with a can of BP gasoline. He poured it in the gas tank and the car began moving which helped traffic resume and all deliveries was made for the day. Remember that article? Yeah, me neither, but it could be the start of a growing trend.

 

The Guardian, an online newspaper, announced last month that it was making a “branded content and innovation agency” which is partnered with Unilever (Kutsch, 2014). The Guardian is engaging in what is known as native advertising. Native advertising is a blurring of the lines of journalism and advertising. It’s essentially the print version of an infomercial.

 

What’s really blurring the lines here is that unlike traditional advertising, which uses outside companies to write and pay for ads, the ads are written by in house reporters who produce content for outside companies (Kutsch, 2014). This is a cause for concern because the lines between what an editorial are and what an advertisement are may be delineated only through the notifications that what you’re reading is an advertisement and those notifications are typically small or not as highlighted. For a profession which is supposed to be objective, they are now employees of the advertising business.

 

The reason for moving to native advertising is because news media sources are struggling to replace a decline in print with digital sales and while digital sales have risen, only about 12% of Americans and 9% of Brits say they’ve paid for digital news (Kutsch, 2014). Many companies and advertisers see native advertising as a more effective way to generate attention from online customers than through traditional banner advertisements (Kutsch, 2014). As long as the ads are clearly marked as ads, I can see these being effective and more fun to read, but if not then I could foresee lawsuits against many of these journalists or advertisers for purposely deceiving the general public.

 

The FTC, which usually regulates this type of stuff, is currently working on a policy for native advertising (Kutsch, 2014). However, until this is established, advertisers currently have free reign for this sort of business. This can be a boon for the consumer who will see typically objective professionals writing for advertisers who may not know their profession as well.

 

Here’s just one example of a type of native advertising:

 

(Image courtesy of adpulp.com)

How do you feel about this? Let me know in the comments!

 

 

References:

 

Kutsch, T. (2014, March 08). The blurred lines of native advertising. AlJazeera America. Retrieved from http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/8/the-blurred-linesofanativeaadvertising.html

Shot in the dark

There’s a war raging right now and it’s fought with words and logic. The irony of it all is that while this war is being fought with words and logic, it’s about guns and ammo. Gun control or no gun control is a largely heated debate which has kicked up even more with more journalist reporting and social media being on top of so many different aspects of society today. The nation is truly divided and usually this rift comes between people who live in metropolitan areas versus people in more rural areas. Those in a metropolitan area are subject to more violent crimes because of disparity and class division whereas those in rural areas aren’t subjected to this as much and/or have more open areas with which to exercise their use, knowledge, and safety of guns.

A new advertisement is focusing on gun safety while using the 2^nd amendment as a focus. For those who may have forgotten, the 2^nd amendment is about the “Right to bear arms”. The ad shows the Founding Fathers discussing the Bill of Rights. One thinks the 2^nd amendment is too long and doesn’t like addition of “…as long as people aren’t being dumbasses about it” (Evolve, Evolve – The Bill of Rights for Dumbasses).

 

The ad has “brought a few chuckles” which is a good first step toward opening conversation to such a sensitive subject in America (Barr, 2014). Of course, while intentions may be to bring about awareness, almost everything tends to turn political and head south quickly (just go to any article’s comment section for proof).

Advertisements which utilize humor are common, but with gun safety being a hot button issue, this could resonate badly and further divide the country even more. Having grown up in an area of the country where guns can be common, I understand gun safety and find that it’s very rarely violated except by “dumbasses”. I did notice that it tried to appeal mostly to people with a logical point of view, hence the iteration of calling people who exercise poor to no gun safety, dumbasses.

I thought the ad was humorous and showcased some basic gun safety points, but I think it needs to go further in explaining where people should look for gun safety classes in their area. Perhaps tell them to check out a local firing range, their local NRA chapter, or even any local areas which put on gun safety courses. While I enjoyed the ad and understood where it’s coming from and what it’s trying to promote, some people say it’s cavalier for so serious a subject (Barr, 2014).

After viewing the advertisement, what does everyone else think? Is the advertisement on point and make sense? Does the advertisement create more polar opposites? Is it effective? Sound off in the comments below and let me know how it makes you feel.

References

Barr, A. (Writer) (2014). In Advertisement uses humor to talk about gun safety. Kansas City: KCTV 5 News. Retrieved from http://www.kctv5.com/story/24794821/advertisement-uses-humor-to-talk-about-gun-safety

Evolve. (Producer). (2014, February 13). Evolve – The Bill of Rights for Dumbasses [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/6yeF-qNp8Ns

Holy Burger King!

While scrolling through Advertising Age’s homepage today I came across a title that struck me as odd. The title read, “Burger King Tests Fan Loyalty By Giving Away Big Macs”. I instantly clicked on the article and was blown away by the social media idea that Burger King Norway came up with. In the article AdAge highlights that Burger King Norway had roughly 38,000 Facebook followers. Many of the followers of the Facebook page were interacting with the brand’s Facebook Page in a negative light. Posting rude posts and comments that were not positive regarding Burger King. This is where the idea for the new campaign came from.

Burger King Norway chose to “test” which fans were actually loyal to the brand. They did this by creating a new Facebook page and telling their fake fans that they would give them a Big Mac if they pledged not to interact with their new Facebook Page. Some would say that this is slightly counterintuitive, however Burger King said that this was quite effective. In the article it mentions that because of this action Burger King Norway lost upwards of 30,000 fans, but the fans that were left were interacting with the brand in a more positive light.

This is by far one of the most radical Facebook marketing stunts that I have ever seen. I thought that this article was perfect for what we had been researching in COMM 370. Through our analysis of our brands most of researched the sentiment of the posts made by the users about the brand of our choice. I never really thought that brands truly cared that much about what the users were saying since brands have very little control about what is on the web on these social media platforms.

What do you guys think? Was this move by Burger King awesome or do you think that they could have gone about addressing these issues in a different fashion?

Included below is a link to the article where BK explains what they did.

http://adage.com/article/creativity-pick-of-the-day/burger-king-tests-fan-loyalty-giving-big-macs/245490/

References:

“Advertising Age.” Burger King Tests Fan Loyalty by Giving Away Big Macs. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Dec. 2013. <http://adage.com/article/creativity-pick-of-the-day/burger-king-tests-fan-loyalty-giving-big-macs/245490/>.

The War Continues

For those of you that don’t follow my blog posts throughout the semester I have been keeping up to date with the ongoing war between Microsoft and Google. This semester long advertising war began with with Microsoft’s first battle that was between a company other than Google. The first battle took place between Microsoft and Apple when they made a Tweet about Apple’s new Iphone. Following this instance Microsoft has been very aggressive and has put Google on full blast.

This aggressive campaign was centered around Microsoft’s “Scroogled” campaign where they made commercials about users being “Scroogled” and their privacy on the internet being compromised by Google. Between the time that the ad was released until currently Microsoft has even gone as far to make a “Scroogled” web store featuring t shirts, hoodies, and mugs all with “Scroogled” emblems on them.

Most recently they have taken this campaign even further. In a recent article by the Wall Street Journal entitled, “Microsoft Hires ‘Pawn Stars’ to bash Google Chromebooks”, author Shira Ovide speaks about Microsoft’s most recent battle tactics. In the article Ovide focuses little on the harshness of the tactics of Microsoft and talks more about the Chromebook itself. In summary Microsoft hired the stars of the tv show Pawn Stars to make a fake segment of their tv show. During this fake segment a woman brings in a Google Chromebook hoping to pawn it off to the stars of the show. When the woman brings the computer up to the main character of the tv show he elaborates that the Chromebook isn’t going to get her much because it really isn’t a laptop. He continues to say that when the computer is not hooked up to the internet it is pretty much a brick.

Throughout the semester I have truly been drawn in by this aggressive marketing tactic by Microsoft. As a user I would assume that this would put other users in a negative place with their brand. Contrary to my belief their stock price continues to go up. I find this very odd. On the other hand I will give it to Microsoft for being so bold with their marketing efforts. This ad imparticular came out at a perfect time, right at the height of the holiday shopping season. This advertisement is making is taking clear stabs at Google’s newest product.

I personally think that its a bad move for Microsoft to bully Google like this. Maybe I am the only one that thinks this, how about you guys?

 

References:

Ovide, Shira . “Microsoft Hires ‘Pawn Stars’ to Bash Google Chromebooks.”The Wall Street Journal. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Dec. 2013. <http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/11/26/microsoft-hires-pawn-stars-to-bash-google-chromebooks/>.

 

 

 

Ever Wonder Why Watches are Set to 10:10 in Ads??

What was one point in history the only way you could tell time and use for a purpose, now the watch has become more of a fashion accessory than anything else. After the invention of cell phones that have a clock available with the touch of a button, people have lost interest in buying a watch for the purpose of actually telling time.

Personally, I am one of those people who have watches for the sole purpose of wearing it as an accessory. Even if my phone is dead, I will still forget that I have a watch right on my wrist with the exact time on it. However, if you are looking at an actual watch, some of you may have noticed that almost of all of the old school analog wristwatches are ALWAYS photographed and pictured in advertisements with the time of 10:10.

Does this time have a special meaning or history? Nope! This is done purely for aesthetics. For what reason, you ask? Well, the manufacturer’s logo is typically right under the 12 o’clock position (e.g. Michael Kors, Fossil, DKNY, Gucci, etc.).

Strategically setting the watch hands to freeze at the 10 and 2 points makes sure that the hand will not be in the way of the logo. Furthermore, those exact locations even out the logo proportionally and focus the buyer’s eyes right in the center toward the actual logo.

I have heard rumors that the watch is set to 10:10 because that is the time that President Lincoln was shot and killed, however it is an old trick that is done all for advertising!

It’s really interesting that this tactic has been used since watches first came out on the market and is still a valid tactic to this day.

Although all watches for the most part look the same except for color, material and price, the manufacturers of these watches need to show off what makes the watch unique, which is the brand and logo. Placing this at the center of the watch makes it easier for people to zoom in on who is selling the watch and because of this, it sticks in people’s minds and they remember that the logo was the center image of the entire ad.

Did any of you ever notice this? Do you think it’s an effective and smart idea? Have you ever wondered why it was always set at 10:10? Do any of you use watches to actually read time, or is it more of a fashion statement like it is for me?

Yeezus Makes A Risky Move

 

For years, Kanye West has been a partner with one of the most successful shoe companies in the world: Nike. At first, in his career, he started off as only a hip-hop artists and nothing more. But more and more, he wanted to show off his passion for fashion and design. He has been partners with Nike for years, but there have been rumors for a long time that he cut ties with Nike for good. This weekend on his Yeezus Tour in New York, Kanye confirmed the controversial and shocking news that he did in fact drop a deal with Nike.

It was a very surprising announcement because he spoke strong feelings against Nike, which implies that Mr. West ended his relationship with Nike in a bad way. He even spoke against Nike CEO Mark Parker and said kept repeating that Nike would not let him be himself or express himself the way he wanted to in a creative way.

Kanye always complains and rants about things, but when he was talking about why he left Nike, he also confirmed that not only is he ditching the brand, but he signed up with Adidas, which is Nike’s main competition. In between songs, Kanye said ““The old me, without a daughter, would have taken the Nike deal because I just love Nikes so much. But the new me, with a daughter, takes the Adidas deal because I have royalties and I have to provide for my family.”

His main reason for leaving Nike is to better provide for his family and better express his freedom of creativity. I love Kanye and do think that he is a big icon for fashion worldwide, but I do think it is ridiculous that part of his decision to leave Nike was to better support his family. This is crazy to me because Forbes recently just marked Kanye as being worth $100 million dollars.

I loved all of the shoes that Kanye made with Nike called the Yeezy’s and I am worried that the shoes he makes with Adidas will be uglier in comparison to the Yeezy’s. Yet his other reason for leaving was because he did not like that Nike did not give him freedom to design. However, this makes sense because Nike is a shoe for athletes and professional fitness people, not a purely fashion shoe. I think that Nike and Kanye just had different visions for what they wanted in a shoe, so maybe switching to Adidas will be a better match. Even through countless Kanye meltdowns… I STILL LOVE KANYE.

 

Related articles

• Kanye Officially Leaves Nike, Joins Adidas. (urbanhash.co)
• Bye Bye, Red Octobers! Kanye West May Be Severing Ties With Nike For Adidas (DETAILS) (earz2dastreetz.wordpress.com)
• Kanye West Announces Sneaker Deal With adidas (slamonline.com)

Upwell Hacks IKEA

            In this day and age where big brands are as powerful as they’ve ever been and consumers already have companies in their heads when they look to start buying things, how is a small design studio with a great idea for a new product supposed to break through and show said product off to the public? There’s a lot of ways someone could go about it, but indie design studio Upwell had what is in my opinion one of the most creative advertising ideas in recent memory.

            Upwell had come up with the idea for a very smart product. Introducing Wallhub – a light switch cover that doubles as storage for your everyday items like keys, mail or scarves. The company wanted to test if their product was saleable and marketable, but rather than go the boring old focus group route, Upwell had another idea. Put the product directly into Ikea stores and see how people respond to the product.

The team bought an IKEA polo online, repackaged their product with the IKEA style logo, calling it “WÅLHÜB” rather than Wallhub, and installed it in different IKEA locations. As the video above shows, the product was a hit. Consumers were very interested in it, and were willing to pay for it. Once IKEA employees told them that the product wasn’t actually IKEA, consumers were even happier to be getting it for free that day.

The reason I love this idea so much is that in addition to finding a fun, new way to test the marketability of their product, they also were able to shoot video for it all and create a very cool online video that has potential (and already has in some ways) to go viral, generating even more buzz about the company and their product.

It’s hard to come up with interesting ways to market your product effectively through viral videos, but Upwell seems to be doing it right. I know I’m interesting in a Wallhub, and seeing what they’ll come up with, product wise and advertising wise, next!

references:
Design agency trolls ikea, places its own product for sale inside the store. (2013, November 15). Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/creativity-pick-of-the-day/design-agency-trolls-ikea-places-product-store/245306/

Your Recycling Bin is Stalking You

               People think it’s creepy when the internet monitors how much you google something, but in London they have it way creepier! Recycling bins in London are monitoring the phones of people who pass by, so that advertisers can target messages at people whom the bin recognizes.

The company, Renew, has installed 100 recycling bins with digital screens around London before the 2012 Olympics. Advertisers can buy space in the internet-connected bins and get the city 5% of the airtime display to public information. The bins also have technology that scans the smartphones of people who are walking by.

The idea is to bring internet tracking cookies into the real world. The bins keep track of a unique identification number (known as a MAC address) for any nearby phones and other devices that have Wi-Fi turned on. That allows Renew to be able to tell if the person walking by is the same from yesterday and the specific route down the street…. It even records HOW FAST the person is walking!

            For example, if a coffee company wants to win over customers from another rival, they can buy the bins and track if you are a loyal customer and come often and then tailor the ads on the bins accordingly.

This kind of personalized advertising, according to the company, does not invade anyone’s privacy. London is the most heavily surveillanced city in the world and so this is considered legal in the country.

The company wants to expand this new technology to all of the recycling bins in huge cities and Dubai and New York City.

There is a London bar that Renew wants to install five tracking devices in: one by the entrance, one on the roof, one near the cash register and 2 in the bathrooms. This way the bar could know each person’s gender (from the bathroom trackers), how long they stay (dwell time).

The bins track almost a million people every single day who are walking from work, home and restaurants.

There is a way to avoid your phone being tracked, and this is by turning off the Wi-Fi on the device or filling out a privacy form online. The woman who is in charge of the recycling bin company said, “the chances are, if we don’t see you on the first, second, or third day, we’ll eventually capture you…we just need you to have it on once.”

Personally, this freaks me out and I do not want anyone tracking me walking down the street. I think that we need to form together as citizens and put our phones on airplane mode when we are in the streets!

Before we only had to watch out for humans stalking us and staring us down when walking in the streets of the city, but now we have to worry about recycling bins? This is crazy!