Marketing Matters

You mark my words. Sooner or later, Toyota will admit that the acceleration problem they are having with their cars is much more than a floor mat problem. Then over the following several months, we will hear about evidence that shows the company knew about “these other” problems for years.

And even if I’m wrong, the fact that I (and most American consumers) would probably bet that I’m right, is indicative of a crisis communications strategy that is about as bad as it gets. By breaking some of the most fundamental rules regarding crisis PR, Toyota has destroyed any sense of the trust that they’ve built up over the past couple of decades. And each day it just gets worse.

Here are some of the rules that Toyota apparently continues to ignore:

Rule 1. Be up front and honest.
Rule 2. Be quick to admit mistakes – it’s better that you reveal them yourself then have someone else do it.
Rule 3. Show sincere concern for those harmed and those that may be harmed in the future.
Rule 4. Lay out a viable strategy for setting things right.

The New York Times reported that there is evidence Toyota knew about some of the most recent problems back in 2007 or earlier. And now, instead of admitting their mistakes, it appears that the Japanese company is trying to minimize the extent of the problem – blaming it on floor mats..even when there is strong evidence to the contrary.

To reduce public concern, the company quickly put out ads telling Americans that Toyota made a mistake and is now refocused on quality control. Sorry guys. Too little, too late. You provide no specifics to what the problem was or how you are correcting it. You do not address the inordinant amount of time it took to reveal these problems or how you are addressing internal issues to prevent this from happening again.

And still the reports of runaway cars continue to make headlines.

Of course, the company’s current crisis communications plan is the result of executive decisions to reduce the impact on sales. In the meantime, the law suites and recalls will certainly add up to be one of the biggest and most expensive blunders in automotive history. Yet, the company continues to portray, what seems to be, indifference to its customers and greater concern for its own bottom line. Not good.

As far as the bad and the good…While not as ugly as Toyota, Tiger Woods didn’t do so well with his crisis communications either. He did finally hold a press conference and spoke honestly about what led up to his crisis. Unfortunately, it was another case of too little, too late. He did outline a strategy for fixing the problem (off to the sex clinic) and in time, his fans may actually forgive him and the endorsements may return.

As for the good, I’m reminded of a corporate crisis that came across my desk over a decade ago. Turned out that the largest personal printer manufacturer in the world was selling a printer that could kill you! That’s right. If you put your finger in the right place at the right time, you would receive a shock that was bigger than the one you’d get when you saw how much you’d be spending on printer ink cartridges.

As soon as the problem was discovered, a meeting was held to determine the proper course of action. While the implications for damage to immediate sales were not good, the right decisions were made:

1. An immediate recall of all effected printers
2. A halt in production until the design was corrected
3. A proactive communications strategy.

That’s right. Even though no one had yet died (or was even harmed) from the printer, it was the company’s own PR staff that first alerted the press (and subsequently, the public) to the problem. The potential danger was, if anything, exaggerated rather than minimized. A strong course of action was outlined…and in the end, the company received more press for its quick action than for the original problem.

The ugly, the bad, and the good.

admin Communications Industry, PR Tips & Thoughts, Uncategorized Advertising, communications, corporate communications, crisis communications, crisis PR, portland public relations, PR Tips & Thoughts, Public Relations

 

Someone sent me an e-mail the other day that reminded me of the fluidity of marketing. They had images of ads from the past that really brought home the point: what might be appropriate today could be disaster tomorrow. This goes well beyond simply being politically correct. In fact, the current backlash of being overly PC today can make being unPC very PC (did you see the GoDaddy Ads on Superbowl)?

Which made me consider the fact that smart marketing often involves breaking the rules. 7Up did it when they became the UnCola. Avis did it when they boasted about being #2. Brenner Associates has been effective at gaining client visibility by breaking some of the most hardened rules regarding press releases (see earlier post). But as my piano teacher told me many years ago, you really need to understand the rules before you can break them. That’s because it involves risk. But then (as the same wise piano teacher told me) you never attain real greatness without engaging in some level of risk taking.

Well, with unnecessary over-analysis aside. I think the following ads from the past speak for themselves. Hope you enjoy…or at least find them thought provoking.  Next week, I’ll post a few more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And oh yes, if you have similar print advertisments from the past that belong in this collection, I’d be happy to share them in future posts. Just send them along.

admin Communications Industry, Misc., Uncategorized Advertising, communications, digital marketing, marketing, portland pr, portland public relations, PR, PR Tips & Thoughts, social media

XXXXXXXXXX

I LIKE BREAKING the rules. If done right, it can get you valuable attention, make you stand out and even give you a huge competitive edge. It can, of course, also get you into trouble.

With that in mind, I’ve always been drawn to that age-old edict “You must know the rules before you can break them.” I first heard this pearl of wisdom as it relates to music theory. The rule says you must play “X” but you can break the rule and play “Y” instead… if you understand how and why it works.

Famous broken rules (and I will tie this to marketing, I promise):

• That long intro scene in the 1953 Brando movie, The Wild One.” The rule said that a movie director shouldn’t hold a camera in one static position for more than 6 seconds. But in the now famous opening scene, Laslo Benedek focuses the camera on a long stretch of open road for more than a minute. Great tension building. xxxxxxxxxxxxxBuildxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      
• Beat It. The rule said that pop/soul music and heavy metal don’t mix. But when Michael Jackson teamed up with Eddie Van Halen on Beat It, the results were incredible.  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• The rule was that a second is a second is a second. Albert Einstein declared that a second to someone traveling in a rocket at the speed of light could be a lifetime to someone stationary on the ground. His theory of special relativity changed everything.

Public relations and advertising is steeped in rules. The shelves at Barnes and Nobel are lined with such books as “The Fifty Golden Rules For Guerrilla Marketing,” “The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding” and now, The New Rules of Marketing & PR.” And to be sure, these best sellers are chocked full of great information.

But let’s not forget about the value of breaking the rules as well. I cut my teeth working for a couple of the largest PR agencies in the world and learned the rules from some of the most successful pros in the business. Unfortunately, however, I’ve found that many of these old pros are teaching and abiding by the same rules that governed their strategies twenty years ago. But if you understand the rules, you will know when and how to break them.

In the 1960’s Avis broke the rule that you never position yourself as anything but the marketing leader. The company’s “We’re #2 – We Try Harder” campaign was responsible for tripling their market share from 11% to 33%.

More recently Google broke the branding rule that says company logos are sacred and something to be left alone. By continuing to create new versions of their logo, Google has helped create a fun, friendly persona for a company that others (say…Microsoft or Yahoo perhaps?) would kill for.

Carl’s Jr. just launched a new advertising campaign that breaks the rule governing the use of competitive product comparisons. They make no bones about their “Big Carl” burger is a direct rip off of the Big Mac…and it works.

So it’s disconcerting when experts tell me that I shouldn’t break the rules and that a news release is simply a tool for reporters – sorry, but those are old rules (see previous post), or that marketing video production must be slick and expensive (welcome to the age of YouTube fellas) or that you must keep customer-oriented promotional material out of press documents.

Earlier this year, Brenner Associates created a viral video for a client looking to reach 20-30 year old men. They had previously paid another marketing firm over $20K to create a product video for use on their web site and across the Internet but gut zip in return.

A quick look at the results told me why. Their $20K was well spent on sharp graphics, high quality camera shots and beautiful spokespersons – and they wound up with an advertisement that might have worked twenty years ago but was of no interest to their target audience today.

I promised them I could deliver a more effective video for less than $900. We came up with a creative video that was fun to watch AND reinforced their brand image. We used a hand held camcorder and real people and unscripted dialogue. Posted on their website and on select social network sites, the video has been seen by more than 390,000 potential customers and has been responsible for increasing the company’s web sales by close to 20 percent.

There is another old edict, “Rules were meant to be broken.” And when it comes to public relations and marketing – especially in today’s evolving digital age – strategic rule breaking can be the key to unimaginable success.

admin Communications Industry, PR Tips & Thoughts Advertising, communications, marketing, PR, PR Tips & Thoughts, Public Relations, rules, SEM, SEO, social media

 PAST POSTS on this blog have addressed some of the dramatic changes that are currently turning traditional marketing strategies on their head. The press release is no longer solely for the press; published articles are oftentimes less valuable than those posted online; targeting lots of small audiences (bloggers) may ultimately yield BIGGER results than targeting one big entity (Wall Street Journal).

Another area of marketing strategy that has completely gone topsy-turvy is the use of advertising and public relations. As businesses shore up their
marketing plans for 2009, questions regarding advertising vs public relations are once again taking center stage and deserve some attention. Here are my top thoughts on the subject…

Once upon a time, advertising was used to create initial awareness and interest in a product. Public relations was used to support the advertising campaign. Today, the opposite is true. PR is most effective at creating awareness for a product and establishing a new brand. Advertising has taken the supporting role. It is now best used to remind people about a product they are familiar with and have already come to enjoy.

There are two main reasons for this dramatic shift. The first is credibility – or in the case of advertising – the lack there of. Consumers are more marketing-savvy today than ever before. In fact, studies have shown that an average person is more likely to REJECT a premise once it is put forth in an advertisement.

In their book The Fall of Advertising & The Rise of PR, Al and Laura Ries give a great example of how Firestone tried to use advertising to squelch fears that their tires were unsafe. In 2004, national headlines told the story of Firestone’s massive recall due to tread failure. In response, Firestone ran its “Making It Right” campaign that featured the company’s CEO, John Lampe telling consumers that Firestone had reviewed and corrected manufacturing problems and now their tires were safer than ever before. The result? A pre and post survey of consumer opinion found that people who saw the ad campaign were more likely to think Firestone tires were UNsafe. Apparently, the credibility of the advertisement was so low that viewers thought to themselves that if a company had their CEO make claims regarding the safety of the product, the opposite must be true!

Public relations, on the other hand, is all about credibility. It is not the company itself that is making claims. It’s an “objective” reporter telling the story, or a blogger or a critic. Deserved or not, the mere fact that a story is printed in a publication or on an online forum gives it credibility that advertising lacks.

The second big reason that public relations now trumps advertising is simply “focus of attention.” Today’s consumer has been inundated with advertisements from the moment they are aware of their surroundings till the day they expire. Advertisements are as ubiquitous as the air we breathe. As I sit here in my office, I can look around and see dozens of advertisements; It’s on the back of a magazine, on my computer screen, on the container of chewing gum sitting on my desk and on the electric bill sitting on top of my inbox.

To survive this constant barrage of marketing noise, consumers have learned to automatically tune out advertisements. Businesses spend millions of dollars each year placing print ads in newspapers and magazines only to have readers ignore them in favor of the featured articles. Take note of your own behavior. When you read a newspaper, do you even see the advertisements or have you learned to tune them out? And if you notice one, do you read its message thoroughly or do you simply turn the page?

Public relations, on the other hand, is the content that consumers look for when they read a magazine or watch the news. It is the subject matter that makes up an editorial or a by-line article. While readers are bypassing the advertisements, they are focusing on the public relations content.

Given these two significant factors – credibility and focus of attention, it’s easy to see why public relations now serves the critical role of introducing a product or service, of gaining consumer interest and building brand loyalty. And it’s why advertising has been relegated to the supporting role of reminding people that the product/service/ exists. Advertisements are now used to reinforce the messages that have already been created through PR.

Clients often ask me if they should advertise. The first thing that I tell them is that successful advertising is an uphill battle and that it should be used in conjunction with other marketing activities. I also tell them that it is a long-term commitment. If they are thinking of running a single ad in a trade publication or a couple of ads in the local business journal, they should save their money. The only hope of obtaining reasonable advertising ROI will come through an ongoing campaign that is both high volume and constant.

Those are my thoughts. What are yours?

I am particularly interested in hearing from those that can share first-hand accounts regarding the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of past advertising campaigns. If you can, include the type of advertising, where it was placed (newspaper, online etc.), how often it ran and other pertinent data.

admin PR Tips & Thoughts Advertising, Public Relations