I’ve admired these Mount Sinai Hospital ads for a long time. Mount Sinai Hospital located in New York is one of the oldest, largest and most prestigious hospitals in United States. This is an ad campaign that deals with cancer and other serious illnesses and seeks to present the hospital as the best choice for treatment. A delicate subject that has been executed with ingenious creative and flawless execution. The emotional approach of the copy is simple but powerful, (“A Father…” “At 14, Ryan…”) it connects well at a human level. The photography is realistic, but sophisticated which helps targeting the upscale demographic. The symmetry of the layout is clean but original (body copy and logo at the top of the page and above the headline) with a classic contemporary font (Mrs. Eaves). The photography doesn’t show patient faces, leaving the reader to imagine their own story. It also, of course helps in dealing with privacy issues.
Other ads, more minimal in their approach stand out with their daring and well balanced sense of humor.
Overall this ad campaign does its job remarkably well while presenting the Mount Sinai Hospital image with dignity, creativity and appropriate sophistication.
When I first saw this Pepsi ad in The New York Times I felt good about the direction the new Pepsi branding was taking. It felt fresh, fun, optimistic, uncomplicated. It was timely and seemed to be hitting the right cords.
Then I saw the packaging in a supermarket.
The freshness and excitement of the Pepsi branding ads are missing from the package
A you can see the package looks rather stark. Some have called it minimalistic, even cheap looking. I know it’s Pepsi because of the circle with the red, white and blue brand colors but again, what is the brand message I’m supposed to get? In my opinion the new color fields within the circle don’t have any clear meaning or project any particular feeling. Is it a smile a la Amazon or a boat’s sail? The new logo type is clean and a bit trendy in style but this can also be a liability and make the brand feel outdated in a couple of years.
I’m staring at the packaging and these visual cues aren’t telling me much.
Pepsi profits went down 43% in the fourth quarter. Pepsi says it’s the economy could the new brand look have something to do with it?
To make things worse, as reported by Advertising Age, a brand document from the Arnell Group, the agency that created the logo, presents the design strategy as “breathtaking”. Some in Madison avenue, the design world and beyond don’t agree, to say it kindly.
We all know how tough it must be getting an iconic brand logo approved through the layers of corporate bureaucracy but still it’s a pity when you look at the new Pepsi logo thinking about the many millions spent on its rebranding and how little it speaks to you.
I’m sure Pepsi takes its branding seriously, but looking at this fiasco you wonder if they are serious enough.
You are quickly browsing through the New York Times pages probably on the way to work or on a lunch break. You turn the page and voila! you see a huge scribble or a cryptic image followed by rather dull headline and a massive block of corporate copy.
These IBM ads are part of the ”Conversations for a smarter planet” campaign. Would you feel interested enough to stop in your tracks and dip into the lengthy message?
The idea of a “Conversations for a smarter planet” green campaign is brilliant and well intentioned, the execution… in my opinion, not so much. Ad images are meant to be relevant and engaging, grab your attention and draw you into reading the copy, and hopefully you will take some action such as visiting a website. But these images, although eye-catching, in my opinion, are neither relevant nor engaging. Would you invest your time in figuring out the meaning of a scribble or an abstract icon?
IBM if you want to engage and “educate” your audience, make it easier for them to understand your message. Make sure the reader actually wants to read your message.
However well intentioned, these corporate-sponsored environmental claims are unlikely to be taken too seriously these days.
Joe Makower from The Energy Collective wrote an insightful story about this IBM ad campaign that explains its goals and strategy and includes interviews with Rich Lechner, IBM’s VP of Energy and Environment and John Kennedy, VP of Integrated Marketing Communications.
In time for the holidays, Subaru brings its “Love” theme to a higher level. Subaru is a practical brand that knows how to touch an emotional chord with consumers. Its philanthropic promotion, “Get a Great Deal. Support a Great Cause,” offers to donate in your behalf to one of five high profile charities, and its TV commercial reinforces the brand’s story of down-to-earth authenticity and caring with the smart use of bumper sticker messages and excellent casting.
In my opinion, this campaign continues to successfully build Subaru’s unique brand positioning, strengthen its connection with consumers by appealing to their value system, and attract new buyers with its well balanced pragmatic and emotional communication strategy.
Recent comments in Youtube include: “Subaru Forever! i own an 89 xt6 boxer 6! love the grr sound after muffler mod. its a Wedge on wheels!. LOVE A SUBARU !”, “anyone know who is the girl at 0:14?? i think im in love.” and “It’s so great to see the “LOVE” theme continue in these latest ads.”
As reported by Advertising Age, “Subaru is gaining traction as the auto industry stalls”. Subaru’s VP-chief marketing officer claims that “consumers’ favorable opinion of Subaru has jumped by roughly 25 points since last year”.
This socially responsible approach seems to fit well with the current consumer mindset.
Source: North American Technographics Media and Marketing Online Survey, Q2 2008 Base: US online adults who use each type of content *Trust is defined as a 4 or 5 on a scale from 1 (don’t trust at all) to 5 (trust completely)/
Company Blogs are not getting it right so far
If brands are looking at social media to get closer to and trusted by their target audiences, these numbers clearly show they are having a hard time.
Taking a closer look, there seem to be four distinct groups:
The number one trusted source of information is the people we know, no surprise there.
Second, are the automated neutral information resources such as Consumer Reports, Search Engines and Yellow Pages.
Third, is traditional media, headed by the good old Newspaper, followed a close second by Social Networking site profiles from people you know. Magazines, Radio, and Online content sites and TV tied right behind, and Wikipedia a noticeable drop behind that. There is a tight competition between old and new media in this group.
Fourth, is a group comprised of personal and company communications. Email from a company or brand leads the trust level of this group. Despite the hated spam, email seems to hold as a trusted vehicle, perhaps because of its one on one nature. Although blogs are becoming such a powerful and influential communication vehicles, it’s surprising to see them rate so low in the trust level of this study. Personal blogs and particularly, Company Blogs have the least credibility. Why? Companies can’t figure out how to relate to their audiences at a personal level (which is what Social Media is about), but they are trying with tools like Tweeter (see GM’s small but telling effort with Tweeter http://twitter.com/GMBlogs ), and eventually, the smart ones will find the right voice to connect and be trusted.
A note from Forrester Research who commissioned this research:
A note about how we collect data. The data comes from an online survey we conducted in Q2 of this year. Our online panel is as representative as we can make if of the US online adult population (18 and older). Companies use our data all the time, and I believe it’s the best available survey of its kind; we’ve been conducting surveying consumers since 1997. In this case, we surveyed over 5000 people. We asked them to rate how much they trust information sources on a five-point scale, from 1 (don’t trust at all) to 5 (trust completely). Respondents could also answer that they didn’t use a particular information source. In this case about 80% of those we polled said they did use corporate blogs. Of those who used them, only 16% rated them 4 or 5 on the five-point trust scale.
I was reading this Martin Lindstrom article in Ad Age. He questions whether “brands manage to create their own religion by coincidently or deliberately, adopting triggers and tactics from the world of religion”.
Partnering with a neuroscientist and using an MRI, he discovered that the same regions of the brain were activated in Christians and powerful brand (Apple, Harley, Guinness) fans. Other less powerful brands did not produced the same effect.
To find out what sets these brands apart, he interviewed 14 religious leaders from all over the world to determine what are the components behind these brands success.
Here they are:
A clear vision
A sense of belonging
An enemy
Sensory appeal
Storytelling
Grandeur
Evangelism
Symbols
Rituals
My two cents:
No doubt all of these are important branding components (I would also add “authenticity”), but it’s not enough. What I feel is missing and makes the difference in generating a “religious” following is the originality (creativity) of each of these components and their outstanding execution.
The full story was published in Advertising Age December 8, 2008 and online: http://adage.com/cmostrategy/article?article_id=132996&search_phrase=lindstrom
Ad visuals are supposed to entice you to read the message. Looking at this image, I doubt most readers will venture further to read the heavy copy. IBM’s highly stylized visual is getting in the way of the communication rather than leading to it. “Setting the table for a smarter planet” is a message full of promise that is in no way supported by this confusing image.
This ad is eye catching, bold, fun, and friendly. The bold graphic and a touch of humor make it approachable and fun to look at. It succeeds at communicating the complexity of Shell’s innovations such as their snake-well drill technology, with simplicity. This ad is a positive brand builder.
Simple and direct communication with playful and informative graphics get across a message of innovation and honesty. This ad succeeds in communicating Shell’s proactive approach to alternative energy.
Here are samples of three major corporate brands trying to explain or claim to be “A world leading solar company” (Sharp), to “Build a smarter planet” (IBM) and “Helping prepare for the new energy future”.
The Shell ad
I like the friendly, easy-to-understand, eye catching illustration. The headline, it’s a little long with a big statement “…we’ll need to think the impossible is possible” and then the copy talks about CO2 and CCS technology, but nothing really makes a direct connection with our lives. So they talk about processes and technology, but in my opinion, the human connection is missing, and so is its effectiveness. I’m not sure a lot of people will be motivated to go to the website to find out how “Shell is helping prepare for the new energy future”.
The Sharp ad
It starts with a logo (good thing). Lengthy headline, but interesting fact. But the copy is boring and also way too long. Corporate verbiage such as, “To power the world on solar energy is an ambitious endeavor,” really doesn’t say much neither does it connect with the average fellow. I really don’t care if “you are ready for the change”. Just say you produce “over a quarter of the Earth’s total supply of solar cells.” Don’t bury it in fluffy copy. The layout is also very corporate and boring; it falls way short. The photo of the solar panels is so generic; it takes the power of the message away. I would it make a connection between what people think of the brand Sharp (electronics) with the other side of what Sharp is: a powerful player in clean energy. As they say: “Keep it simple…”
The IBM ad
I love this layout. So avant-garde, graphic, clean and Paul Rand-like. Too bad the illustration although beautiful, is hard to understand for the average fellow. It took me a while to realize it was a car on a maze. I like the headline too: “The roads to a smarter planet.” Nice. Too bad the first line of copy starts with: “In 2007, the world crossed an epochal threshold.” This really sets the wrong tone to tell a “smart” story. The explanations that follow make up a salad of cumbersome data and percentages. I just don’t buy it, sorry. The lBM logo sideways? Not so smart. These days, the key to communication is simplicity, authenticity, relevance, and above all, the connection. Step down from your pedestals guys, and talk to the people at their level. That’s how they like it and how they are doing it online.
It’s late. I’m going to sleep.
Please let us know your thoughts on these ads and green branding in general. To the ad creators, feel free to add your credits and comments.
