Where powerful ideas in advertising come from

In advertising, powerful insights equal powerful ideas. Three brands that have succeeded in creating them? Australian TELCO Optus, Indian brands - Cherry Blossom and MRF tyres.

This post is about the thinking that went into these brands and how successful ideas were generated for them. They are based on conversations I have had with the people who happened to be in the room at the time or in the cases of the Indian brands, knowledge I gleaned on the brands while I worked at the agency that created them - one of the best - LINTAS India.

OPTUS - says 'yes' when its competitors say 'no'
Australia was a market dominated by a single TELCO Telstra for the longest time ever. In the late eighties it had its first taste of competition when Cable and Wireless Group launched a competitive brand Optus.

When Optus was launched, George Patterson Bates, the agency that held the account at the time, did research into consumers trying to understand how they felt towards the category and the incumbent brand Telstra.

One of the biggest issues consumers had with Telstra was their poor service ethic at the time. According to consumers, whatever they asked Telstra for at the time, the answer would invariably be "No".

The agency took this insight and created a simple but powerful concept for Optus - simply called "yes"! The whole idea of "yes" was to highlight how Optus was a much more service orientated brand and a better choice for Australians as a result.

The campaign captured the imagination of Australians and made the Optus brand a strong number 2 to Telstra allowing it to eat massively into its share. "yes" is a part of Optus advertising even today - over a decade after launch.

The perfect gentleman always wears a Cherry smile
One of India's most powerful brands is a shoe polish called "Cherry Blossom." The advertising for Chery Blossom was created and handled for decades by my ex agency (LINTAS) when I worked in India briefly in the mid nineties.

As far back as the seventies, the agency researched consumers to find out how they felt about the task of polishing shoes. Most viewed it as "dull, boring and mundane. It was hard work and they wished they didn't have to do it."

The agency leapt on this insight and used it to create an iconic campaign that featured comic genius Charlie Chaplin. The whole idea behind the use of Chaplin was to distance the brand from the category negatives that threatened to overshadow it. Chaplin made the task of polishing shoes seem a lot more fun than it actually was. In doing so he transferred feelings and associations that were a lot more pleasant onto the Cherry Blossom brand which became one of the biggest and strongest in the country - with ads that people always wanted to watch.

 The Cherry Blossom campaign ran unchanged for decades. A great example of a brand that intelligently uncovered an insight that it then translated into a powerful piece of work that anyone who grew up in India has fond memories off.

MRF tyres - tyres with muscle
MRF tyres are the number one brand of tyres in India.The campaign was conceived I believe by the great Alyque Padamsee himself (CEO and Chief Creative officer of LINTAS at the time and one of the all time Indian advertising greats).

The story behind its creation is this. The biggest user group of tyres is truck drivers. So Alyque went onto a major highway and interviewed truckies as they rolled into the numerous "dhabas" along the way set up to serve them food and drink. When he asked them what they wanted from a tyre, a number of them would flex their muscles and say "takth" which in Hindi means "strength."

From this simple insight was born the idea of a muscle man carrying a tyre above his head with the tagline "MRF Tyres. Tyres with muscle" - an idea that contineues to define the MRF brand even today - decades after its launch.

Powerful insights lead to powerful ideas 
A powerful idea is one that stands the test of time. It''s not an idea that wins a Canne or a Clio. It's an idea that captures the imagination of its audience and in doing so makes the brand it has been developed for -  succesful.

Ads are an interruption - they don't have to be

In my observation, people consume media for two key reasons - to be informed or entertained.

It follows that if the advertising a brand puts out there links itself to either of these reasons – it is less likely to be perceived as an interruption and consumers are more likely to be receptive and accepting towards it.

A brand doesn’t truly “inform” until it tells its audience something they didn’t know about it before

If a consumer feels they already know the message a brand is trying to communicate, they will dismiss it on grounds of irrelevance and no objective or purpose will be served.

This is only natural – there is too much “noise” out there in the market so consumers will take every opportunity to “filter” some of it out.

Brands have to work harder with their advertising as a result. To be effective they need to genuinely “inform.” They can only do this by communicating facts that are new, interesting and relevant – and that tie back and reinforce the value proposition they represent.

Soup on the rocks – a new use for an old product

A long time (in 1972 to be exact), Campbells ran this ad for their range of soups in the US. What the ad does is show consumers how to use the product in a new way. In doing so, it proves to be genuinely “informative” as it gives consumers an idea into product use they may never have had before. Because of this, the ad and the brand as a consequence are a lot more likely to be mentally engaged with rather than discarded. The same can’t be said for the advertising of a lot of brands these days.

Schlitz beer – we wash our bottles with live steam

In the thirties the great Claude C Hopkins wrote a campaign for Schlitz beer. The idea - “we wash our bottles with live steam” All beers did so at the time – consumers just didn’t know it. The campaign made Schlitz one of the largest selling beers of the time. Why? It “informed.” It told consumers what they didn’t know – but clearly wanted to. The fact that Schlitz washed its bottles in live steam was important information as at that time health and sanitation were key issues. Bottles washed in live steam meant they were more sterile and that the beer was purer and better and safer to drink.

Insurance company claim - Australia

A third example – closer to our times comes from Australia. A few years ago I came across an ad for an insurer with a simple message that I thought was brilliant. The ad simply said “we pay 99.9% of all our claims”.

The ad again “informed”. It told consumers something they didn’t know but that they wanted to and was clearly relevant. They were more likely to engage and be receptive towards the message as a result.

Al Ries – raising questions and a furore

I am not sure how many of you remember, but a few years ago, marketing guru Al Ries raised a furore on Madison Avenue when he claimed in his book ‘the fall of advertising and the rise of PR” that advertising was ineffective at building brands while PR was.

I understand Al’s point – and I’m sympathetic to it. However I don’t think effectiveness has got anything to do with advertising or PR. Effectiveness I think is influenced largely by whether a brand is proving to be newsworthy or not – and in the right way of course.

If a brand is telling its audiences things they know about it already its messages will be discarded and its memory over time will fade.

PR has a historical but not necessarily a proprietary advantage over advertising here. PR’s whole premise is on creating stories about brands. The problem (or rather what has worked in PR’s favour) is that newspapers and other forms of media won’t accept or publish these stories unless they are newsworthy in some respect! PR’s whole focus is on ensuring they are as a result.

It is therefore not PR that is creating strong brands but its focus on newsworthiness that is!

If you adopt the same focus in your advertising as PR does then it is likely to be just as effective in building your brand. This is the point I think that Al Ries either missed or failed to communicate effectively enough to marketers when he launched his book.

Claude C Hopkins: “You don’t buy from a clown”

Claude Hopkins once said “you don’t buy from a clown.” Though I admire the man, I think he was wrong on this. You do. Ronald McDonald is testimony to this! As are scores of funny campaigns that have made millions for the brands they were conceived for.

Humour works because it is not only entertaining – it is disarming. It lowers barriers to sale and makes it possible for brands to own emotional territories that they would otherwise not be able to.

There is no shortage of humorous ads that have done very well in the market – “Happiness is a Cigar called Hamlet” is one, the Breast Cancer society ad is another (if only women paid as much attention to their breasts as men).

Edward De Bono takes humour a step further calling it “the highest form of intelligence”.

Entertainment has genres

Humour is only one of them. There’s also drama, action, documentary – all styles of narration that can be explored through advertising. Which one is appropriate depends on the product, category and key message your brand is trying to get out there.

Crispin Porter – Burger King

Crispin Porter used entertainment in a big way for Burger King.

Some time ago it embarked on a social experiment for the brand (as opposed to creating an ad!). What the agency did, in the campaign later named “Burger Freakout”, was tell people that Burger king had decided to take the Whopper™ off the menu. The reactions were captured live on video and edited into a hilarious series of videos that you can watch on the YouTube link provided. Please note the video contains coarse language – lots of it.

Why inform or entertain?

When you do, you achieve a closer fit with media and the key reason why people consume it in the first place.

Why do we switch on our TV sets if not to watch programmes that will take our minds off work? And why do we buy newspapers if not to keep abreast of the events happening around us and in the world?

When this happens the advertising your brand puts out is not seen as advertising any more - an interruption to the experience the audience seeks - but an enhancer to it on the contrary. In the process, you greatly increase the chances of your ads being more positively accepted and received.

What is your Media Saying about You?

A brand’s media choices say as much, if not more, about a brand as the ads written for it.

Yet it’s the area marketers tend to pay least attention to.

How do you decide whether your media strategy is aligned to your brand or not?

The starting point is to look at what your brand promises or stands for and ensure that its values are reflected in the media choices you make.

One brand that gets this idea and has implemented it beautifully is Mini Cooper
Mini has long been representative of all that is fun and quintessentially British. When Mini featured in the movie “Austin Powers - the Spy Who Shagged Me” (whether consciously or not), it used the script, the characters in the film and the actors (Michael Caine and Mike Myers) to supreme effect – bringing alive in a way few ads could – its core values – its quirky sense of British humour and fun.

Mini has done that for a while though. Right from the time it was chosen by Mr Bean as his choice of transport as he went about his wild and whacky capers. Quintessentially British – Mini has exercised its media options intelligently and well – using them to strengthen its brand, its core imagery and values.

Brands differ and so their media choices must too

The Catholic Church - authoritarian, strict
Two brands that are similar yet different are the Catholic Church and the Episcopal Church.

The Catholic Church is not a liberal brand. On the contrary, it is authoritative, strict and intolerant of many practices considered okay in today’s society.

The Catholic Church forbids sex before marriage, for example, it is against homosexuality, opposed to female priests as well as the use of condoms.

Given the stance the brand has chosen to adopt, there are some media options that would work for it and others that would not. It would not be appropriate for the Church to market its message in adult chronicles like Playboy or Penthouse for example. Alternative lifestyle magazines like Blue or even popular shows like Oprah that deal in a fairly open manner with issues that would be contentious with the stand taken by the Church.

To do so would be to condone behaviour, values and lines of thinking it has long decided it must live in fundamental opposition to. The Catholic Church’s conservatism as a brand prevents it from exercising many media options another brand might.

The Episcopal Church - here for sinners not saints
The Episcopal Church is a very liberal brand compared to the Catholic Church. Its ideology was beautifully brought to life by an award winning campaign by Fallon McElligot in the mid eighties which some of you may have seen.

The campaign featured many different ads. One of them shows a picture of Christ nailed to the Cross and said “we welcome people with piercings.”

Another showed a picture of Henry VIII with a headline that read “In a Church started by a man with 6 wives, forgiveness goes without saying.”

What the Episcopal Church tries to do as a brand is preach “forgiveness”, and “compassion”. Its premise, “that all of us are in need of the redemption that only Christ can provide” gives the brand a “non-judgemental” quality that greatly broadens the media options at its disposal.

Simply by virtue of the stance the brand has chosen to adopt, it can use media – including all the options detailed above – that the Catholic Church cannot. Its justification is simple – as a brand it’s not here for saints but for sinners – and they are to be found in media more conservative brands like the Catholic Church will invariably frown upon.

Your media communicates more about your brand than just its values
It can sometimes communicate your brand’s fundamental beliefs in business and strategy.

Let’s take a brand like Google for example. Let’s say Google suddenly decides to launch a mainstream advertising campaign for its products on television. What does it say about the brand...that it has departed from one of its core beliefs...that the future of advertising is not in the area of contextual relevance any more? Such a move would belie and go against everything Google has stood for so far and the brand would suffer as a result.

Google hasn’t decided to launch a mainstream campaign just yet (thank goodness!) but Yahoo has.

Yahoo’s new campaign “Yahoo it’s You” is all about the personalisation options the brand offers users in terms of its portal and search. The trouble with this campaign is that the media it uses is predominantly offline (ie television, print and outdoor). We all know Yahoo is trying to buy itself out of trouble. But I don’t think they’ve thought about the message their decision to go mainstream in such a big way will send to the market about their brand.

The message it sends about Yahoo the way I see it is this – the brand does not believe that it (and therefore any other brand) can market itself successfully using the online space alone. It therefore needs mainstream television, print and outdoor.

There are two issues with this stance:

One – in a time when more dynamic brands are walking away from mainstream channels to more targeted and efficient ones, Yahoo is doing the opposite. In the process, it is depositioning itself as far as its dynamism and progressiveness as a marketer is concerned.

Two – in a time when the brand’s sales people are trying to convince marketers of the value of putting more money into the online channel - Yahoo itself is doing the exact opposite! It can't be easy for Yahoo's sales people to sell on the platform the brand has chosen to adopt.

Yahoo's approach could have been a lot cleverer in terms of reaching out to its audience. By developing a traditional, straightforward and somewhat uninspired marketing approach it raises questions on its direction and the strength and dynamism of its leadership. All through the media channels it has chosen for itself.

Choose your media carefully - it says more about you than you can imagine
The media choices you make for a brand communicate how it thinks as well as the key values it epitomises. These media choices also cue the strength of an organisation's leadership, its belief in its direction as well as the clarity with which it has defined it.

When you use a particular media to say something about your brand - the interesting thing is this - it does!