Over the weekend of January 8-9, 2011; rapper 50 cent made several tweets about HNHI, a headphone company.
The next Monday the stock shot up 240%, $50 million.
All of Mr Cent’s tweets are not as golden, though:
Over the weekend of January 8-9, 2011; rapper 50 cent made several tweets about HNHI, a headphone company.
The next Monday the stock shot up 240%, $50 million.
All of Mr Cent’s tweets are not as golden, though:
I’ve mentioned advertising which co-ops something else, such as a police recruitment campaign which co-ops the techniques of illegal (thus, anti-police) graffiti art. Co-optation is stealing the techniques from another in spite of philosophical differences.
And then there are ads which go far beyond the mere stealing of techniques and practices of another group and steal much more (such as your body) or, in this following case, your expectations.
This took place at a right-wing extremest rock festival in Germany. At the festival, t-shirts — with right-wing flags and skulls on them — were given away for free.
However, after the t-shirts were washed the skulls and flags faded and a message appeared asking the owner to break with right-wing extremism. link
My rusty German translation: “what your t-shirt did, you can do also.”
I guess you could call stealth advertising hoaxes, but in a way, that’s just like calling magicians hoaxers. Magicians and stealth advertisers are doing something with so much style and creativity that it would be unfair to them to call them hoaxers. What they’re doing is more than just telling a lie which will soon be exposed. Even after the lie is exposed you are still amazed.
This has been the week for hoaxes! I reported a few days about about the hoax study about Internet Explorer users having lower IQ scores than normal and discussed media pranks in general. Now we have reports of companies which you pay to increase your Twitter Feed’s status (i.e. number of followers) . $25 gets you at least 1,000 followers and $45 gets you 2,000. Newt Gingrich used these companies to boost his Twitter followership up to 1.3 million.
This is related to the process called Astroturfing – fabricating the appearance of a grassroots following. While astroturfing on Twitter is as new a Twitter, astroturfing has been around for a while and has many differs versions.
A few months back it was exposed that radio talk shows (the blogosphere of the pre-internet days) hired actors to call in to talk shows to support the show or present a strawman to give the host something to rail against. If you are interested, the Premiere On Call website is back up and you can register for an audition.
One thing I’m interested in, in the area of consumer behavior, is consumer mis-behavior. By studying misbehavior I feel that we can come to better understand the process of how people respond to commercial (as in business, not ad) messages and also how people respond to the commercial culture we live in.
Of note in this area:
Alan Abel is the media prankster! Here’s the trailer for the documentary about his career:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xupDpIwoaE[/youtube]
You should watch the Abel movie, to see how media manipulation is done (Abel is the pain in the ass from the title of this entry).
The Yes Men are currently active and their base of operation is NYC!
Take a look at this video:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlUQ2sUti8o[/youtube]
It’s great that a corporation took responsibility for its actions.
No, that didn’t happen. That interview was a Yes Men hoax. Dow Chemical’s stock went down Two Billions Dollars after that news story aired!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02QEWvyrcXI[/youtube]
And finally, this recent story from earlier this week:
The browser wars are getting personal. A new study gave IQ tests to more than 100,000 English-speaking Internet users from the U.S., Canada, U.K., Australia, and New Zealand. Those results were then compared to what browser each person was using to take the test.
If you’re reading this using Internet Explorer, you may want to navigate away, because the “psychometric consulting company” AptiQuant found, IE users were on average not as bright as those who use Firefox and especially not as bright as those who use Chrome and Opera. link
which received a great deal of press — was a hoax!
It turns out the ones with a below average IQ are a number of people in the news media — including us — who were fooled by an elaborate hoax that claimed users of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser were slow. We fell for it and so did others like the BBC, CNN, Forbes as well as the IT publication The Register, which we quoted. link
I read it, myself, and didn’t notice that the story said that the average IE user’s IQ was 80. I would scold my class if they didn’t recognize what an IQ of 80 means. But, the power which commercial messages has on us (me included) causes us to suspend our critical faculties.
Actually, it doesn’t. Does – not – sell.
Here’s why.
This ad, for example (from Copyranter’s blog):
If I asked you about this ad in 5 minutes you (or “guys” – I’ll get to that later) would remember the naked women, but not the brand name!
That’s what the empirical research shows on sex in advertising: people look at the naked people and it distracts them from looking at the ad’s message.
Yes, sex in advertising decreases its effectiveness! For an ad to be effective: the target needs to perceive the message, remember the message and act upon the message. You can’t act on the message (buy the product) when you don’t remember what it is.
Sex in advertising does do one positive thing: it causes people to look at the advertisement (people look at the sex part but nothing else). Did you read the ad’s text, or just look to see if the model’s nipples were visible?
But in a truly ironic fashion: Sex causes the wrong people to look at the add. Sexy advertising targeted at (straight) men usually feature sexy women. Research shows that because of the sexy woman in the ad, men will be less likely to read the ad’s copy and women (who are not the target of the ad) will be more likely than men to read the copy. The opposite is true of women: they will look at the sexy man in the ad and not read the copy but men will be more likely to read the ad’s copy!
So why sex in ads? Above I offered empirical results. Below I can only offer my guesses.
1. The client is always right. They client thinks sex sells and the ad agency goes along for the check.
2. For the benefits of the controversy. Advertisers must pay for ad placement in magazines and on TV. That’s the major cost of advertising. If a sexy ad is controversial …
… such as this one for a coffee company, it will receive placement in newspapers and on TV for free!
3. The sex isn’t for the consumer. The advertising company is thinking about winning advertising industry awards for creative advertisements. Winning (or just being nominated for) an award will give the agency greater status, more interested potential clients and the ability to charge more for their services. Sexy ads, like the coffee ad above, can make the campaign seem clever or ground-breaking and thus more award-worthy.
4. Of course, in some cases, the entire brand wishes to be connected to sex and controversy. We hear so often of American Apparel and their controversial ads that many consumers associate the brand with sex. There’s no empirical evidence on whether this has any effect on the brand’s sales.