September 2008

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September 2008.

Do you remember when you were a kid and you picked your cereal based upon the toy in the box?  Remember deliberating as you walked down the very small aisle which had a reasonable amount of cereals from which to choose? Remember getting home and sticking your hand in a brand new full box of some sugary crunchies to fish out a plastic item that your mom always hoped you didn’t eat accidentally?  The toy wasn’t usually that interesting in the end game but it still persuaded you to make a brand decision. 

Things have changed in the cereal aisle and elsewhere when it comes to marketing to our kids.  First of all the cereal aisle is twice as long and has infinitely more choices.  Secondly the stakes are higher:  it’s no longer a toy, it’s an online game. Moreover, it’s not just the cereal aisle that has fun incentives and those toys are not just for kids anymore!

Welcome to Advergaming! According to Wikipedia: 

“Advergaming is the practice of using video games to advertise a product, organization or viewpoint. The term “advergames” was coined in January 2000 by Anthony Giallourakis who purchased the domain names Advergames.com along with Adverplay.com. The term Advergames was later mentioned by Wired’s “Jargon Watch” column in 2001, and has been applied to various free online games commissioned by major companies.”

I won’t blog about the whole history of the concept, suffice to say it’s been here since the beginning of this century and even if you haven’t been exposed it is likely that your kids have.  My kids love Webkinz.  “Webkinz are stuffed animals that were originally released by the Ganz company on April 29, 2005. The toys are similar to many other small plush toys. However, each Webkinz toy has an attached tag with a unique “Secret Code” printed on it that allows access to the “Webkinz World” website. On Webkinz World, the Secret Code allows the user to own a virtual version of the pet for virtual interaction.”  Webkinz are the perfect example of brand interaction but not necessarily designed to be “advertising”, more the point of the pet is to experience the virtual reality of the pet.  But whatever you call it, my kids are playing with a brand for hours if I would let them.  (Please don’t let Webkinz come out with a cereal!)

Similarly many marketers from Pepsi to McDonalds, Fruit Loops to Chips Ahoy have developed fun online games that are a true band “experience”.  The gaming world has been growing at warp speed since Pong hit the screen in the 1972.  According to a new survey from the Pew Internet & American Life Project, “97 percent of children and teenagers ages 12 to 17 claim to have played some kind of video game, with 99 percent of boys and 94 percent of girls saying they play games.”  Given the ability of kids, and those even the younger than tweens and teens, to navigate a variety of interfaces, it is no surprise that advertisers would jump at the chance to make branding fun.

It’s virtually impossible to find a brand who doesn’t have virtual fun associated with its products.  And don’t be deceived that play time is just for kids anymore.  Adidas, Fidelity, Toyota, Volkswagen, Stride Gum have all developed advergames.  Even Pfizer is promoting Viagra via it’s own targeted advergame.  Begging the question, are you really serious?  Grown men interacting with little blue pills on line.  What will they think of next? 
There is no doubt that advergaming is attractive to many consumers out there.  It makes sense because the goal of many advertisers is to get the target audience to spend more time with the brand, increase preference and loyalty.  This online fun allows marketers to develop their own private custom media channel and continue to restate their unique brand proposition but in a subtle and subliminal sort of way.  Imagine, finding a way to have your target market watch a channel that only ran your marketing messages and nothing else.  What would you pay for that kind of play time?

I am not sure if there is a punch line here but I am sure it has something to do with lipstick.  Has anything taken our country more by surprise that the Republican nomination of Sarah Palin?  Admit it, had you even heard her name before last week?  And yet out of the background has stepped this gun toting, pro-life, beauty queen turned governor; hockey mom of five children: one of whom has special needs; one who is going to war in Iraq next week; and one who is expecting her first child at seventeen.  You can’t make this stuff up!

When John McCain announced his running mate, the media was off and running.  Fresh meat was being served and in this case, you might have thought that the press hadn’t been fed in a while.  In an election year, during hurricane season and a war, you would have thought that there would have been plenty of content about which the press could write.  Yet this still sophomore governor is taking the front page of most major newspapers and all the entertainment and gossip magazines, often times featured aiming a gun!  Immediately the media along with most of America began questioning her experience and credentials as the woman who would be a “heartbeat” from the presidency; one breath from being the leader of the most powerful country in the free world. 

As an American woman, I must admit that anytime a woman gets closer to penetrating the glass ceiling I am enthused (even if I don’t agree with her politics).  As a Mom, I have witnessed how women get things done in business, in PTOs, in communities and have often wondered how the world would run if there were more women in major government positions.  And as a Mom who is employed outside of the home I am disappointed that anyone would question Sarah Palin’s credentials based upon her “mother’” status.  Did anyone ever ask any of the previous presidents how they would be able to govern being Dads and all?  Do we have no faith in the “first dude” who manages to attend to his children’s needs and still race snowmobiles?  (Listen, this may not qualify him as Betty Ford or even Tipper Gore but every better half of the Vice Presidency needs to have their own identity) Do we not think that having a spouse who has agreed to take on the Mr. Mom role is good enough for her to carry out her obligations? 

There was the RNC, strewn with homemade signs: “Hockey Moms for Sarah”.  There was Sarah explaining the difference between Hockey Moms and Pitt Bulls:  Lipstick. She seemed tough enough to me. You?  We should be questioning her credentials and her experience.  We should be vetting her, maybe slightly more that the GOP did before they threw her into the bright lights of national politics, but we should (read: the media) be vetting her ability to lead, to inspire; to make tough choices; to balance budgets; to govern the United States of America.  We should understand her views and experience on foreign policy, economics, alternative fuels, education, poverty, healthcare and a host of other topics.  We should find out her stance on terrorism and human rights.  We need to understand her ability to make the most challenging and difficult decisions under the worst of conditions:  with the glare of the media shining in her face and the whole world watching. 

While I (personally) am delighted to see women rising to the opportunities that are before us, my criteria for choosing a candidate has nothing to do with their parental status, anymore that it would their race or gender.  I admire that she may be a good hockey mom.  I am impressed with her short but apparently very busy and productive governor-ship.  But I want to know a lot more about her before she becomes my “First-Lady-Vice-President”.

The conventions are over and I am looking at the numbers coming across the web and they are shocking.  A while back we covered the topic of media bias and sexism that was directed at Hillary Clinton and opined that it helped Barack Obama win the Democratic nomination by a slim margin. (By the way, in a little covered story, the DNC just announced that over 1000 delegates still voted for Sen. Clinton even after she released her delegates to vote for Obama –Yes We Can?)

It turns out that the assault on Hillary was just the warm up for a full beat down that was given to Gov. Sarah Palin after John McCain named her to the ticket a week ago.  The attacks on her experience, gender, kids, looks and home state have been well documented and I will spare you my rants and raves about NBC, Keith Olberman, Campbell Brown, CNN, Rachel Maddow, Andrea Mitchell, Jonathan Alter, Sally Quinn, Maureen Dowd, The New York Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe, Gloria Steinem, The Daily Kos, Andrew Sullivan et al. 

The media pile on got so bad that stories started circulating that she may drop out and the McCain campaign would be embarrassed and doomed.  The sharks were circling and smelling blood.  My two cents is that sexism and the double standard were just a small part of the vitriol.  The left leaning mainstream media has decided that Obama must be elected President at all costs.  They have personally invested themselves in this notion and there is no turning back now.  Oprah endorsed him and they can’t let her down.  They knew that the pick of Palin could finally get the conservative base off the sidelines and enthusiastic about a McCain/Palin ticket. 

All was riding on her Wed. night speech at a lackluster convention that was delayed by a hurricane.  Living up to her High School nickname, Sarah Barracuda, she ripped the roof off the place and delivered the best address by a Republican since Ronald Reagan.  She connected with people and went after Obama with a smile and a wink as only Reagan could.  She made Obama’s thin resume and “community organizing” a national joke, and showed herself to be tough, smart and ready.  And, it was viewed by 40 million Americans, the same number who watched Obama the week before.  (This just in – last night McCain received higher ratings than Obama did last Thursday night.) But, did it matter?  Here are the results as of today, exactly one week after she was introduced to the country as a virtual unknown:

From Rasmussen’s Tracking Polls

A week ago, most Americans had never heard of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Now, following a Vice Presidential acceptance speech viewed live by more than 40 million people, Palin is viewed favorably by 58% of American voters. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 37% hold an unfavorable view of the self-described hockey mom. The figures include 40% with a Very Favorable opinion of Palin and 18% with a Very Unfavorable view

The new data also shows significant increases in the number who say McCain made the right choice and the number who say Palin is ready to be President. Generally, John McCain’s choice of Palin earns slightly better reviews than Barack Obama’s choice of Joe Biden. Perhaps most stunning is the fact that Palin’s favorable ratings are now a point higher than either man at the top of the Presidential tickets this year. As of Friday morning, Obama and McCain are each viewed favorably by 57% of voters. Biden is viewed favorably by 48%.

The Rasmussen tracking poll has the race virtually tied wiping out Obama’s convention bounce, and one third of the survey’s interviews were conducted before Palin’s speech and all of them were done before McCain’s acceptance.  A CBS tracking poll also has the race tied, while Gallup has Obama up four, but many of the interviews in their tracking poll were conducted before Palin’s and McCain’s RNC addresses.  The Monday report will have the full impact of both conventions for the first time.

Some other tidbits – SurveyUSA’s poll reports that 60% gave Palin an A for her speech and 11% a B.  The same survey shows that voters think she is more of an asset to McCain than Biden is to Obama, and now think that McCain will win.  Oh, and one more – 54% think that the media is rooting for Obama, while 8% feel that way about McCain.  That echoes an earlier Rasmussen poll that said 51% thought the media was being unfair to Gov. Palin and 24% were more likely to vote for her because of that.

Here is the big surprise from Rasmussen today:

Following the Wednesday night speech, voters are fairly evenly divided as to whether Palin or Obama has the better experience to be President. Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin.

sarah-kiss.jpg               obama-sweating.jpg

Think about that for a minute – they are comparing the Democrat running for President against the Republican’s VP.  Obama has been at this for 18 months and has had the media fawning all over him.  In just one week his lack of experience has been exposed.  The turnaround is an incredible change in perception from a 45 minute speech where the mother of five looked into the eyes of the country and spoke from her heart. 

All this could change by next Friday, and you can bet the media will continue to go after Palin and try and trip her up.  However, you can’t deny that the voters of the country are sending a powerful message to the media:  Stop the smears and we don’t care what you think!  As usual the mainstream media is denying any bias, but they need to stop reporting for each other, the Boston/NY/DC corridor and their personal agenda’s.  A nice change for them may be the central message from John McCain this week – Country First.

P.S. Take a break from all these numbers and read this National Review satirical column on Barack Obama and the Chicago machine.  It is laugh out loud funny.

To say we’re heating up for another testy presidential election would be an understatement. This burner’s been on for months and we’re all overcooked. I loved the primaries, but by April, I was exhausted by the Democratic Party’s inability to choose a candidate, and by Mitt Romney’s embarrassing quest to purchase the White House. When it became clear that my pantsuited hero was out, I licked my wounds and placed myself defiantly in the undecided camp.

I am exactly the person both Obama and McCain want to sway to their side. Obama wants me to understand just how mentally unstable McCain is. How could he possibly not remember how many houses he owns?! McCain wants me to know how Obama himself said, in 2004, how he would not be ready to be president in 2008. How could you possibly elect such a celebrity 2008?!

But this year, something is different. Both political parties are making their pleas to me via the web, which is the information and entertainment tool I, and every single one of my peers, use more than any other medium. In past election years, I’d be lucky to catch an attack ad or two on television on the weekends. Now, it seems like I’m seeing new web videos released every few days. I’m watching as McCain compares Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, and as Obama warns us that McCain will send more troops to Iraq. I can watch them multiple times (I said can, not want to) and send them along to my friends – something that was impossible with television ads.

Of course we can’t lose sight of the fact that this is still all politics as usual. McCain might not get my vote because he keeps coming out with better videos of key Democrats sounding off about Obama’s lack of experience. The point is that they’re reaching me and I’m watching them. And on November 4, I have to make a decision.

Close
E-mail It