Are We Creating the Clutter that We're Trying Hard to Break Through?

Let's elevate the conversation.

All these advances, the ones bringing our world more closely together, they’ve given us so much. But just as surely, they taketh away.

And perhaps it’s always been that way, particularly with revolutions in how we communicate. The invention of writing, some eight or ten millennia ago, gave us our first non-wetware capability for information transmission. But it also spelled the end of the nearly supernatural feats of memory exhibited by the shamans and storytellers, who’d been keeping and sharing the tribal legacies since the Stone Age. And likewise, with the coming of the printing press, away went the gorgeous handcrafted product of the calligraphers and scriptoria.

The communications revolution we’re living right now is arguably (or maybe barely arguably) the
most profound thus far. Starting with desktop publishing in the nineties, then on to the World Wide Web and the social media explosion as we know them today, we’ve been effectively handed a global, instantaneous platform for spreading information and sharing ideas. Non-local communication is no longer the purview of the elite, but rather the birthright of nearly all of humanity.

And what, pray tell, might that taketh away?

Novelist and copywriter Robert Cormack warned recently of a coarsening of society, of a “vulgarization”, as he called it. He points an accusatory finger at the advertising industry, perhaps not unfairly, calling attention to our command of mass media and asking us to examine our motives and commitment to the higher good.

They’re questions worth asking, to be sure, and we certainly call upon ourselves and our colleagues to let our consciences be our guides.

But given that mass media is now truly massive, and that we’re all content creators, we think it’s wise to cast a wider net, and to plead for communal responsibility, for leadership from the trenches.

Every single one of us can decide, each time we mount our digital soapboxes, whether we’re about to contribute to an elevation of the global conversation, or to its lowest common denominator. We can choose whether the content we create—be it a ten-thousand word blogifesto or a dashed-off tweet—makes people think, or makes them cringe.

This colossal platform of ours invites unexpurgated input, but it also permits anonymity and it winks at uncouthness. This all can, and does, lead to an erosion of the dialogue into something that’d never happen when people meet face to face, when they open their hearts, and when they share their thoughts.

We’d like us all to remember this—that no matter what sort of interface and no matter how great the distance, it’s still a conversation we’re engaging in. We hope we can approach all our conversations, digital and otherwise, with the respect and civility they deserve.

We’re committed to honoring our role as global citizens and communication leaders. And we very much invite you to join us.

The C4:
1. Advertisers have gained a reputation (not entirely undeservedly) for using our media leverage in the pursuit of dishonesty and a dumbing-down of the collective conversation.

2. Reputations can only be rehabilitated by action. It’s up to us to reform from within and to gain back any esteem we might have lost. We’re on it.

3. May we humbly submit, though, that we no longer command (if we ever did) the tenor of the media and the trajectory of societal discourse? The fact is, we’re all creators, and we all share responsibility for the integrity, or lack thereof, of the content we share.

4. We’re not saying cool it with the cat pics (you can haz cheezburger!), and we love a viral vid as much as anyone. We’re just saying that this global conversation is ongoing, and we can choose to make it constructive, or to let it become toxic to us all. We’re aiming for the former. How about you?

So, you think there's no power in advertising?

You may want to lather, rinse and repeat.

“Don’t leave home without it.”

“Taste Great. Less Filling.”

“Can you hear me now?”

“Where’s the beef?”

We’ve just thrown at you four unforgettable examples (we could add dozens more without breaking a sweat) of the enduring power of mass-media advertising. Just take a second to appreciate the stickiness of these ear-worms. They’re representative of campaigns that ended years, sometimes decades ago; yet, unless you’re hearing them here for the first time (in which case you’re a hermit or a youngster. Or both?)...then they’re every bit as familiar to you as they are to us. More than that—you can probably hear or see, in your mind’s eye at least, the original flight of ads that embedded them in your consciousness, and in our collective unconscious.

And that’s exactly what happens to these classics, wouldn’t you agree? Eventually, they belong to all of us. They become cultural markers, very often evolved beyond, in due time, the corporate identity from whence they came: “Bet you can’t eat just one” “Have it your way” “Would you like fries with that?” “Lather. Rinse. Repeat.”

These are the phenomena that we hold up as rebuttal to those who say that advertising has no relevance. And we reference them to rebuke, as strongly as we can, those who claim advertising has no power. We humbly submit that advertising like this, lines like these, surpass marketing and mercantilism, and become part of our popular imagination.

“It’s the real thing.”

“Good to the last drop.”

“What’s in your wallet?”

You must realize, then, that this is an ongoing process. That even as the ad-memes of yesteryear endure (“My bologna has a first name!”), contemporary ones are implanting themselves today (“So easy a caveman can do it!”). The cycle repeats.

So what’s the takeaway? For most of us, it’s that our culture is alive, vibrant, ever-changing—replete with not just art, music, and literature, but also with the provocative creativity found in our popular media. With advertising.

And for a select few of us: marketers who’d love to harness this collective chorus, the takeaway is imperative and pithy: Just do it.

The C4:
1. A diamond is forever.
Succinct and catchy advertising slogans endure. They make the jump from media to imagination, and they stay there.

2. Plop plop, fizz fizz.
Repetition is key. Marketers jumpstart this phenomenon by harnessing all available channels to spread the message.

3. But I’m worth it.
Don’t forget value and quality. What you’re selling must be worthy of the consumer’s attention.

4. Time to make the doughnuts.
It takes hard work, and it takes time. Stick to it and you’ll gain customers, move product, capture
market-share. And who knows? Maybe you’ll create that one catchy line they’ll still be raving about a hundred years from now.

Who is Bill Cosby?

Is he America's funniest dad?

Perhaps he is a purveyor of fine puddings and delicious gelatin-based desserts? Or is he someone with decidedly more sinister secrets?

We don’t know the answer any more than you do, and we watch with resigned sadness as it plays out - we hope - to some kind of resolution. But this unfolding story illustrates a vital point, one we think is applicable to our personal lives, business lives, indeed to all of life, writ large.

Because the truth is, whether we’re talking about Bill Cosby, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton or Billy the Kid, we have to realize that a public persona, or any persona, tells only part of the story.

Lives are complex. That seems simplistic, but it’s actually a truth so profound that it’s worthwhile to frequently ponder all its implications.

Think of it this way — what person, other than yourself, knows you the best? It could be your spouse, your closest friend, or very possibly the church minister or bartender down the block. Whoever they are, and however well they may know you, we feel safe to pronounce: They don’t know you completely. We don’t accuse you of hiding some part of yourself, anymore than we accuse ourselves of the same (this phenomenon is entirely universal). It’s just that we’re all different people, in ways subtle and distinct, depending on circumstances and surroundings.

If this is a truth we can stipulate for people, can we not also apply it to organizations? It seems to us that the complexity must compound when we’re looking at larger pools of personalities.

So — was Enron all bad? Is the Humane Society all good? We’re not taking any stances here (we’re willing to flirt with controversy, but please excuse us from full-on macking)...we’re just posing questions.

Whatever feelings you might have about individuals, organizations, corporations, or even your friendly neighborhood brand-management experts it may behoove you to remember that those feelings were born of isolated experiences. You might remind yourself they probably only represent one small part of a very complex picture.

The C4:
1. One hundred percent good and one hundred percent evil are caricatures. They’re the stuff of comic books and not-very-convincing fiction.

2. Real life is more about subtleties of gray, and of complex ranges of motivation and action. Might not be as satisfying from a dramatic standpoint, but mundane human existence rarely is.

3. It’s well-nigh impossible, then, for any of us to completely, intimately know the personalities of others. We think this is inescapable on an individual basis, and even more so with large groups.

4. Impressions, feelings, even the things you’re sure you know about the people around you and the the businesses you work with might just be incomplete. We’re not saying your impressions aren't valid. They surely are. We’re just hoping you can recognize that other impressions and contrasting truths could be just as valid in their own right.

A New Icon Is Already Up In The Air

American takes off. Again.

Before & After

There’s much more to the art of branding than symbolism and iconography. But then, without the symbols and icons, there is no brand.

That’s why changing those elements brings such risks. There’s risk in staying stagnant, of course. There’s risk in living in the past. But in updating, in revamping, there’s danger of the noble past being erased.

There might be no more noble brand than American Airlines, and not just because their name co-opts the vision of a society and the ideals of a people. This company, aloft since 1934, helped create our global dominance in aviation. They’re a legacy of Charles Lindbergh and Howard Hughes. They’ve survived the most momentous age not just of flight, not just of travel, but of human experience.

They’ve also been in bankruptcy for more than a year, and have been held up as an example of the decline of airline customer service. If ever a company might benefit from rebranding, that company would be American Airlines.

Yet somehow, we can give only the most hesitant endorsement of American’s recently unveiled image, in the form of a new logo, company colors, and airplane livery. The look is bold, modern, and very striking. The aircraft livery is gorgeous. There’s little to quibble with here.

But there was little to quibble with in American’s old look, which dates from 1968 and was created by the venerable, honorable design house of Massimo Vignelli. For a brand image that’s pushing a half-century in age, Massimo’s design remains powerfully contemporary. It’s also one of the most recognizable trademarks on earth.

For all that, we won’t say that American’s rebranding was a mistake. For a company as stricken as American Airlines, maybe a rebranding was necessary to break with the past, and to start writing a newer, better narrative.

We just hope the American executives realize that a fresh brand won’t write that narrative on its own. The challenges that American Airlines faces are systemic, not symbolic. A fresh brand might bring a reappraisal from consumers, but only a better way of doing business, and a new commitment to service, will bring those consumers on board.  

The C4:

1. American Airlines has just rolled out a new brand; with a thoroughly modern logo, eye-catching aircraft livery, and even new company colors. (Don’t worry, they’re still American, so they’re still red, white, and blue. They’re just a slightly different red, white, and blue.)
2. This is a company that’s been in bankruptcy since November, 2011. They’ve struggled to present a workable plan for re-emergence. They’ve gained a reputation for abysmal customer service. So yes, perhaps this is a company that could benefit from rebranding.
3. But we’ll miss the old brand, created 45 years ago by superstar designer Massimo Vignelli. Few corporate images that old can remain so appealing, so contemporary.
4. Nevertheless, the die is cast. We hope the redesign serves American well. We also hope the company realizes that now that the designers have done their jobs, it’s up to every employee of American, from baggage handlers to executive officers, to create a strong new airline, worthy of its bold new brand.

Let Go of the Past, Embrace the Future

Open wide your windows of opportunity.

Not exactly controversial advice, right? But when that past includes equity and proven success, it tends to make an alternative future that much more uncertain. And this makes letting go of the one and embracing the other all the harder.

Still, it happens. We’ve seen it happen twice in recent weeks, with both Microsoft and Avis bidding farewell to iconic marketing elements, and moving on to something new. This was brave of them…but was it wise?

In Avis’ case, they’ve stopped using a marketing slogan that has for half a century defined them as a determined rental-car underdog. “We Try Harder” was their 1962 answer to their second-place status to Hertz. All these decades later Avis is still following Hertz, but has at last ceased advertising that fact. Instead, they’re concentrating on their core market, business travelers, by adopting the position “It’s Your Space.” They’re attempting to tout all the amenities they offer busy people on the go, which is probably a smart strategy. But “We Try Harder” has been around for generations; Avis is mistaken if they think their customers will forget it anytime soon.

Then there’s Microsoft.

That company has stirred up both tech and design observers — two opinionated groups if there ever were any — by replacing their 25-year-old logo and branding. The “wavy windows” look is gone, but what’s in its place is eerily familiar. We now have a bold, sans-serif rendering of the company name, next to a symmetrical four-color window grid. In terms of branding updates, this one is more like baby steps.

That hasn’t quieted the sounding-off, though. Some are saying that the placid, 2D windows look like an antithesis of technology. Others say the design is clean, simple and memorable. What’s probably a win from Microsoft’s point of view is that people are talking about it.

These sorts of updates are never easy, in that they’re a letting go of often beloved elements of a company’s history. On the other hand, such elements almost always eventually date themselves, and must be let go (take a look at Microsoft’s original 1975 logo if you don’t believe us). Either way, it’s a gamble.

And like all business gambles, these ones will ultimately be settled in the marketplace.

The C4:

1. In business theory, the idea of letting go of the past and embracing the future is a no-brainer. In practice, it’s trickier. When do you let go of something that’s served you well? When do you try something new? Often the right answer only becomes clear in hindsight, often when you realize you’ve chosen poorly.
2. Nevertheless, Avis and Microsoft have both moved boldly, relinquishing tried and true marketing elements and replacing them with something brand new. Avis, in focusing on service to business travelers, risks the question, “Aren’t you guys trying harder anymore?” And Microsoft has raised the scorn of logo critics, who say the simple new design ill represents one of the world’s leading tech companies.
3. Those reactions are worrisome, but what were these companies to do? They’ve both broken with decades-old traditions—something most of us would argue has to be done sooner or later. Whether their decisions are smart or self-damaging perhaps is just a matter of timing.
    
4. So did they time it right? Or did they shoot themselves in the foot? The answer is entirely up to the customers of these companies. The jury’s out, and deliberations are underway.

A New Cuban Revolution

Capitalizing on emerging capitalism.

There’s a revolution going on in Cuba. There are guerrillas walking the streets of Havana. They bear little likeness to Fidel’s cadre, though — the one that installed a Marxist dictatorship in 1959. Instead they’re free-market reformers, responding to Raúl Castro’s 2010 easing of restrictions on small business entrepreneurship. They are the island’s first capitalists in three generations, and they’re creating from scratch a uniquely Cuban approach to guerrilla marketing.

They’ve embraced the guerrilla approach — that unconventional, low-budget and ever so effective style of advertising — not because they’ve heard it’s trendy here in the States. They’re doing it because they have no other choice. Print and broadcast media in Cuba is still state controlled and doesn’t accept advertising. Internet connectivity is severely limited. The new entrepreneurs of 2010 were faced with the challenge: how to let their fellow Cubans know they were open for business.

They met that challenge with ingenuity we should all find instructive. They accepted their limited resources, their limited access to mass media, and worked around them.

There’s the restaurant owner, for instance, who takes to the streets of Havana in his garishly painted MG Roadster (displaying the restaurant’s logo, of course). Cuba’s license plates are color coded, so he keeps an eye out for the blue plates designating foreign tour groups, and leaves discount coupons on their windshields.

And there’s the mobile phone repair company (which also does a brisk business unlocking iPhones). They wanted to differentiate themselves from their hundreds of competitors, so they’ve branded themselves as a “clinic,” complete with a cartoon mascot: a cellphone wearing a stethoscope. That icon is becoming familiar throughout the island, thanks to professional signage and thousands of flyers handed out.

Perhaps most innovative is a popular Havana burger stand. They offer 25% lifetime discounts to motorists willing to carry bright yellow advertising decals on their cars. They also managed to get 30 marchers, all wearing branded t-shirts, into this year’s May Day parade (one of Cuba’s biggest public events). The result was mass-market coverage that would have been otherwise impossible.

At this early stage, Cuban marketing is still in its infancy. The same can be said for all aspects of Cuban free enterprise. But as long as they go on showing this same level of resourcefulness and resolve, their future is bright indeed.

And along the way they might have some lessons to teach the free-enterprise giant just 90 miles off their coast. Here’s hoping we’re willing to learn them.

The C4:

1. In 2010 Cuban president Raúl Castro opened the way for limited entrepreneurship throughout the island. Within months thousands of small business — restaurants, specialty stores and beauty shops — hung out their shingles. 
2. They quickly found, however, that they had no easy way of communicating with their customers. Mass media is controlled by the Cuban government and conventional advertising doesn’t exist.
3. So they embraced what we call “guerrilla marketing.” They leveraged ingenuity, meager resources and every opportunity for exposure. It worked. It’s still working.
4. It’s a fascinating, real-time experiment in creating a free-market system from the ground up. There are lessons to be learned in Cuba. Wise marketers everywhere should pay attention to this developing story.