This past Super Bowl brought us what industry experts have called one of the least-memorable litany of high-stakes messages in years. That doesn't mean, however, that people weren't talking.
As you may already know, three campaigns — two that debuted during the Super Bowl and one shortly thereafter — have cause a firestorm of buzz. And most of it's been bad.
One is the now well-known chest-hair-pulling spot for Snickers, in which two manly men doing manly things wind up sharing a Snickers bar, and an unintentional kiss — then resort to great (albeit short) lengths to reinforce their manliness. The spot was quickly pulled after gay and lesbian protest.
Another spot, this for GM that featured a depressed manufacturing robot jumping off a bridge, was re-edited after it received extreme criticism from the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.
Even uber-hot Crispin Porter + Bogusky felt the heat in the kitchen after resurrecting, in a very creepy way, the late Orville Redenbacher (some blogs have taken to referring to him as "Deadenbacher").
So the question is: is bad buzz really better than no buzz at all?
Our answer: not when the buzz spins negatively vis-a-vis the brand's perceived core personality characteristics (i.e. sympathetic, understanding, sophisticated, intelligent, cool, etc.). After all, it's one thing to be outrageous or silly or daring or even (in the right situation) stupid. It's another to be rude, unfeeling or disrespectful.
Source: Boards, NOISE
No comments:
Post a Comment