Nostalgia Advertising

Nostalgia marketing is, in my opinion, one of the most effective kinds of marketing for established brands. Not only can it be used as a reboot for a company- a way to get something that used to be good back in the game- but it's an effective way to reengage an older demographic. Companies will always be thinking of new ways to get younger people to buy their brand, but that only includes some of the population, and marketing mongers should be on the prowl for more. This is where nostalgia kicks in.

To get an older generation involved with a product that's being revamped for future generations, advertisers need to reconnect with their roots. Day to day products like shampoo or toothbrushes probably wouldn't benefit from nostalgia advertising because no one has nostalgia for those things. No one group of people has a collective memory of their first toothbrush. For other kinds of products like toys or clothing, advertisers have tapped into nostalgia because they realize that "consumers view the past through rose-tinted glasses and are ready to spend on any product or service that can help them recreate the feelings of warmth and security they felt during happier times" (source). And nowadays, "retro" products are highly desirable to young people, so nostalgia marketing actually sells to both generations in one go. The only real problem with it that I can think of is that it can be a slippery slope if the advertisers don't do the old product justice.

Take, for instance, video games. Video games that have been around for a while have desperately loyal fanbases that would do pretty much anything to get their favorite games back- I should know, I've been there. So if you consider games like Pokémon, Sonic the Hedgehog, Crash Bandicoot, or Banjo Kazooie, every time they revamp their games to bring it into the new generation of video games, their old supporters follow. If we look at Banjo Kazooie, we can see the strategy being used blatantly in their advertisements for the new generation. The old games were great, filled with adventure and good game design, and when the time came to bring back the Banjo, the designers knew to feed off of the old games' success.

The commercial stirs up all kinds of emotions for faithful fans, and caused a lot of buzz and excitement for the new game to come out. However, the new game was literally aimed to "broaden the demographic," and broke the fourth wall in the game in order to tell the audience. The thing is, even though the final product was hardly like the original and strayed from the idea given to the fans in the preview, that trailer did get people excited for the return of Banjo. The nostalgia kicked in and devoted fans bought the game left and right, but most of the were disappointed by the results.

Harley Brand Community

Brand communities are the ultimate test of loyalty for fans, but they aren't suited to every brand. A community such as the Harley Davidson posse works because Harley Davidson has always advertised itself not just as a motorcycle company, but a way of life. It establishes itself solidly in the lifestyle of rebellion and carefree thinking, which Harley riders can all connect with. Brands like Coach could never hope to achieve that kind of connection with their buyers because that's all they are- buyers. The people who wear Coach don't eat sleep and breathe it, it isn't a lifestyle that they fit into. Sure, the Coach brand might be associated with wealth and status, but that doesn't mean they parade around loudly with the message "I am high class" in the way harley riders zoom around saying "I'm a free spirit".

The Harley-Davidson brand community has the annual Posse Ride which brings the fans together. Every person who participates in the posse ride has a minimum of 1 thing in common (ownership of a harley), and through that, it can be assumed that they probably have more in common on a deeper level because Harley identifies with the characteristics of its consumers, not their wealth. The posse ride is all about the fans showing off the brand rather than the brand showing off the brand. It's about pride in being an individual that's a part of something, and that's what makes it so appealing. Other brands can only dream of reaching this level of connection with their consumers.

Although I think Harley does an unmatchable job of consumer inclusion, they could potentially do more. Not every Harley rider can make it to the posse ride, so Harley could turn the experience into something of a video log- recording snippets of the main events at each pit stop, highlighting the individual people and their stories which would make the experience longer lasting and even more about the people who ride the Harleys than the Harleys themselves. What people will buy into even above good products are good people behind the products.

Badvertising

Coke Zero- which I have to admit I am a fan of- used a campaign in Australia that differed from the campaigns elsewhere by making it more about the everyday person trying to live a carefree lifestyle. Now, the idea behind the campaign is a solid one: consumers respond well to campaigns that are tailored personally to them, but Coke's method was something of a misstep in my book. The Australia campaign was based solely on deception- fooling the average person into thinking that other average people were being positively backed up by Coke Zero, which in reality turned out to be just flat out lies. Coke faked the situation, and in North America or Europe, I doubt the campaign would be received well. Sure, it worked in Australia because, let's face it, there's a lot of backwards thinking in their advertising, but blatant deception doesn't sit well with North America and Europe (at least in advertising).

Whereas I understand where Coke Zero is coming from- word of mouth via the blogosphere and the general public is always the best way for publicity to travel fast- but I think that they were slightly unethical to make the hubbub themselves. The fuel of the advertising industry runs on word of mouth, and it's up to the agencies to make a good enough campaign that people do spread the word. If advertising agencies and brands resort to creating their own synthetic "word of mouth", what's even the point? It seems to me as if their rendering their own jobs obsolete.

Other companies have had their fair share of blunders, but one that stands out to me is Burger King, who has had so many bad marketing campaigns since 2008 we can almost feel bad for them. A notable strategy they've used on multiple occasions (bafflingly enough) was the "king" campaign in which they used their "mascot" as the poster boy for their products, which turned out to be bad decision upon bad decision. The "king" was included in a number of commercials run in bad taste such as "wake up with the king" or more notoriously, "Square Butts," which was a music video involving the king, spongebob squarepants, and butts set to Sir Mix-A-Lot's "Big Butts." It only takes a second to be horrified by the whole ordeal.

Sales were down roughly 6% in 2011's first quarter because of the negative press Burger King was getting, and even those who weren't offended by their variety of advertisements were generally creeped out by the mascot. The "king" campaign was finally put to rest in August of 2011, and we can all be grateful for it.

General Redundancy

As time progresses, students are weaseled into spending more and more years in school- years that they could be spending starting careers and earning money to secure a comfortable future. When you look at the current system, our college age students are spending a minimum of two years completing general education, which are essentially repeats of high school classes. Why delegate extra years and extra money into learning the same subjects twice when we can focus our time more efficiently?

Actual photo of student bound by general education preparing to explode. Protect your families from combustion. Note how he is studying from phonebooks: how does that make any sense? WHAT HAS OUR COUNTRY COME TO?

I propose that we change the focus of our current school system. High school courses should function more like the general education courses required of college students- a general basis on which to decide general interests. College should be spent broadening our horizons to discover more specific career paths within general subjects of our choosing, not repeating courses that we have already determined our level of interest in. Students should be able to experiment with more career oriented courses in that first year or so when they would normally have taken general education courses.

Make college a place for American students to pursue their goals and leave the GEs to high school.

The Overzealous Use of Race in Advertising Today

Race has always been something of a hot button topic in society perpetuated by its representation in media. The overzealous use of race, whether in a good or bad light, has been prevalent for essentially all of America's history. We can briefly look back on one of America's fondest memories which started off our, dare I say, colorful past with racism- slavery. There it was, tainting our relations with any non-white person who happens upon our path for years to come. Even after slavery was abolished, we still had folks of separate races in positions of weakness as servants and maids.

An article on NBC news' website explains that "minorities were either invisible in mainstream media, or handed negative roles that generally had them in a subservient position" (source). It's no wonder that the stereotypes lasted as long as they did because advertising never could seem to let go of such easily recognizable symbols. Such demeaning ads towards other races continued far into the 20th century, and then other races finally started fighting back. Those people in the past caused riots and general hubbub about racial equality so that people in the future wouldn't have to; so that those of us living today could look around and not give a single hoot about the color of anyone's skin because it's not important. Things like race shouldn't be a big deal anymore, but with the old stereotypes hanging over our heads like the sun in a desert, the misrepresentation of race still weighs heavily on our society.

The good news is that the world is a much wiser place nowadays thanks to those race riots, however, advertisements still often rely on race; maybe not in the same way that they used to, but they do. Because the world is so conscious of the moves we make regarding race, a lot of companies have decided to make race the central focus of their ads. You can find countless examples of advertisements that feature a systematic line-up of every race you can think of just for the sake of looking progressive.

The same NBC article from before worded it nicely, saying, "ads like these are part of a subtle, yet increasingly visible strategy that marketers refer to as 'visual diversity' — commercials that enable advertisers to connect with wider audiences while conveying a message that corporate America is not just "in touch," racially speaking, but inclusive." 

Now, this isn't to say that I'm not appreciative of the general idea being presented- I'm all for the representation of diversity in mainstream society- but something about this kind of advertising ripples my harmonious bells. More than anything, they feel more like haphazard justification of their products than promoting the normalization of race into society. It's one thing to be proud of your heritage and another thing completely to say that you stand out from society because of your heritage. That misses the point altogether; we should strive to incorporate race like it's no big deal and make use of it in an ad where you don't need to pay attention to the race of the people because it's not the focus of the ad. I suppose advertising is still just stuck in the transition period, and it is certainly moving forward, but I look forward to the day when I can see an ad without noticing the race of the people in it.