You must participate

Even though I'm a writer, I have a thing for Web 2.0. Social networks, blogs, SMS, widgets, that sort of thing. I like them because they're marketing tools that "don't just show life to people, but make them live."

To invoke Guy Debord in an essay on marketing tactics is to dare the wrath of a hundred thousand college sophomores. Situationist International wasn't known for purchasing Nikes. But maybe it should have been. After all, "Nike killed the three martini lunch." (And who am I quoting there? Fenske?) Without a raft of ads encouraging us to "just do it," those who can take lunches would probably spend them hitting the bar instead of the barbell.

Nike got rich using traditional media to promote an active lifestyle. But everything top-down advertising does, Web 2.0 does better. It lets people connect based on affinity instead of proximity. It lets local actions take place on an international scale. It gives the people access to the powerful. Perhaps best of all, it tests the concept of juristic personhood by daring brands to live up to their legal status.

And for all the good it does, Web 2.0 only has two real downfalls. It immortalizes everyday language, holding it to an impossibly lofty standard. And it encourages content creation so much that it has confused shamelessness and celebrity. (I wrote a despondent essay on the latter issue; someday I may even post it.)

I think most marketing people buy in to the idea that Web 2.0 is an opportunity for brands to engage with consumers. But how many understand the flipside? Web 2.0 is an obligation. Because consumers now expect brands to make life better. And so Burger King creates a game and Target builds a Facebook group and Adidas shoots a practice film and ESPN makes a widget.

See what I'm getting at? Traditional advertising asks consumers to pay a premium for a product based on brand equity. Web 2.0 asks consumers to pay a premium for a product based on brand utility.

Web 2.0 marketing is perhaps something Debord would have welcomed, if he could have forgiven the spectacle of it all. Because while a brand can't make you live, it can now give you tools and opportunities. That's something that a print ad simply can't provide.

Crossposted on Karsh Connect.

What's a concept?

On September 3, I left this comment on The Denver Egotist about the definition of the word "concept."

I think the problem is the floating definition of the word "concept." In ad school, they teach you one definition, which revolves around the idea that the consumer must bring a bit of himself to the work in order to understand it. But I've heard people use the word concept as a synonym for "theme." And as a synonym for "cool to look at..." [T]he word concept is like the word edgy - so overused it borders on meaningless.

I can't remember who first explained the word concept to me. It was probably one of my teachers at The Creative Circus. But I've always found the following explanation interesting.

Consider the three arcs to the right. In each, the "A" represents the product and the "B" represents the ad.

In the top arc, the product and the ad are right up next to each other. There's no room for the consumer to have fun with the ad, to feel a connection to it. The headline is probably something like, "Today, you can buy this chair for $99." And the visual is probably a chair. This is not a concept.

In the middle arc, the product and the ad are nowhere near each other. Nobody could make sense of this ad. The headline probably says, "Attila the Hun loves you." And the visual is probably a boat, upon which sits a hippo. This is not a concept.

But the final arc is. The product and the ad aren't smothering each other, but they're close enough to make the consumer feel the shock of recognition and a bond with the brand that transcends any short-term product offering.

Of course even that labored and lengthy definition can't possibly explain something as good as this:

Marketing 2007, meet Denver 2001

Ad Age tells us how a viral spot ruled Cannes:

The film winner at the Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival was Dove's "Evolution" from Ogilvy, Toronto, a 60-plus-second spot that barely qualified for the category. Famous for going viral on the web and garnering more impressions than a Super Bowl ad, it made the cut because someone at one point had the foresight to run it once on TV.

Meanwhile Fast Company reports on Martin's modernization:

The story of how the Martin Agency got its mojo back is not one of some transformational epiphany or monumental business decision. It is a tale of adaptive success, the power of chipping away at a problem until a razor-sharp idea emerges. It's about letting go of industry habit and doing what works now.

And the New Denver Ad Club's 2007 show has been completely restructured to allow judges to rate ideas virtually, without regard to media. (That's right, Ad Age, we're actually doing it.)

Is this some sort of epic change? I don't know. It's how agencies in Denver have been thinking for years. We've always done guerrilla because our clients have never had the budgets to shoot six-figure spots. We've always been media neutral because in Denver a team doesn't get to concept spots and microsites unless it's willing to work on tradeshow booths and direct mail, too.

Denver has the chance to put itself on the map. Partially because of Crispin. And partially because we're good at what the world wants now.

AdWeek on Colorado Farm Bureau Insurance

AdWeek on our new campaign for Colorado Farm Bureau Insurance:

In polite society, we're no longer allowed to say anything bad about nature. Even when a natural disaster strikes, we're sure to be told that it's really the fault of human activity. Nature itself can do no wrong. At any rate, that's the modern orthodoxy. It may not be fully shared, though, by someone whose home has just sustained thousands of dollars worth of damage due to an ice storm. This campaign for an insurance company does a deft job of acknowledging the nature-is-blameless mind-set while addressing the reader's practical concerns.

It's nice to get recognition and awards and stuff. But in a way, it's even nicer just to be understood.

Me, selling the new Denver ad club

Denver ADDYs

My agency, Thomas Taber & Drazen, did well at the Denver ADDYs. Twenty-two ADDYs, seven of them gold. We won awards for many of our clients, including Einstein Bros. Bagels and Clarity Media. A strong showing, even given the absence of Pure, TDA, Sukle and Factory.