Archive for March, 2010

31
Mar

Ronald McDonald gives his darkest performance yet in Logorama

Playing against type, Ronald McDonald is brilliant as the deranged psychopath in Logorama, a demented romp through a world of logos and icons.

The Michelin Man is nuanced and convincing as an undercover cop with an attitude. However, the Jolly Green Giant’s sizable talents are underutilized in the role of zookeeper.

What? You missed this flick? Logorama was screened at both Cannes and the Sundance Film Festival, and recently won an Oscar as best animated short film.

(Watch it below. It’s 16 minutes long. The film is not yet MPAA-rated, but be aware it contains profanity and some violence.)

Is the film a cynical commentary on commercialization and globalization? Or just a mischievous frolic in Brand Land?

Writer and director Ludovic Houplain says, “It’s fun to twist (brands’) meaning and association and see how people react.”

25
Mar

Miller Lite’s target: Men who can’t commit

It’s just a joke. I get it. But help me with this one.

  • Does Miller Lite’s research indicate its best customers are men who can’t commit?
  • Are they concerned about turning off female customers?
  • Is the reason these men can’t commit to women because they can only commit to drinking?
  • Or, as some have suggested, are the women in these spots just too needy?

Regardless, Miller Lite is committed to its anti-love campaign.

24
Mar

Support your local brands

In a shop near where I work, I picked up a flyer on The 3/50 Project, a grassroots initiative supporting locally owned businesses. The concept was hatched in the depth of the recession, when Cinda Baxter wrote a blog post titled “Save the economy three stores at a time.”

Her suggestion: pick three independents and spend $50 per month in each.

A movement was born. National media picked up the story. A good idea went viral.

The 3/50 Project claims that for every $100 spent in locally owned independent stores, $68 returns to the community through taxes, payroll, and other expenditures — more than generated by national chains or online purchases.

The 3/50 site offers qualifying independents free 3/50 art for flyers, window clings, countertop signs, print ads, website badges, and more.

Who qualifies as an independent? “Someone who sleeps little, eats on the run, balances their checkbook over the breakfast table, combs through order forms in bed at night, and is capable of sorting invoices, signing paychecks, fielding questions, responding to emails, and faxing confirmations while simultaneously explaining to a new employee how to check in UPS.” (Here are the official requirements.)

Picking three independents to support was tougher than I thought. In the spirit of the movement, I looked for locals in categories where I have chain options. But $50 a month? As much as I like coffee, I can’t spend that much in a coffee shop. So I settled on these three:

  • Figlio, a restaurant near where I live
  • Carnardo Wine & Cheese
  • FrontRunner, a running store

What are your picks?

16
Mar

“9 criteria for brand essence” deck now available

The most popular post at BrandSTOKE to date is “9 Criteria for Brand Essence.” Now I have combined it with some Branding 101 definitions, a few examples, and additional thinking in the accompanying SlideShare presentation.

It’s intended to provide a basic understanding of brands and branding for most business professionals. (Branding experts may want to skip it.) I hope you find it useful.

15
Mar

If rockers named new products …

istock_000003982760xsmallI heard a concert promotion on the radio for the indie-rock band, We Were Promised Jetpacks, and realized we have the wrong people in charge of naming brands.

If rock musicians named new products, we would be spared forgettable and hard-to-pronounce monikers like Accenture and Eukanuba.

Instead, we would be driving Blue Oyster Cult cars and drinking Toad The Wet Sprocket beer. We’d bank at They Might Be Giants and buy insurance from Built To Spill. We’d enjoy dinner at The Flaming Lips.

Here’s a representative list of poor brand-name choices:

  • Bing
  • iSnack 2.0,an Australian cheese spread
  • Syfy
  • VIA, Starbucks’ instant coffee
  • Depends
  • Ruth’s Chris Steak House
  • Acloché
  • CompUSA
  • Vonage
  • Comerica
  • iPad
  • Ayds
  • Cranergy
  • DHL
  • Touareg
  • Noxzema
  • Comerica
  • Anextec
  • Cialis
  • GEICO,
  • Xfinity
  • Xe, formerly Blackwater
  • Altria, formerly Philip Morris
  • Airtran
  • Tiguan

Compare the above with this list of creative and memorable rock band names:

  • Psychedelic Furs
  • Dinosaur Jr.
  • Violent Femmes
  • Velvet Underground
  • Meat Puppets
  • Romeo Void
  • Guided By Voices
  • Queens Of The Stone Age
  • Camper Van Beethoven
  • Fine Young Cannibals
  • Moby Grape
  • Country Joe And The Fish
  • TV On The Radio
  • Porno For Pyros
  • Foghat
  • Spandau Ballet
  • Strawberry Alarm Clock
  • Captain Beefheart
  • Faith No More
  • Echo And The Bunnymen
  • Crowded House
  • Arcade Fire
  • Death Cab For Cutie
  • Daft Punk
  • Pink Floyd
  • Pearl Jam
  • Radiohead
  • Hot Tuna

Now tell me. Which set captures your attention?

08
Mar

Are running shoes a sham?

istock_000008706988xsmallIf you spend in the neighborhood of $100 per pair of running shoes like I do, you may find the following statement by Dr. Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at Harvard University, disconcerting:

“A lot of foot and knee injuries that are currently plaguing us are actually caused by people running with shoes that actually make our feet weak, cause us to over-pronate, give us knee problems,” says Lieberman in Born To Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen, a book by Christopher McDougall.

“Until 1972, when the modern athletic shoe was invented by Nike, people ran in very thin-soled shoes, had strong feet, and had much lower incidence of knee injuries.”

Lieberman’s study and McDougall’s book are fueling a debate within running circles (and shoe companies). Are running shoes not only not helping us, but actually hurting us? Is running barefoot safer?

“We were born to run, but maybe not with shoes on,” says The Boston Globe. “New research … shows that people who run barefoot or with minimal shoes — as people have done for millions of years — often land on their feet in a way that avoids a jarring impact. That’s very different from most shoe-clad runners, who crash down on their heels with every bound.”

Or as Popular Mechanics asks, “Could shoes — and shoe companies — be part of a $25 billion snake oil industry, covering hundreds of thousands of perfectly able bare feet?”

Lieberman explains on his study’s web site that “runners who forefoot or midfoot strike do not need shoes with elevated cushioned heels to cope with these sudden, high transient forces that occur when you land on the ground.”

McDougall isn’t quite so gentle. One full chapter of his book is an indictment of Nike and other running shoe manufacturers that he believes know their shoes are causing injury and continue to sell them anyway.

At least one shoe company, New Balance, addresses the issue head on: “After hundreds of years of walking with shoes on, is it time we relearn? There’s a movement going on that challenges the very foundation of sneaker wearers (not to mention sneaker companies) everywhere, around running barefoot. This broad grouping of perspectives includes some runners who are finding they prefer to run exclusively barefoot, some who prefer to run with minimally cushioned shoes, and others who like to vary their runs between shod, minimally shod, and shoeless.”

Nike, the inventor of the modern high-tech, highly engineered running shoe, doesn’t miss a trick. Or a marketing niche. It has introduced a new shoe, Nike Free, that for all the world looks like the flat-soled Keds, PF Flyers, and Chuck Taylor All Stars I wore as a kid. The Nike Free slogan? “Run Supernatural.” Back to the future, I guess.

In his book, McDougall builds the case that humans are built — not to run fast — but to run long. He tracks down and studies the mythical Tarahumara Indians who run for extreme distances in lightweight sandals in the remote and deadly Copper Canyons of Mexico.

And he’s a convert. Since running in Vibram FiveFingers, a neoprene sock-like foot covering, he’s seen his running injuries disappear.

Though I’m not quite ready to hit the pavement barefoot, especially in the winter, the idea of lacing up the old Chucks from high school is kind of appealing. As I remember, I was faster back then.

How about you?





Subscribe to the RSS feed

Archives


“9 Criteria for Brand Essence” Deck

The 9 Criteria for Brand Essence



twitter grader

Add to Technorati Favorites
Featured in Alltop

Invesp landing page optimization
Chris Brogan says I'm a Rockstar!

Top 100 Blogs Award
Brand Management featured writer