This blog is about commercial jingles, I at this very moment, have the old gold fish jingle stuck in my head "The snack that smiles back, Goldfish!". There are certainly worse songs or jingles that could be stuck in my head, but I haven't actually heard this jingle in years, but I heard it hummed once today and now I can't get it out of my head. Is it because I love goldfish? Or because I am brainwashed to love goldfish? Or did whoever create the advertising tool of jingles, come up with the ultimate advertising tool?
PS sorry if you can't stop singing "the snack that smiles back, Goldfish!"
It's better than the Oscar Myer Weiner song..
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Friday, February 22, 2013
The Ocho (B)
In response to Heather's Blog about Sports Illustrated and Target Swimsuit Ads:
I have no problem with nontraditional gender specified advertisements in a magazine I read. I don't see why this would be a problem in the first place. It's not like I have to go through the 6 pages of swimsuits, I can just simply skip over the advertisement that matters nothing to me and continue on with my reading. If anything I could see this benefiting the company that is advertising. A guy could be reading his SI see the swimsuits, check them out, see one he thinks is "sexy" and in turn tell his girlfriend/wife or whatever about it, and she in turn looks, likes it, and goes to buy one.
What if the shoe were on the other foot? What if there was advertisements geared toward males in a copy of Cosmo? How would women feel about that?
I have no problem with nontraditional gender specified advertisements in a magazine I read. I don't see why this would be a problem in the first place. It's not like I have to go through the 6 pages of swimsuits, I can just simply skip over the advertisement that matters nothing to me and continue on with my reading. If anything I could see this benefiting the company that is advertising. A guy could be reading his SI see the swimsuits, check them out, see one he thinks is "sexy" and in turn tell his girlfriend/wife or whatever about it, and she in turn looks, likes it, and goes to buy one.
What if the shoe were on the other foot? What if there was advertisements geared toward males in a copy of Cosmo? How would women feel about that?
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Blog lucky number 7 (A)
FanFueled is a collaborative marketing platform that allows for companies to enlist everyday consumers to advertise for their company, using incentives from clothing to tickets. I was one of FanFueled's lackeys two years ago in an attempt to win tickets to Camp Bisco X. Once a week I would log on and click some buttons that would in turn spam my facebook and twitter account with links to Camp Bisco's site. As well as individually inviting my friends to join the page. When people clicked the links I got additional points. I partook in this for 5 months leading up to the actual festival in July. By which point i had 1100 points, enough for a simple screen-printed sweatshirt or lesser prize. Now fast forward to present day, Camp Bisco is back on fanfueled for their upcoming summer festival. However the layout has changed and the point system is completely different. As someone who was an avid FanFueled participant I now look at the site and feel it is nearly impossible to win/earn any prize worthy of spamming my friends.
My question to you is do you think it is fair for a company to take use people for advertising purposes when there is a very small chance they end up with anything to show for it?
My question to you is do you think it is fair for a company to take use people for advertising purposes when there is a very small chance they end up with anything to show for it?
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Blog 6 (B) Response to Haley Bannon
Haley asked the question "Do you think that corporate responsibility
should extend to the community where the outsourced work is?"
I think that corporate responsibility extends to all stake holders in a company. I do not mean stake holder in the direct sense of money invested into a company. I mean it in the sense of people who will be affected by an aspect of the company, people who work for the company, people in the companies community, people at other companies who make parts for the first company, these are all people who can be effected by the companies actions.
It becomes the corporations responsibility to take care of these stake holders, because without them happy or satisfied, they can join together and form a coalition or action group to fight the corporation's ways which will be bad for business. Regardless of whether the stakeholders are stateside or in a different country, the corporation should still be responsible for its actions.
Do you think that it is responsible for a corporation to outsource the work in the first place?
I think that corporate responsibility extends to all stake holders in a company. I do not mean stake holder in the direct sense of money invested into a company. I mean it in the sense of people who will be affected by an aspect of the company, people who work for the company, people in the companies community, people at other companies who make parts for the first company, these are all people who can be effected by the companies actions.
It becomes the corporations responsibility to take care of these stake holders, because without them happy or satisfied, they can join together and form a coalition or action group to fight the corporation's ways which will be bad for business. Regardless of whether the stakeholders are stateside or in a different country, the corporation should still be responsible for its actions.
Do you think that it is responsible for a corporation to outsource the work in the first place?
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
2.12.13 blog V (A)
"Do you believe self regulation is more or less effective than governmental regulatory agencies? Why?"
Governmental Regulatory Agencies, such as the FDA, Interstate Commerce Commission, and the SEC, have been created over the years in order to create and maintain a fair business environment and to help protect consumers. Before these agencies were created it was solely up to the business to regulate and maintain their business and ensure they were providing a safe product for their consumers.
However, there are problems with both; with self regulation, it is up to the business and the business alone to regulate it's actions, in a perfect world they would run their business honestly and fairly, unfortunately that is not the case. One business may be self regulated and be an upstanding business in the community. While another business is selling the same product, however it is made using excess amounts of lead. Without a regulatory agency both business will remain open while one harms its customers and the other may have business harmed because people lump the similar stores into the same category.
With regulatory agencies, it creates a fair playing field among business, but it also allows for a safer product market for the consumer. It can also allow for more eco-friendly businesses because they have to adhere to the agencies standards. A downfall to the agencies is sometimes they are behind the ball on what is necessary for their standards. With self regulation, a business can hear about a way to provide a safer product, and figure out a way to implement it into their business right away. Some regulations can also be outdated and harm the way that a company is doing their business. They might not be doing anything wrong, but if it goes against the agency's standards it will still be stopped.
Self regulation allows for innovative thinking for a better business and better product, but the government agencies create standards for a whole industry preventing individuals from doing something harmful. There certainly can be one without the other, but with both self regulation and government agencies, it creates an environment where there are safe standards and requirements, while allowing businesses to work beyond those standards and requirements to be more regulated and even more advanced than just the government agency and its regulations.
Final Thoughts; Self regulation can be more effective than governmental regulation agencies, but more often than not, a government agency will help to regulate a business in a more positive way than just self regulation.
Do you think government agencies are always thinking about what is best for the consumers? Or is there something or someone else at the top of their priority list?
Governmental Regulatory Agencies, such as the FDA, Interstate Commerce Commission, and the SEC, have been created over the years in order to create and maintain a fair business environment and to help protect consumers. Before these agencies were created it was solely up to the business to regulate and maintain their business and ensure they were providing a safe product for their consumers.
However, there are problems with both; with self regulation, it is up to the business and the business alone to regulate it's actions, in a perfect world they would run their business honestly and fairly, unfortunately that is not the case. One business may be self regulated and be an upstanding business in the community. While another business is selling the same product, however it is made using excess amounts of lead. Without a regulatory agency both business will remain open while one harms its customers and the other may have business harmed because people lump the similar stores into the same category.
With regulatory agencies, it creates a fair playing field among business, but it also allows for a safer product market for the consumer. It can also allow for more eco-friendly businesses because they have to adhere to the agencies standards. A downfall to the agencies is sometimes they are behind the ball on what is necessary for their standards. With self regulation, a business can hear about a way to provide a safer product, and figure out a way to implement it into their business right away. Some regulations can also be outdated and harm the way that a company is doing their business. They might not be doing anything wrong, but if it goes against the agency's standards it will still be stopped.
Self regulation allows for innovative thinking for a better business and better product, but the government agencies create standards for a whole industry preventing individuals from doing something harmful. There certainly can be one without the other, but with both self regulation and government agencies, it creates an environment where there are safe standards and requirements, while allowing businesses to work beyond those standards and requirements to be more regulated and even more advanced than just the government agency and its regulations.
Final Thoughts; Self regulation can be more effective than governmental regulation agencies, but more often than not, a government agency will help to regulate a business in a more positive way than just self regulation.
Do you think government agencies are always thinking about what is best for the consumers? Or is there something or someone else at the top of their priority list?
Monday, February 11, 2013
2.11.13 - The Fourth (B)
In response to Ariana Barone's blog and question;
"Do you think social media is still worth it even though it does not reach everyone?"
I think that in today's day and age where technology reaches almost all aspects of our lives, advertising through social media is almost a necessity. It allows for a company to advertise its business, in most cases, for free. They can easily create a facebook page and a twitter account that they in turn manage and post as they feel necessary to allow people, who already like the store or they wouldn't be linked to their accounts, to know that there is a certain deal, bargain, sale, or new merchandise, available right that instant in their store.
By having a social media page, where customers "like" the page and subscribe to the updates, it allows the customer to feel a personable connection to the store, they feel as though they are getting sales updates before anyone else and will in turn, go to that store for the new deal that they just found out about. It makes the customer feel that much more special and that much more connected to the business.
The social media allows for the people who like the store to stay in formed, but it also allows for the fans to share their favorite business and the sales by "retweeting" or "sharing" a business post. This allows for a theoretical sharing to "everyone". One or two people share to their 500+ friends then one or two more share to their friends and it creates a large network of shared data, all through one simple post by a business.
I think social media is still worth it, and will be worth it as long as it remains prevalent in our society, and business still have the ability to control it themselves.
Do you think social media advertising will someday be more popular than television or print ads?
"Do you think social media is still worth it even though it does not reach everyone?"
I think that in today's day and age where technology reaches almost all aspects of our lives, advertising through social media is almost a necessity. It allows for a company to advertise its business, in most cases, for free. They can easily create a facebook page and a twitter account that they in turn manage and post as they feel necessary to allow people, who already like the store or they wouldn't be linked to their accounts, to know that there is a certain deal, bargain, sale, or new merchandise, available right that instant in their store.
By having a social media page, where customers "like" the page and subscribe to the updates, it allows the customer to feel a personable connection to the store, they feel as though they are getting sales updates before anyone else and will in turn, go to that store for the new deal that they just found out about. It makes the customer feel that much more special and that much more connected to the business.
The social media allows for the people who like the store to stay in formed, but it also allows for the fans to share their favorite business and the sales by "retweeting" or "sharing" a business post. This allows for a theoretical sharing to "everyone". One or two people share to their 500+ friends then one or two more share to their friends and it creates a large network of shared data, all through one simple post by a business.
I think social media is still worth it, and will be worth it as long as it remains prevalent in our society, and business still have the ability to control it themselves.
Do you think social media advertising will someday be more popular than television or print ads?
Monday, February 4, 2013
2.4.13 Blog Three (A)
Yesterday was one of the biggest marketing days of the year, Super Bowl Sunday. A day where companies spend around four-million dollars for a 30 second TV advertisement that in turn was viewed by an estimated audience of 55 million Americans. When you think about how many people are seeing the advertisement, and hopefully, in turn, go and by or use that product, four-million dollars doesn't seem like such a big deal from the business aspect of it. With ads ranging from cars, to movies, to products, it's easy to get lost in the humor of the tv-spot and forget that you are watching an advertisement that is trying bring business to their company. My biggest problem with Super Bowl Sunday advertisements is the majority of the time, they don't tell you about the product, they show you an attractive person or flashy object, and use them to convince you that their product/company is a good whole-hearted company that deserves your money, just as much as you deserve their product. I would be much more likely to purchase a product I saw in an advertisement if I knew about the product and maybe a little bit about the company, rather than Bar Refaeli kissing a teenager for a GoDaddy commercial. For those who don't know GoDaddy is a domain hosting site where you pay to have a website hosted there. See a connection between Bar and an Internet Hosting Site? Neither do I. I think it's silly to create an advertisement for that price, that doesn't give the viewer a real idea about the product being displayed.
Do you think it is worth it for a company such as GoDaddy to spend 4million dollars on a 30 second spot, where 20 seconds of it is the sound of kissing?
Do you think it is worth it for a company such as GoDaddy to spend 4million dollars on a 30 second spot, where 20 seconds of it is the sound of kissing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)