Here’s a very expensive television commercial, very “creative,” interesting to look at.
Undoubtedly it will win some awards, which is good for the ad agency that produced it because that will attract more business to that agency.
Only one problem….
“If machines can’t eat it, machines shouldn’t make it.”
Why not?
Is that really a criterion by which you decide whether to eat a chicken sandwich — whether it was breaded by a machine or by a human hand?
They could just as well say, “If machines can’t drive it, machines shouldn’t make it.”
Or, “If machines can’t drink it, machines shouldn’t make it.”
The entire focus of this attention getting, visually interesting campaign is completely unrelated to any real reason that someone should choose a Carl’s Jr. chicken fillet sandwich over that of any competitor.
Yeah, it’ll win awards. Ad agencies fall all over themselves praising their own work for being “creative.”
But it’s very unlikely that seeing the sandwich smash into the robot’s mouth made you want to eat a Carl’s Jr. chicken fillet sandwich.
In addition to being a source of entertainment or information or companionship, a radio station is a community.
If lots of people want to be identified as members of your community, that’s a good thing for your station.
Not everyone who ever listens to your radio station, however, feels like a member of your community.
Even being a regular, faithful listener isn’t necessarily enough to make someone a member of your community.
In personality testing — for example, the long-established MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) — researchers long have been aware of the danger of a test taker’s results being skewed by the individual’s desire not to “look bad” to…well, to the computer that scores the results.
For example, one of the “yes/no” questions is, “At times I feel like smashing things.”
Perhaps that’s true for the person taking the test, but that person doesn’t want to be seen as having violent tendencies. So the test subject deliberately misreports his feelings, urges or behaviors.
That testing trap is called “Social Desirability.” That person doesn’t want to be identified with the group of people labelled “violent tendencies,” so he disavows any association with “those people.”
So what?
Originally I planned to play a radio commercial for you to point out that, if I guess correctly, violates Federal Trade Commission regulations.
My “guess” — and I’m willing to back it up with a large wager — is that “Jane” isn’t real. It’s someone who is being paid to read a commercial script, not someone who lost 25 pounds in four weeks as a result of patronizing the “medical spa.”
If I’m right, then Millennium Medical Spa had better hope their advertising doesn’t come to the attention of the FTC.
If Jane is a real patient success story, then it’s simply a poor commercial. Making reality sound fake really isn’t a smart strategy.
But as the radio commercial came to an end, another began. And my jaw dropped.
Give it a listen. How many people do you know who gladly would want to be identified as a member of this music radio station’s apparent community?
If that’s the image of that radio station’s community, it’s possible that “Social Desirability” will discourage some people to “forget” that they listen to that station.
That wouldn’t do much for the station’s word of mouth.
And if the station is in a rated market that relies on self-report rather than on Portable People Meters, it wouldn’t help the radio station’s ratings, etc.
(Lest anyone misunderstand: I’m not suggesting those advertisers should be banned from the station. But playing them back-to-back cheats those two advertisers and damages the radio station.)
As a program director, I would wince whenever it would play on my radio station.
It won’t ever win an award.
It’s not “creative.”
You will hate it.
None of which matters to the advertiser.
Why This Radio Commercial Is Good
It immediately identifies the targeted listener.
It gives real-life examples of the kinds of pain their target audience suffers.
It communicates clearly.
It gives a single Call To Action.
It doesn’t talk about the advertiser. It talks about the consumer’s problem. (The advertiser isn’t even identified until 60% of the spot has passed.)
How This Radio Commercial Could Be Better
It should give people a specific reason to call:
“Call now for a free assessment of your financial situation….”
“Call now for a free consultation with a Tax Relief Helpline specialist.”
“Time is not on your side” should be stronger. Do they mean, “The longer you delay taking action, the more desperate your financial situation becomes”?
If so, which of those two sounds stronger to you?
“This the perfect time to build a plan that could get your life back on track.” — Another lazy sentence. Now is the perfect time? Better than yesterday or last week? If they were to use some version of the line I suggested above, that weak sentence could be eliminated entirely.
“Call now…from anywhere in the U.S.”
Big mistake. For professional services, consumers prefer to deal with local or regional businesses.
That line tells the listener, “The Tax Relief Hotline isn’t local. We’re not in any way part of your community.”
Odds are that when you call their toll free number, you’re routed to a local associate or franchisee. But there’s no way for the listener to know that, and saying “from anywhere in the U.S.” destroys any chance of a “local” feeling.
Still, overall that’s a good commercial and I’m quite willing to predict it’s generating a positive R.O.I. for the advertiser.
Even though everyone who comments on this blog probably will focus on how much they hate it.
The latest issue of my Radio Programming Letter includes an audio example of what radio personalities often (but never should) do; a free radio station promotion that takes advantage of “social media” without requiring any technical wizardry; and a radio feature utilizing the creativity of your listeners.
This posting is for subscribers to add their own comments….
Here’s a very expensive television commercial, very “creative,” interesting to look at.
