Send this issue of The Lowbrow Lowdown to a friend!

2.4.05
Power to the Sheeple
-- OR --
Futurist Folly
By now you've probably heard about the quasi-Volkswagen ad that's got every blogger's lederhosen in a bunch. Some spout off about VW's reactionary lawsuit against the spot's creators. Others contend it evinces some new consumer-empowering paradigm in which Joe Schmo is now in control of advertiser brands, and advertisers had better just get used to it or go the way of the recording industry.

Well, they're all missing the black forest for the trees.

To make it brief, a couple of smart-alecky British ad agency twits created a highly-controversial spot for self-promotional purposes for the VW Polo that leaked its way onto the unwieldy Web. Big surprise: they claim they "had not intended for it to be distributed," according to a 1/31 CNet News.com story. The ad depicts a middle-eastern looking dude wearing one of those stereotypical black and white checked scarves getting into a Polo parked alongside an outdoor café patronized by mammas and babies and other innocent bystanders. Of course he detonates a bomb, but its explosion is contained within the vehicle, because, as the ad concludes, this little turd of a car is "Small but tough." (Check out the ad on Snopes.com.)

Although VW filed a lawsuit against the film's creators even before they revealed themselves, the company has dropped the suit as reported in a 2/4 Law.com article. The car maker claims to have nothing to do with the phony ad and condemns it. This seems plausible since the ad was most likely unleashed as a PR ploy by its masterminds.

The story itself is insignificant. It's the conversation that's been launched by it that is of far broader relevance to us all. The fact is that advertisers are reluctantly realizing that their precious brands are no longer within their tight-fisted control, but in the hands of the forum-posting, blogging, media-producing consumer. I recently interviewed several agency creative directors for the cover story of the March issue of OMMA, an ad industry trade pub. Almost all of the ten or so with whom I spoke cited the consumer-commanded brand phenomenon as a trend that will proceed, and one that will force advertisers to surrender control to consumers.

The so-called media and marketing futurists call it a revolutionary power-shift. "The consumer has control now!" they rave. "You stick-in-the-mud, old-media advertisers are doomed! You'd better get with the program or your brands will be left in the cold like so much New Coke on ice! Finally, the promise of the Internet and digital media is here! The little people are taking back media once and for all!" Insert spooky maniacal laugh here.

It's too bad the almighty futurists can't see past the curve in the road. They're so giddy over the prospect of consumers harnessing the brand reins, they don't see what a spectacular turn of events this is for the advertisers. Meanwhile, the ad world is crouched in fetal position, boo-hooing over the prospect of having to give up control of their brand messages to consumers. The thing is, they're crying over an amazingly fortuitous turn of events.

Call it an unintended coup: consumers feel empowered by this new ability to take part in brand building and proliferating their own ad messages on behalf of advertisers. Yet, this supposedly people-powering about-face amounts to the ultimate in reverse psychology. In truth, consumers are yet again acting out their inevitable roles as mindless brand drones, duped into thinking they're in control, and all the while doing the advertiser's dirty work!

Exactly how assisting in your own brand slavery could be considered empowering is beyond me. Today the consumer-driven brand has already taken form in the discussion spurred by a fake VW spot, a BK branded website where a guy in a chicken suit and garters fulfills people's personal demands via Web cam, and an American Airlines campaign featuring home movies submitted by actual consumers. There's much more where that came from.

How will this supposedly empowering brand shift manifest itself tomorrow? There's little doubt we'll soon see ads created by the young and tech savvy for their favorite brands featuring personalized content and intended for distribution to their close friends. ("Hey guys, check out my new ad for Xbox! Isn't it sweet?"). Nascent examples of this future phenomenon already exist through branded greeting cards or interactive animations that can be personalized and distributed via email. And don't think advertisers won't enable this in every way possible.

Empowerment? Quite the opposite. This consumer-driven brand slam simply makes it that much easier for brands to connect with us in an even more personal way than ever before. If you still have that macaroni sculpture you made in kindergarten, you might grasp just how attached people will get to their beloved brands once they've assisted in their creation and personalized their promotion.

Remember what they say about power corrupting….



The Search for the Holy Sale
-- OR --
Yahoo Likes Spam -- A Lot
One of the few musicals I truly enjoy declares in a dramatic refrain, "Blame Canada." Well, I dig Neil Young and Degrassi too much to do that. I say, "Blame Mel Brooks." That's right. If it weren't for Mel Brooks mucking-up his classic flick, The Producers, to better appeal to the white-bread musical-going mainstream, there's a good chance the Brit comedy fave, Monty Python and the Holy Grail wouldn't have been subjected to Broadway debasement. Now, not only has the flick been minced, processed and artificially flavored for the masses who'd rather revisit some repurposed, recognizable pop-culture pap than experience something novel, it's become an advertising vehicle for a search engine.

The original Holy Grail film made no mention of Spam, the mystery meat product hailed in a sketch and song aired on the comedy troupe's TV show, Monty Python's Flying Circus. However, its Broadway bastardization has been deemed "Spamalot," an obvious reference to King Arthur's legendary court. Now, to slather on another layer of grail contamination, online publisher and search engine Yahoo will be represented on stage by "'The Spam Guard,' a military troupe that will carry flags emblazoned with the company's logo," according to a 1/21 MediaPost story.*

Hormel Foods' is even offering cans of Spam Golden Honey Grail flavor for collectors. Tastes like 2,000-year old Jesus spittle…yum.

Of course, the Spam Guard probably has nothing to do with luncheon loaf and everything to do with Yahoo's email spam-blocking services. Apparently the spamsorship will also include Yahoo logos on the musical's signage, costumes and possibly mentions of the company within the script itself. Talk about unsolicited, obnoxious ad messages!

Man...at this rate, I won't be surprised if Lancelot and Galahad track down the Holy Grail by searching Yahoo.

* Lowbrow Lowdown author, Kate Kaye has written for Mediapost's MediaDailyNews as a contributing writer and currently writes for the publisher's print magazine, OMMA (previously Media Magazine).



Consumerist Youth League
-- OR --
Red Farce
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Or in the case of Ogilvy & Mather's recent operation in China, if you can't beat 'em, exploit 'em.

Who says China's communist tradition should be a barrier to the country's furthered commercialization? The folks at international ad agency Ogilvy aren't letting it get in their way. In fact, they're using China's commie communities to help promote their advertiser clients. According to a 1.25 Wall Street Journal story (Chinese Youth League Turns to a New Path: Madison Avenue, by Geoffrey A. Fowler), the agency aims to crack the tough Chinese market with Red Force. No, Red Force is not the latest Mountain-Dew offshoot. It's Ogilvy's joint venture with the Communist Youth League, an organization founded in 1922 to help promote the Communist Party.

This unlikely pairing stems from the mutually-beneficial outcome of Red Force's activities. Essentially, China's growing pool of young college grads needs jobs, and Ogilvy needs young people to help promote its advertiser brands to the Chinese. So, in exchange for access to CYL members, Ogilvy provides training sessions and job opportunities to the commie kids. When Estela Kuo, managing director of Ogilvy's field marketing unit pitched CYL officials on the idea to join forces, she recalls explaining, "We need young people, and I know the mission of the CYL is to help young people get better lives."

If this type of rhetoric reminds me of anything, it's advertising. In the same way that advertisers hope to convince us that buying their products and being loyal to their brands will somehow improve our lives, the Communist Party tries to convince people that it created the CYL "to help young people get better lives." It's disturbingly funny: marketers and communists even employ the same ridiculous spin-tactics. I mean, c'mon, the CYL wasn't created to "help young people get better lives." It was created to help form a legion of propaganda-spouting automatons.

During a Red Force training session in Beijing this past December, Kuo offered jobs to the duly-indoctrinated youth. Apparently, a call for four Swatch promotion girls (at least 5' 4" with no distinguishable regional accent) drew cheers from the auditorium.

It's surprising it took this long for Madison Ave. to realize the clear parallels between the slogan-centric propagandistic culture of communism and its own history of branded brainwashing. It's true, the post-communist world is hardly a bastion of free-market principles; the imprisonment of oil tycoon, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, as well as the recent shenanigans surrounding the Yukos buyout exemplify this. Still, commies from China to Cuba are reluctantly accepting and engaging in capitalism out of the sheer need for party survival. Despite the opposing philosophical facades of the two systems, deep down they have much in common. Think about it: corporate culture, with its team-player mentality and lackey-laden hierarchy -- even its unsaid dress requirements -- does embrace elements that pervade communism.

Some companies even have mission statements and slogans they try to instill in employees. In fact, during the December Red Force training session, Ogilvy exec Jeffrey Wu repeated agency mantras during a lecture, including the vaguely militaristic command, "Deliver your brand to the last mile." Well, like most pinko propaganda, it probably sounds better in Chinese.

One brand Ogilvy hopes to "deliver to the last mile" is Hong Kong Disneyland. As noted in the article, Red Force held storytelling sessions with southern Chinese children to promote the park. "Red Force members at the youth league's 'youth palaces' read aloud 'The Prince and the Pauper' and guided potential Disneyland vacationers to draw pictures of Mickey Mouse, sing Mickey songs, and meet Mickey.

According to anonymous Lowbrow Lowdown Lackeys, Ogilvy reps resisted requests from Communist Party officials to teach the kids about the far superior Tiananmenland mascot, Mickey Maose.


Send this issue of The Lowbrow Lowdown to a friend!


The Lowbrow Lowdown is available for syndication.

Disclaimer
The The Lowbrow Lowdown™ is a registered trademark. Any use of The The Lowbrow Lowdown™ name or content without consent of Kate Kaye is strictly prohibited.

While best efforts were used in collecting and preparing the information contained herein, The Lowbrow Lowdown™ does not assume, and hereby disclaims, any liability for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions resulted from negligence, accident or other causes.