philippine daily inquirer, still no.1 - why you love to hate it

don't you just love to hate the philippine daily inquirer?



it's a national daily newspaper that's good just for a total read of 3 articles at the most! and that usually takes less than 8 minutes to read. it doesn't help that PDI's approach to journalism is actually that of a tabloid that's masquerading as a national newspaper. in my view, the PDI is actually a newspaper version of boy abunda's tv show, The Buzz, with the only difference being topics are on politics and national news and issues and not show business. in PDI, national issues and politics are delivered in a chismis style journalism.

there are many to be said about content and its kind of journalism, but that is straying away from the nature of this blog.

the other part you love to hate in PDI is the over-population of ads!

in today's issue, PDI has, believe it or not a total of 24 sections! that means 24 separate pull outs. there is the main headline section, 22 pages, 1 magazine and 1 comics section and 21 separate pull outs or sections, each pull out consisting of just 4 pages.

and that is one of the biggest things you love to hate about the PDI - the 21 separate pull outs or sections. they use letters to name the sections, and in today's issue, it runs from Section A to Section Q, that's only 17, but some of the sections have sub-numbers, like Section A, then Section A1. perhaps to cut on the number of letter sections? it will be totally embarrassing if they hit Section Z, don't you think? they also cheated, 2 sections they did not put letters on, just numbers. again, it's to save themselves from the embarrassment of hitting Section Z.

it's not just the numerous sections, it's the fact that in each 4 page section, there is only a tiny article or editorial and the rest of the pages are print ads. i would say the editorial in those sections account for a tiny portion while the ads occupy 70% to 85% of the total 4 pages.

ah, now you get it. those sections are actually just ads, not articles or sections with legitimate topics. you could have been impressed, PDI on a sunday has 21 sections, and therefore 21 topics! but no, what PDI is doing with the sections is really just printing classified ads but tried to give it some glamor by calling them "sections", and not classified ads which they truly are.

as a reader and consumer of PDI, that really sucks and is utterly inconvenient. the hardship that a reader like me goes through, like for example looking for the movie section, it means you have to go through 21 freagin sections before you find it! they don't even try to give each section a unique layout or design. not even a decent header to differentiate one from the other.

that makes me wonder - are advertisers in PDI getting their money's worth? let's be honest here - how many readers actually go through each of those 24 sections page by page? after awhile, you get to understand what PDI is doing - when you see a section, and knowing 85% of what's inside is just an ad, will the reader still turn the page and look at the ads? you know there's hardly an article inside, why bother opening the page?

for advertisers, the promise of readership in PDI is actually just a myth, you can get handsome readership numbers in your post buy media analysis, but did actual readers read the ad? i don't really think so.

for advertisers, in the layout that they have now, PDI is a WAWAM!

======================

Inquirer still No. 1 by bigger margin, says Nielsen survey
By Kate
V. Pedroso

Philippine Daily InquirerFirst

Posted 03:01:00 06/15/2008


THE PHILIPPINE DAILY INQUIRER continues to generate the largest readership among Filipino broadsheet readers nationwide, according to the latest survey conducted by Nielsen Media Research.

The Inquirer captured 53 percent of broadsheet readership in the country’s key cities, according to the Nielsen Media Index 2008 Q1. The Manila Bulletin and Philippine Star both got 44 percent.

This translates to an estimated 1.258 million readers for the Inquirer, 1.051 million for the Star and 1.048 million for Bulletin nationwide.

senator mar roxas tide tv spot

here is one of those tv ads - is this a product endorsement ad or a political ad?

this is what senator mar roxas has to say on this tide tv spot:

Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas II, who once pushed the detergent brand Tide, denied doing any product endorsements: “But I didn’t endorse. I didn’t say that the public should buy a product, nor did I hold any product. And I did not say that it was better than the others. It’s a public service announcement saying that all product sellers should be true to consumers.”

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20080528-139254/Villar-cracks-whip-on-senators-in-ads

this is next in WAWAM!

product endoresment ad or political ad?

senators are on tv now, not just in the news but (gasp!) in tv ads for consumer products and services.

i have thoughts equivalent to a dozen blogs on this topic, but for now, here is one article worth reading.


---
Truth in advertising
By Conrado de Quiros
Philippine Daily InquirerFirst
Posted 00:15:00 06/03/2008

Some of the explanations the senators who appear in ads offer to justify it are pretty hilarious. There’s a whole bunch of them: Panfilo Lacson (Facial Care), Richard Gordon (Safeguard), Pia Cayetano (Downy Fabric Softener), Francis Pangilinan (Lucky Me Instant Noodles), Francis Escudero (Circulan) and Loren Legarda (Lucida DS, a skin-whitening agent). Last week, Miriam Defensor-Santiago asked the Commission on Elections to look into premature campaigning by candidates in the guise of commercial ads.

For Lacson, the principle is simple: product endorsement, yes; self-promotion, no. He says, not without vitriolic humor: “It is within our rights to endorse a product. Maybe there are some who do not want other senators to make endorsements because no one would get them.”

Gordon says he’s been an advocate of health for as long as he can remember, having been with the Red Cross for 30 years and worked once as branch manager of Procter & Gamble, which produces Safeguard. “The intent and core message of the Safeguard campaign is to teach the general public the benefits of proper hand-washing and its importance in preventing the spread of communicable disease.”

And Pia Cayetano: “I personally lent my name to a good cause, which is saving water.”
Well, to begin with, I myself can imagine American Standard and Kleenex wanting Miriam and Juan Ponce Enrile to endorse their products, given their talent for flushing things down the drain and wiping the object of the famous expletive off somebody’s ass, not necessarily respectively. While at this, Gordon should really not keep calling attention to the benefits of proper hand-washing lest the public construe it in quite another way and see only the benefits he has gotten from improperly washing his hands in public. These are the kinds of bola that make you realize why Philippine legislation is the way it is.

Do these senators’ ads represent premature campaigning? Probably, though the lines here are infinitely more blurred than in Bayani Fernando’s case. The senators are at least not using taxpayers’ money for these ads, and they are promoting products rather than themselves, for which they are getting paid. Fernando’s posters and billboards simply have no right to be there. They are illegal where the senators’ ads are merely unethical. They are punishable by jail where the senators’ ads are only punishable by scorn.

That doesn’t mean those ads ought to be tolerated. I grant the senators are at least not advertising cigarettes and alcohol, which encourage vice, or cars or luxury items, which rub the noses of the poor in the mud in these dire times. Though while at this, I myself take exception to “skin-whitening” products, as atrocious a concept as you can find, suggesting as it does that darkness of skin is a blemish or impairment that needs remedying. And I grant making ads to augment income is better than stealing, which is what most public officials do. It is better than stealing—but it is worse than not making the ads at all.

At the very least what’s wrong with it is that it throws the weight of a public official’s position and role as authority figure behind a particular product. It’s thoroughly dishonest to say that one is merely lending one’s name to the cause of saving water or personal hygiene. In fact, one is proposing the superiority of one product over another. Having been once a manager at Procter & Gamble is not a justification for endorsing Safeguard, it is an added reason for not doing so. You are no longer manager of a private company, you are a senator of the land. Senators are—despite the principle being more honored in the breach than in the observance—supposed to be fair and impartial.

But far more than that, it debases the position. It is not unlike a priest or bishop coming out to plug for Mompo as the wine of choice of clergy during Consecration. And justify that afterward by saying one is merely encouraging the faithful to attend Mass, not least by dangling the prospect of partaking of the salutary libation during Communion in return for alms money. Senators are the secular equivalent of bishops. They have jobs that require total—and exclusive—commitment to constituent and flock. If some senators find their pay too paltry to live decently on they have to sideline as ad endorsers, if not as clowns and jugglers (that would be redundant for some), they can always leave the field to people like Crispin Beltran who are perfectly content to serve the people while living in one-bedroom bungalows and having a total net worth of P50,000.

Of course these are debased times, standards have plunged to record lows. People no longer have to prove they are paragons of virtue before they can occupy public office, they need only prove there is no evidence to jail them—even if they have to wipe the fingerprints off the smoking gun in plain view of the public. They do not have to prove they are Caesar’s wife to step into Malacañang, they can be Pidal’s wife for all they care. But if that is the case, then the point is not to debase the country some more, the point is to stop it.

The practice of senators and other public officials selling facial care and skin-whitening lotions may not be illegal, but it is unethical. I personally wouldn’t mind a legislator proposing a law banning it altogether. The danger is patent; it subverts the Senate’s credibility, which is so essential to its work, not least in ferreting out corruption in government. It encourages the public to associate its truth with so-called “truth in advertising,” the kind that says that wearing a certain brand of deodorant or pair of briefs makes you, like Shaft, a sex machine to all the chicks.

That is one truth that won’t set you free.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20080603-140351/Truth-in-advertising

iPhone 3G : steve job's plan for world domination

there isn't any more simple plan at achieving world domination for steve jobs, just two sentences, well ok, three : "iPhone 3G. Twice as fast. Half the price."

everyone, both consumers and the whole mobile phone industry, knew that when steve jobs launched the iphone last year, the mobile phone industry will never be the same ever again. everyone was expecting the iphone will do to mobile phones what what the ipod did to mp3 players and personal cd players.

there were just two quirks - you can only get the iphone through an AT&T mobile service subscription and the hefty price. the first one consumers did not mind and lived with, the second, the price, they sort of complained but bought the iphone just the same. but these two quirks were both ignored and seen by rabid users as just part of the deal, it goes with the teritory of being hip and cool in owning an iphone.

if you ask iphone owners, they only have one complaint - the price. and with the launch of the new 3G iPhone, steve jobs simply erased the only product negative. there is one more extra - it runs twice as fast.

now, in marketing terms, that's a sure fire success formula at achieving world domination - price, quality (speed) and coolness. apple also announced the 3G iphone will be sold in 70 countries, promoting the iphone as a new key player in the global mobile phone industry.

The iPhone’s new business model

“Twice as fast. Half the price.”

That’s the story about the new iPhone 3G that Apple is selling, and it’s a line that was echoed by Apple VPs and industry analysts in the Moscone West spin room after Steve Jobs’ keynote Monday.

“The new price point is a very big deal,” said Tim Bajarin of Creative Strategies. “With that, and the 70 countries, Apple is now a world player on the mobile smartphone stage.”

But it’s not that simple. There were a lot of financial details Jobs left out of his keynote that only emerged later in the day, in a 8-K form Apple (AAPL) filed with the SEC and a long press release issued by AT&T (T).

Apple alerted the SEC that although it had signed deals with 70 countries…

“…Under the vast majority of these agreements, Apple will not receive follow-on revenue generating payments from carriers”

AT&T, for its part, warned investors of…
“…potential dilution to earnings per share (EPS) from this initiative in the $0.10 to $0.12 range this year and next.”

What does it mean?

It means the iPhone has a new business model.

When the device was first introduced, Jobs was able to dictate some rather unusual terms. Customers had to pay full retail price for it (a practice almost unheard of in the mobile phone industry) and carriers had to share a sizable cut of their monthly revenue with the manufacturer (also virtually unprecedented).

Now, the carriers are subsidizing the cost of the phone, making up for it in monthly charges, and they are no longer funneling a share of that monthly revenue to Apple. As Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster puts it: “Apple is basically playing by the rules that all other cell phone hardware manufacturers play by.”

Pressed for specifics, Munster speculates that AT&T is paying Apple about $400 for the 8GB iPhone and keeping $199 of that. It probably pays Apple about $450 for the 16GB model, he says, and keeps $299. [Update: in a note to clients Tuesday Munster came up with a slightly higher number. He now estimates that Apple is charging carriers, on average, $466 per iPhone. Toni Sacconaghi at Bernstein Research comes in with a range that goes even higher; he believes Apple will sell the new iPhones to carriers for anywhere from $350 to $700 each.]This is a big change.

Gone is that nice revenue sharing deal where Apple socked it away as deferred income over the life of a 24-month contract — a comfortable cushion against lean quarters in the company’s future, should they ever arise.

Gone too is the nice iPhone bonanza AT&T got upfront last summer by selling all those 8GB iPhones for $599 each (minus a small commission, perhaps $80, to Apple).
But don’t cry for AT&T. As its press release made clear, it’s going to make up for that by raising the $20 monthly fee customers pay for unlimited data services to $30. That works out to $240 extra over the life of a two-year contract.

“Half the price,” it turns out, actually costs customers $40 more.

But most people look only at the purchase price when they buy cell phones, and at $199 for the 8GB model, the iPhone is going look a whole lot more affordable to a lot more people. Munster, for one, believes that Apple will more than make up in volume what it’s losing in revenue sharing.

Munster had predicted that Apple would sell 12 million iPhones in 2008, beating its own 10 million target by 20%. With the new price point, he says, 12 million “should be a lay-up.”

And what about his famous prediction that Apple will sell 45 million iPhones in 2009 — a number that he acknowledges is “way ahead of the Street”? Munster is not raising that target, but admits he’s “increasingly comfortable” with it.

ameriquest mortgage "yummy" tv spot

i'm torn on this ad - is it a good one or not?

it is funny and for sure it will catch attention, but do i want my brand to be associated with such humor and the idea that the ad dramatizes? is it a polarizing ad? i've always erred on the side of caution whenever it comes to ads where there is a risk that some will like it but some might not. advertising is an investment, and it is a very costly one. when you air a new commercial, the proper attitude is that, it might be your last and therefore make sure it's your best and it works. an adman must have a "take no prisoners" attitude on that one.

the idea of not taking things by just the way they look is a good one for a mortgage company. it tells consumers to always look deeply into the mortgage companies before they engage their services. and that with ameriquest, they will always work their hardest for you.

BUT is this the only creative concept that can dramatically demonstrate that thought and in a funny way too? that certainly would have been my first question if the ad agency presented this storyboard to me.

well, i hope the ad agency does not schedule the airing of this ad during meaL times.

judy ann santos meralco system loss tv commercial

news report say the judy ann santos system loss tv spot was filmed a day before she left for europe. that was what i thought, it was a quick produce tv spot, probably done in her home using an HD camera.

the copywriting is fine, the ice melting analogy to explain system loss is great but the production values showed it was a rush job. the lighting was ok but it was not very professional. more importantly, and this i think is key is judy ann santos was not engaging, she did not elicit sympathy. i think the director gave judy ann santos the wrong directions. the director most likely told judy ann to deliver the lines and look that way because it was a "serious" topic. and that's how judy ann delivered her lines - a straightforward delivery.

but that kind of delivery took away the charm of judy ann santos. she is a tv and movie superstar, she caters to millions of her fans and we don't like to see her as a serious actress when we see her in things other than in her mivies. we all know she is not an engineer, nor an academe nor an economist, the ad agency got her for her popularity as a movie and tv superstar. and we like to see judy ann as warm, amiable and engaging. that's how we want to see her.

this directorial treatment was a bad call for the director.




the controversy over the tv ad rages on. i like the print ad released by meralco where it said the issue is not judy ann santos, the issue is "system loss".

that is precisely correct.


they probably felt the need to release that print ad because of the way pro-administration defenders have been coming out lashing on judy ann santos herself. judy ann is just a commercial talent that was paid to do a job. any talent, known or unknown could have appeared in that commercial and it could have communicated the same things it is doing now.

the pro-administration defenders have been lashing out on judy ann santos herself, taking it too personal which is highly unwarranted.

i suppose this over-reaction and personal attacks on the commercial talent is a tribute to the impact and power of the ad.

caught in the political storm

i agree that garcia and the government were most likely caught flat footed with the juday system loss tv ad. that is very obvious in the way they reacted to the airing of the ad. you see a frenzy of scare tactics, doomsday pronouncements and all types of ridiculous assertions on what the ad was saying, or what it was trying to do and what sins the ad committed. panic time talaga!
that shows you the power of the ad.

garcia and the govt should all grow up. if the juday ad did them some, what's to prevent them from doing an ad themselves?

amazing art : theo jansen's "Animaris Rhinoceros" kinetic art

it is not advertising nor marketing, but it's a joy to watch. here's one more kinetic art by theo jansen, the genius featured in the bmw tv spot.when you look at this art, your mind keeps asking the question "how can he do that?". you see it being done but your mind continue to wonder if it's for real. the engineering genius allows you to see so much grace in it's movements. it's a breathtaking art form that satisfies the heart and the mind.

juday "system loss" tv spot produced by first philippine holdings company

the judy ann santos commercial explaining "system loss" was produced and paid for by first philippine holdings corporation, with the lopezes as majority owners and a major stockholder in meralco.

---------

Lopez firm defends system loss commercial

The sponsor of the controversial system loss commercial explaining the principle of system loss which starred local actress Judy Ann Santos, defended the commercial saying that it only wants to simplify a very technical term.

Early this week, a number of critics bashed the commercial, in which Ms. Santos explained system loss by comparing it to a bag of melting ice, saying that it misleads people.
In a statement, Lopez-owned First Philippine Holdings Corp. (FPHC) clarified that it - not the Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) — had paid for the advertisement.

"As a major shareholder of Meralco, we are very concerned with the inaccurate information being circulated in the media. Certain groups are using technical concepts and complicated issues to manipulate public opinion, discredit Meralco or the Lopez Group." FPHC’s statement said.

FPHC further said that the commercial only sought to explain the salient points of system loss. Legal provisions and regulations are often hard to understand but they have to be relied upon in this instance. FPHC also said that it only meant to make things simpler for the people by using the "electricity-melting ice" analogy.

"There is no intent to deceive or confuse but simply an effort to clarify, within the constraints of the broadcast medium."

Further, it stressed that Ms. Santos was not misled into doing the advertisement.
"In our desire to bring accurate information to Meralco’s four million customers, we asked Ms. Santos to assist us in our information drive. Ms. Santos believed in the message we wanted to communicate, she was not forced or misled to do the advertisement," FPHC noted.

This as Manila Rep. Bienvenido M. Abante, Jr. (6th district) said he will look at the possibility that Ms. Santos violated the Consumers Protection Act when she appeared in the controversial advertisement.

He further said that local celebrities should choose their endorsements wisely especially if they concern the public’s welfare.

Yesterday, Executive Secretary Eduardo R. Ermita said that the palace did not mind Meralco’s decision to use Ms. Santos to explain the systems losses it charges to its consumers and was not surprised by Meralco’s move to rebuild its image with its consumers.

"That is an effort to justify their position. However, the viewers will still decide to believe [them or not]." — Ava Kashima K. Austria

http://www.bworldonline.com/BW060708/content.php?id=042

bmw theo jansen kinetic art tv spot : amazing tv spot!

you don't have to be an engineer to be able to to appreciate that theo jansen's kinetic art can only be done with engeneering genius. we are awed by thousands of domino tiles falling one by one to give us a visual treat, but jansen's kinetic art goes beyond that - it's truly amazing. and your mind takes that leap from amazing engeneering and art on jansen's work to the bmw. you get what it means - that the bmw on it's own has amazing engeenring and art.

judy ann santos' meralco system loss tv spot

there is nothing earth shaking about the judy ann santos "system loss" tv ad for meralco from an advertising stand point. it's a run of the mill, quick produce tv commercial like most of the ads we see on tv. it won't win any advertising award anytime soon or later.

the commercial itself, copywriting, concept and production values are unremarkable but the marketing and communication strategy or thinking behind it is brilliant.

here is a background snap shot : there is an on-going media war between the government and winston garcia versus meralco on supposedly the fight for the lowering of power rates in the country, which happens to be the second most expensive in asia.

it first started as a media war, but it became a real world corporate battle when garcia, doing a 180 degree turn from previous announcements that he does not intend to take over meralco actually attempted a hostile take-over of meralco during the annual stockholders meeting that meralco had a few weeks ago. garcia came to the meeting armed not with plans and intelligent arguments but with an infirmed SEC order preventing the counting of the proxy votes casted in favor of the majority stockholders but was thwarted by brilliant lawyering on the part of the meralco legal team. of course it did not stop there, the media war continues to this day.

at the heart of the issue is the so called "system loss" where meralco passes on to consumers the losses they incur in transmitting the power from the meralco source to the individual residential and commercial users. system loss is not unique to meralco nor to the power industry. it is a global and national practice among power disrtributors. even other manufacturing businesses pass their own version of system loss to consumers. also by law, meralco is allowed to pass a system loss equivalent to 9.5% to its customers.

the juday tv spot is a brilliant marketing and communication move because it dramatically tips the scale in favor meralco through a totally unexpected means. i think the juday tv spot caught winston garcia and the government flat footed. i don't think winston garcia and the government were able to anticipate or even imagine meralco will launch such a media attack through a tv spot featuring juday.

before the juday tv spot, the media war or the battle for winning public opinion was waged through countless press releases, daily press and tv interviews and full page print ads from both camps. the juday tv spot was a refreshing take and totally out of the box but powerful.

first, this is probably the first time in the history of philippine advertising where a national issue that had political and economic implications was explained to the public through a tv spot during a non-election year. political ads we have had before cannot be compared to the juday spot, the political ads were meant to sell the candidates, the juday tv spot is meant to explain to the public some very technical component of the electric bills we all pay.



the use of juday is also a brilliant move and very pinoy. in other countries, topics of this sort would have have featured compelling visuals to illustrate the point or experts in the field like well known engineers, economists or professors doing the talking in the ad. but, we are in the philippines, right? philippine heroes or figures of authority do not come from such esoteric fields, they come from the interview set of boy abunda's The Buzz!

juday reeks of masa! and i mean that as a compliment for the ad agency who chose her. i am guessing that system loss is difficult to understand for most consumers. the use of the block of ice melting while on transit from plant to consumer is also a brilliant creative idea. it simplifies and eloquently communicates what system loss, down to the lowest level or median level of the consumer mind. a simple idea or explanation delivered by a simple woman, juday, admired by simple folks. brilliant!

more than the choice of juday and the use of the melting block of ice mnemonic device in the ad, what trumps these two brilliant components of the effort is the brilliant marketing and communications strategic move of winning the battle for public opinion through a tv spot over and beyond the press releases and interviews.

this effort puts meralco on the driver seat in this battle for public opinion. meralco is now defining the issues and doing it very well. winston garcia and the govt needs to play catch up now.

not only is this ad historic for the philippine advertising industry, it can be historic for the whole country in the way battles are waged to win public opinion.

durex condoms print ad : never in our wildest dreams!

there is no way will we ever see a print ad like this published in philippine newpspapers, not even something as creative as this one. if published, i can just imagine the uproar it will cause and the weekly sermons we will hear in all catholic churches on sundays with no end in sight.

well, it's a cute print ad!

ps : please do not try the above position at home, neck injuries to women may be harmful to women's health. also, neck braces can be very expensive and very uncomfortable to wear.

what the marie france print ad reminded me of

i immediately remembered angelica panganiban when i saw that marie france print ad - a side by side tummy comparison, much like the side by before and after comparison exposed in the internet on what kinds of miracles photoshop can do to a woman's body. photoshop is a much better alternative and a sure thing than a vicky belo. i needed to look at the marie france print ad very closely several times just to make sure that wasn't angelica panganiban in the marie france print ad.

who says advertising can't be fun?

more on this angelica panganiban miralce work: http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/2008/03/truth-in-advertising-miracle-worker.html

marie france vs slimmers world, doing it right versus doing it wrong

there is a different marie france print ad at the PDI, published in the same page 3 space.

first, let me make it clear - i do not see the marie france print ad as winning any advertising award soon or even later, neither do i see it as the epitome of a brilliant print ad, but comparing it to the slimmers world print ad, it's very plain to see what "doing it right" means and what "doing it wrong" means.

it's a great comparison specially because both companies are direct competitors (although i suspect they have the same owners because of the similarity in marketing approach, but that's just a suspicion) and more often than not, their ads are published on the same day, occupying pages one over the other in newspapers. it's a great study at looking at how two different companies competing in the same industry, both going after the same target market comes up with very different print ads, one doing things right, the other doing things wrong. and we're not even talking about strategies, it's easy to see where it fails just on the execution part.

the above marie france print ad have many things right - ad concept was very simple, it had focus and was obviously single-minded in message. the visuals (side-by-side tummy comparison) are also eloquent - there is no way you can miss the message the print ad is conveying. just look at the pictures and you get what it means. there is no doubt at all on the message it is telling you.

there are a few more ways to improve it, here are two - they could have been a little more playful and they could have exaggerated the differences between the two tummies even more to make for a slightly funny but more arresting print ad.

there is a slight problem - bikini tops and bottoms of the two women in the ad are different. they could have made both talents wear the same bikini tops and bottoms to make a cleaner and clearer side-by-side comparison. but that's just being very fastidious.

now, compare the above marie france print ad to the latest slimmers world palenkera print ad:

this slimmers world print ad is an excellent ad if you want to have sore eyes. aside from the sexy bikini-clad, long legged talent in the print at, you don't want to read anything else on the ad, much less pay attention to anything. honestly now, after looking at that ad, can you actually recall what the message is in the ad? when exposed to the ad, most people will just admire the beautiful long legs of the talent and move on to the next page of the newspaper. they are gorgeous legs that are 1 kilometer in length!

comparing these two ads, it tells you the ad agency who did marie france print ad had brains in the right places and are professional enough to make a decent ad for their client. the ad agency of the slimmers world ad on the other hand have their brains only in their wallets whose obvious concern was just to pick up the 17.65% commission on these ads. it's a no brainer ad, and i don't mean that as a compliment. shame on the slimmers world ad agency!

i say it again, this palengkera slimmers world print ad is a WAWAM!

the surprising change in jollibee's new sad face! part 2

was wondering how come the change in graphic design that resulted to a change in personality in jollibee to sad and listless was very surprising. the jollibee mascot must have looked like that for a long time already, why did it become noticeable now?

and this is the reason - consumers have not been used to seeing the jollibee mascot in so many of their merchandising materials before. in fact we hardly see the jollibee mascot, except if you attend some birthday party held in jollibee. most of the merchandising materials in jollibee restaurants feature their celebrity endorsers, not the mascot. but apparently they have changed that now. now, we see the use of the jollibee mascot more often and in a variety of materials.

and that is what is most bothersome in all of these. the jollibee mascot's face is not an exact copy of the jollibee face flat logo. so what is happening is that jollibee is unintentionally (or intentionally) confusing their target market by putting in two, and in my view very different versions of jollibee. and the one that is most visible to consumers is the sad and listless version, the jollibee mascot. as my 11 year old son said, "That Jollibee (mascot) is not happy in his job."


read all posts on this topic here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/jollibee