True to the Brand

This was the home page of The New York Times two weeks ago, October 22...

Here's a close-up of the featured article...

Whether you're grieving or celebrating McCain's loss today, there's something to learn from this:

When you're communicating, consistency counts.

In the book Good to Great, Jim Collins refers to the Hedgehog and the Fox. The fox knows many things. The hedgehog knows one thing.

When the fox attacks, the hedgehog curls up into a ball with its quills protecting him. So the fox tries a different approach. But the hedgehog just curls up again. The fox tries a third time. Again the hedgehog curls up. Boring. But effective. The fox is always moving. But never successful.

When things aren't going well, it's tempting to take the fox approach. We're seeing this now with Microsoft trying to be cool and hip in their advertising. Microsoft can be hugely successful without being cool and hip. But it's not in their DNA to do both. It's like what would happen if Patagonia tried to go mainstream. It's why Paris Hilton looks even worse when she tries to act smart.

What does this mean for you when you're putting your book together?

You probably get multiple assignments each week. For each product or service, your first job needs to be to find the DNA of the brand. You have to understand who they are, and what they stand for, and where they are (or should be) going. You  can't be schizophrenic with the brand. 

Understand your brand's DNA and stick with it. That's not to say "do the same thing that's always been done." That's not to say you can't take a brand in new directions. But they have to be inline with what the brand stands for.

Love Is In The Air

This is not an endorsement of either John McCain or Barack Obama. I don't want to bring politics to this blog. But communication stategy? That's worth talking about in this forum.

Frustrated with the media attention Obama's been receiving, the McCain camp created the following ad (I assume as online content as it's way too long for primetime)...

Does the McCain team have a point that the media is favoring Obama? Sure. Is it fair to say that just because the media prefer one candidate, that's no reason to vote for them? Again, sure. What the McCain people really want to say is, "Don't listen to the talking heads. Look at the issues and make your own decision. Ignore the media." That's a decent argument. But, at least with this piece, it's communicated all wrong.

And here's the problem: When you try attacking emotion, you're fighting an uphill battle. I wrote about this in an earlier post. Whether you agree with Obama's politics or not, you can't attack him by discrediting the way people feel about him. You end up insulting the people you're trying to communicate with. "That's how you feel? Well, let me tell you why you're wrong." Not the best way to be persuasive.

How does this affect you as a young advertising professional? Understand that facts are good. And you should use them to your client's advantage. But you can't build your entire case on them. You need emotion. You need that thrill going up Chris Matthew's leg.

(As a side note, the original piece featured Frankie Valli's "Can't Take My Eyes Off of You." But since the rights to the song were never cleared, the original was pulled. What you see here is a second generation edit with some elevator music and the "Paid for by John McCain for President" stripped off the back end.)