RUTHERBLOG

Advertising is a ruthlessly efficient social barometer; it tells you  a lot about the state of a country, its moral climate and its economic health.

The most extreme example of this happened in 2006, when the mayor of Sao Paulo passed a ‘Clean City’  law to clean up the visual pollution caused by some 8,000 poster sites, many of which had been erected illegally.

Opinion, of course, was split down the middle. Some thought it was a ‘triumph of public interest over private…of aesthetics over ugliness…of cleanliness over trash.’ Others claimed the city looked ‘a sadder,duller place’ and that – in addition to being commercial – advertising is a form of entertainment which engages and informs.

Judge for yourself. Sao Paulo isn’t going to win many architectural prizes, so without the colour of advertising and neo signs, there is a ‘communist bloc’ feel about the skyline. To be fair, these pictures were taken before the job (the complete removal of the sites themselves) had been finished.

Nevertheless, I’m beginning to think London might benefit from a similar approach.

CAPITAL CAMPAIGNS

I picked up some interesting messages today, my first trip into town since before Christmas.

For example,  the Bakerloo entrance to the tube at Paddington Station. There are some large, landscape sites, all carrying posters for the animated feature ‘Waltz with Bashir’, proclaiming its opening – on 21 November. On either side, a portrait-format poster, showing the results of some market research by CBS (the site owners) proclaiming that 9/10 passengers like advertising.

Down the escalators,  the static paper ‘cards’ have been replaced by long rows of digital screens. Yesterday, they carried three messages, two of which were:

* Details of London Underground’s text messaging services to let passengers know about engineering works

* A CBS campaign about the benefits of advertising on digital panels on the Tube.

In other words, 66% of display time was taken by the two owners (Transport for London and CBS). Marshall McLuhan proven right again: the medium is the message.

Cross-track gallery sites (that’s the posters we mindlessly stare at while waiting for a train) are also being upgrades to animations. At Paddington and Oxford Circus, both were carrying messages from CBS about how great it is to advertise on cross-track gallery sites.

Do you see a theme beginning to emerge?

Obviously, the owners are terrified of ‘going dark’ (as West End theatres would say), so they try to maintain confidence with a sort of ‘meta-advertising, (metads?): advertising about advertising.

The third campaign on the escalator was for  Channel 4’s ‘Great British Food Fight’. Imagine the terror: travelling into London’s subterranean world, surrounded by multiple images of Gordon Ramsey. Like some post-modern entrance to Dante’s inferno.

The theme was continued on the platform by giant posters for Channel Five’s remake of ‘Minder’ starring Shane Ritchie as Archie Daley (sic – that is not a typing error; he’s Arthur’s nephew. I am not making this up.)

Interesting variations on the metad form: an advertisement to drive the viewer to another media to watch an advertisement.

IN THE TRENCHES

One of the reasons for my visit was a meeting with an executive who has worked in advertising sales for the past 25 years. He’s run teams for many of the major media brands, and knows the game inside-out.

“It’s a very sensitive market,” he told me. “The economy slides a couple of percentage points? Advertising drops exponentially, TV is down 25% year-on-year, commercial radio is down 35%”

Of course, it’s not all down to a slowing economy; new media has taken a sizeable share of the total pot. The most recent full report I can find is a 2007 US analysis from PWC, which shows total TV spend at $51bn,  newspapers at $48bn, radio a shade off $20bn and outdoor at $7bn.

In the 10 years you 2007, online spend rose from $1.9bn to $21.2bn.

(According two Channel 4’s CEO Andy Duncan, the UK market is in now worth $3bn, about the same as TV advertising. A report by ‘Efficient Frontier’ supports this, saying the Q4 2008 was up 14% year-on-year)

So, a major factor in the change to the capital’s visual communication is a shift in media and technology. It’s not just about a downturn; it’ss the way that we, the audience,  spend our time, where we direct our attention, and how we have become immune to certain forms of persuasion.

But there is no doubt that the ads currently running are signs of the times. And it looks as though the only thing that advertising has to sell is itself.

Popularity: 89% [?]

Direct Line sent me a gift yesterday. Or rather, it didn’t.

The size of a chequebook, it’s full of pictures of things I can insure (a ‘fridge, a car, a pet) with my name on each: ‘Paul’ integrated into the photos as if it were actually on the item. It’s a very clever piece of digital printing.

And on the first page, they thank me for choosing them again, and as a token of appreciation here’s this ‘handy booklet in which you’ll find our gift to you’:

“Discounts across their range of products”.

That’s not a gift; that’s an offer. Putting aside the legal difference , what really irritates about this hand-tooled, finely-wrought piece of marketing nonsense is the blatant abuse of meaning.

When I give a gift (see; use of the word give is a clue), it doesn’t come with conditions. I don’t expect the recipient to have to give me something back so that they can realise the value.

“Happy Christmas, son. Here are some batteries. Given me £150 and I’ll let you have the remote control car to go with them.”

That’s a deal, an exchange, a contract, a bargain, a sale. It’s not a gift.

Interesting to note that there is some precise language on that first page: ‘we’re giving you this handy booklet in which you’ll find our gift to you’ (my italics). So, the company is clear that the  booklet isn’t the gift. There is nothing tangible here. Indeed, the only way of realizing the ‘gift’ is to make another purchase.

Which means that not only is this a jaw-tensing abuse of  language, it’s also a lie. They are not making me a gift at all. They’re making a promise of a gift if I make another transaction.

With wobbling bottom lip he recounts: “My present was under the tree. I was so excited, I tore off the paper, and found that the box was empty, save for an IOU.”

Thank you, Direct Line.

CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION

While we’re here, at the first virtual meeting of “Pedants’ Anonymous”, have you noticed how the word celebrate has changed its meaning?

You probably grew up thinking that celebrate meant to mark an achievement or a milestone of some sort; a marriage, a coming-of-age, exam results, a sporting success.

Not any longer. Now we’re being offered the chance to celebrate the release of a DVD.

Celebrate now means plug.

But again, take a moment to unpack the sentence in which it appears on your local radio station: “We’re giving you the chance to celebrate the release of ‘Now That’s What I Call High School Musical 58′ with our fun competition / ‘phone-in / organ donation scheme / whatever.”

Oh THANKS. You’re giving me the opportunity to mark the fact that I can now buy something from you. Truly, I am blessed.

Look – I know that I sound like a grumpy old man on this. That’s because I am. And I am, because it matters.

Language defines us. Along with opposable thumb, it puts space between us and pondlife. As a friend recently posted on his Facebook wall: “We do not describe the world we see; we see the world we describe”.

Language is the toolkit with which we make the world. The greater our vocabulary, the greater the granularity with which we can see and understand. The meaning of words matters because they give common currency with which to share understanding.

And if we let words like gift and celebrate get hijacked and subliminally redefined without even noting that it’s happening, we’ll be much the poorer for it.

Popularity: 100% [?]

“It is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consistent of believing, or in disbelieving; it consists of professing to believe what he does not believe.” Thomas Paine

It is Sunday morning. Ben and I sit in the kitchen. I skim the pages of a broadsheet, while my 13 year-old son reads one of yesterday’s supplements; he’s found a review of a new X-box game that, at a guess, involves disembowelling vampires.

BEN: That’s really cool.

ME (not looking up from the Arts section): Have you played it?

BEN: No. But it’s got 5 stars in here.

ME (wondering about getting tickets for the new ‘Godot’): And that makes it ‘cool’ does it, because it says so in there?

BEN: Well, it’s why we buy the big papers, isn’t it?

And I realise that I am at one of life’s key parental conversations. We’ve talked about sex, about bullying, about drugs. Now it’s ‘truth’ in the press.

M: How do you think a newspaper makes money, Ben? Where does my £1.50 actually go?

B: The paper shop?

M: Yes – to Mr Singh, and to the distributor who delivers the papers to the shop each morning. By the time they’ve taken their cut, it doesn’t leave very much for the people who make the papers. So how does a newspaper make its money?

We pause. Ben flicks a page or two, looking for a picture of a hole to crawl into.

All he can find is listings for London cinemas.

B: Advertising.

M: Spot on. The newspapers sell space to companies who want to sell things to their readers. No advertising, no newspapers. So the first thing to remember about newspapers is that their business purpose isn’t to print news. It’s to generate advertising revenue.

B: Cool. So why do newspapers write all this sort of stuff? (He points at a feature about a soap actress in the ‘Property’ section.) Why not just run ads?

M: Because too much advertising wouldn’t be very interesting, then no one would buy the paper. That’s the publisher’s dilemma. It’s a question of balance.

B: So get more journalists writing more stories.

M: Well, that’s good for you as a reader, but not good for the publisher as a business. That’s more cost.

B: But there’s loads of writing in these papers, pages and pages of news.

M: Is there? What is ‘news’, Ben?

B: Um…Stories about things that happen in the world. Gaza and the Credit crunch and things like that.

M: And all the sections of this newspaper are full of that, are they?

B: Well, no. Looking at this part (the listings insert he has in front of him), it’s got records and dvds and films and stuff.

M: A famous newspaper publisher called Randolph Hearst once said: “News is something that somebody, somewhere doesn’t want to see in print. Everything else is publicity.”

B: So what’s this? (He points to the soapstar ‘profile’).

M: Read the final paragraph – the bit in italics.

B: “The Notting Hill flat is on the market for £675,000 with Foxtons”

He stops and smiles. A penny drops, and for the next few minutes he’s ploughing through pages of newsprint, looking for publicity stories: a disgraced MP and his new book; a glamour model and her new TV series.

B: Jokes! (it’s a different language, but I’m keeping up) It’s all Publicity! All of it!

M: Well, not quite ALL. But most of it is. And the reason is simple – it’s cheaper than news. News takes time to research, time to collate, time to write, time to check. And as the businessman running the newspaper, you want to cut your costs – but you need to keep the amount of editorial content, because your readers demand it.

B: So make the journalists work harder.

M: Going to be a media mogul when you grow up? Despite the stereotype, most journalists and editors are incredibly productive. But when the advertising people sell more space, it creates a need for more editorial to keep that balance. So it becomes very tempting to use packaged material from publicists and agents and PRs, who are being paid for by someone else.

B: So the editor can fill more space, while the publisher keeps his costs down. Cool. So is this publicity?

He has found a ‘car of the year’ piece by Jeremy Clarkson. To a teenage would-be petrol-head, Clarkson is a deity.

M: Well, it has no news value, but it isn’t promoting anything in particular. So we’ll call it Entertainment – one of the main reasons people chose their Sunday paper.

B: So what about all this (he points back at the cinema listings).

M: That’s the fifth type on content. That’s Information; helpful facts to help you make decisions. You’ll find a lot of those in the Sundays, especially in the Travel sections.

B: News. Advertising. Publicity. Entertainment. Information. Is that it?

M: Pretty much. It’s a good filter to apply each time you read the paper – especially to weed out the PR man’s dream – Publicity that’s being presented as News. Put it in another order, and it spells PAINE.

B ??

M : Thomas Paine was a man who lived round the time of the American and French Revolutions. He wrote a couple of very famous books, The Rights of Man and The Age of Reason. He was quite complicated, and no friend of the Church or the English Government, but all you need to remember is his basic philosophy – we should each think for ourselves. So when you read the paper, and to make sure you read with a questioning mind, remember PAINE. Think for yourself, not the way that others want you to think.

Fatherly advice duly dispensed, I head for a morning shower. Twenty minutes later, Ben is standing in the bedroom door.

B: I looked up Paine on the web. He might have written those books, but he died in poverty and no one went to his funeral.

M : Yes, well, ermm…

B : I bet the man who publishes the Sunday paper won’t die poor.

M : Probably not.

B : Although all that stuff we talked about, that’s on the internet for free. So ‘praps he will.

Popularity: 14% [?]

Listening to Mark Kermode’s round-up of ‘Films of the 2008′ the most damning thing he said about the latest Bond, Quantum of Solace, was that the blatant product placement didn’t interrupt the narrative of the movie.

Because there is no narrative.

With the major film studios now spending over $100m just to promote a movie, all financial contributions are being gratefully received. Similarly, as advertisers find it increasingly difficult to be heard about the din of the marketplace, communicating with a captive audience is an opportunity too good to miss.

Expect to see a lot more blatant product placement in the near future, as the boundaries between the studios, media owners, technology providers and distribution networks become increasingly blurred.

The shift to digital also creates new possibilities. I predict that soon, brand managers and corporate sponsors will be able to insert their product or message into the studios’ back catalogues. Indeed, I am setting up a new agency to advise in this area. Here are my initial thoughts on possible ‘value enhancing synergies’.

Apple – All About Eve

Guinness – Black Narcissus

Ann Summers – Brief Encounter

Parcelforce – Deliverance

Fairy Liquid – Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Dyson – Gone with the Wind

Kleenex – Home Alone

Strepsils – Little Voice

Skype – Look Who’s Talking

Audi – Lord of the Rings

Dulux – Magnolia

Tarmac – Paths of Glory

Harrods – The Prince of Egypt

Ronseal – Rabbit Proof Fence

Velcro – Hook

London Stock Exchange – Raging Bull

Chelsea Football Club – Roman Holiday

Rolls Royce – Silent Running

Michelin – Star Wars

Google – The China Syndrome

Greggs – The Fabulous Baker Boys

Eurostar – The French Connection

Microsoft – The Great Dictator

Rotring – The Thin Blue Line

News International – The Wizard of Oz

All further ideas and suggestions are most welcome…

Popularity: 20% [?]