Tag Archives: censorship

Anatomy of An Insight: Sorry, Coke & Pepsi.

The SodaStream ad for Super Bowl is quite vapid creatively. As a guy, I naturally do not complain having Scarlett Johansson on it but I have seen her in way more interesting settings. The beauty of this ad is that it is already banned:

The reason for the ban is the line in the end: “Sorry Coke & Pepsi”. Apparently Fox was afraid that it would upset those big advertisers and we will not see this 30 s clip in Super Bowl. That hardly does matter as the ad has already been seen over 2 million times. Daniel Birnbaum, the CEO of SodaStream acts furious, but is probably laughing all the way to the bank:

“What are they afraid of? Which advertiser in America doesn’t mention a competitor? This is the kind of stuff that happens in China. I’m disappointed as an American”

Insight: If you are challenger brand, you have to aggressively confront the bigger competitors. People love underdogs. This ad further solidifies SodaStream challenger position while making competitor look as evil giants. When your ad is banned, it actually gives extra credibility to your message. Although Coke or Pepsi might not have anything to do with the ad ban, this raises speculation about conspiracy.

Too often brands do not act as challengers or market leaders, but fell in the middle ground. As a brand you are either David or Goliath, there is no middle ground.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Anatomy of An Insight: For Goodness Shakes

The best thing that can happen to your product ad is to get banned. Good example of this is the protein shake ad below:

Advertising Standards Authority in UK banned the ad because “it would cause serious or widespread offence.”

Yeah, right.

I think the problem with all these institutions is that they regard themselves as the target audience and assume everyone else is as humorless and dull as they are. That is typical problem for planners as well.

Well, whatever.

The ad itself is classic example of building the story around the dramatization of product feature (or lack of it).

Insight: Shaking protein drinks is a habit. This ad showcases that it looks stupid and there is better alternative: protein shake you do not need to shake.

Otherwise really basic, simple and functional product ad spiced with quite mild sexual innuendo resulted in the ban. Probably the ban proves to be goldmine for
“For Goodness Shakes” because of all the free publicity (like this blog post you are reading).

Tagged , , , , ,
Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: