Me, Myself & Media.

Last night was the final episode of "Ugly Betty", and although I have not had time to watch it yet, I am sad nonetheless. I am not a huge TV fan and never have been. However, this isn't to say that I haven't ever had favorite TV shows, because I certainly have. Generally there is one show that I will make time to watch. In the summertime, it's "So You Think You Can Dance", and in the past I've DVRed "Biggest Loser" and "The City". My most favorite, favorite show of the last five years has been, without a doubt, "Ugly Betty." I love everything about it -- especially the comedic timing and the show's flamboyant, exaggerated characters, my favorite being Marc St. James. Coupling Becki Newton, Michael Urie, America Ferrera, Ana Ortiz, Mark Indelicato, Eric Mabius, and Vanessa Williams was a beautiful, brilliant idea, and I cannot believe that their run together is over. This was one race I never wanted to end.

I almost want to postpone watching the last show for as long as possible, as if that perhaps makes the finale less real. At the same time, I have been reading glorious reviews about how everything ends on a happy note, and that audiences are left feeling optimistic about Betty's future in the fashion world. In the recent episodes, Betty's braces have come off, her hair has become less frizzy, and her botched fashion sense has developed into a more cohesive, stylish mess. She's more confident, more... fearless. Proof? "Maybe you're thinking of the old Betty, because the new Betty is fearless. Look, no bangs!" Wait, you mean that Betty isn't ugly after all? Shocking, I know.

When TV shows end, I always worry about the cast of the show. What is next for this bunch? I'm not sure, but they are all so talented, and I am positive that good things will come to them. I must admit, I'm not sure that I am ready for Michael Urie to be anyone other than Marc St. James -- he is fantastic as that character. Marc and Amanda's zingers will be missed for sure -- "I swear on the abs of Mark Wahlberg", says Marc. "Wow, you are serious," quips Amanda.

Last night, "Ugly Betty" became a top trending topic on Twitter for the first time -- where was the support all along the road? Was there nothing we could do to save the show? I suppose that I will have to accept the reality sooner or later, and bid the show farewell. Bye, bye Betty!

In January, Pepsi launched their newest campaign, Pepsi Refresh, which is a single, year long marketing effort engaging consumers, businesses and nonprofits by allowing them to submit their ideas on how they can positively affect their communities. Suggestions are posted to the Pepsi Refresh website (refresheverything.com), and visitors are able to vote for the best ideas. The winners will receive grants ranging from $5,000 to $250,000 in one of 6 areas: health, arts and culture, food and shelter, the planet, neighborhoods, and education. By the end of the year, Pepsi expects that it will have given out more than $20 million in grants. WOW. I think that this is a fantastic idea. It reminds me of Dell's IdeaStorm, only a million times better.


On the latest episode of "If I Can Dream", the marketing director at Pepsi made an appearance, announcing their promotional tie-in to the show. The 6 cast members have been asked to come up with three ideas to help their community, which will be posted to the "If I Can Dream" site. Viewers will vote for their favorite suggestion, and then Pepsi will grant them $10,000 to enact the idea. Good PR for both Pepsi and "If I Can Dream". Touché.


Not only do I really like Pepsi's newest initiative, I also love the commercials that are promoting Pepsi Refresh, especially the most recent one that I've seen "One People", created by none other than TWBA\Chiat\Day in LA. May it's the catchy music (Black Eyed Pea's "One Tribe"), or the incredible graphic effects that are made by the people in the spot, or maybe it's that I'm partial to the ad given my support of the Refresh Project. Who knows? All that I am sure of is that it is a wonderful, creative advertisement. Unfortunately for the company though, I still won't be drinking Pepsi anytime in the near future. But my perception of the social responsibility is much higher, if that's worth anything.


One suggestion for Pepsi? Have a Pepsi_Refresh Twitter account -- It's ridiculous to depend on the #PepsiRefresh to spread awareness about the campaign. I definitely think that a separate account is needed to retweet people's comments, ideas, etc. 


Watch Pepsi's "One People" Ad

I feel like I have been seeing Ford advertisements everywhere recently -- kudos to their marketing department, they should get a big high five. Perhaps they are trying to capitalize on Toyota's woes and launch themselves far ahead of this competitor? Or maybe they just want to tout all of the new snazzy features that their recent models have to offer. My little sister just got a new Escape -- I drove it for the first time last weekend and loved it. Ford really does pay attention to details, such as removing the gas cap and having a more streamlined way to fill up on gas, a process that I strongly dislike.


Ine of the most prevalent campaigns that I have been seeing on TV, Hulu, and internet sites is the "Ford: Drive One" initiative, created by WPP's JWP Team Detroit. The ads have long intrigued me due to the fact that the seem to feature "real people" talking about their favorite features of the car. A qualm I have with the commercials is the fact that none of the statements made by the individuals seem very genuine. The group of good looking "everyday Ford drivers" seem so rehearsed, like their lines have been fed directly to them. And hey, I'm sure they have been. That's what commercials are, right? The number of takes needed to direct and film the short 15-second spots was probably pretty high, which is fine. The thing that frustrates me is Ford's determination to make the campaign so believable, going right now to the shaky camera style to give the ads the viral YouTube feel.


Interested in who these real Ford drivers were, I went online and did some research, learning more about Team Detroit and the campaign in general. Low and behold, these authentic Ford customers are also Ford employees -- who would have guessed? I understand the logic in using "their own", yet it feels sort of deceptive, like there should be fine print along the bottom that reads "Ford Employees". After all, when actors are used to endorse other products, there is the same tiny text that runs along the bottom of the screens, and who's to say that they haven't ever used the good they are selling? The supposed difference is that they are being paid to tell the world how much they love the brand, but isn't that just what Ford is doing?


With all of this said, I truly do not hate the ads. I think they are short, sweet, and convey a memorable, overlying thematic message -- Ford drivers really do adore their cars. I just wish that they could have found Ford drivers who are not receiving paychecks from Ford Motor Co. to tell us how much they like driving the whole Ford experience. All you need to do to know this is read the comments on YouTube for the different ads, like MarkerDude (really?) who said "Great spot! Ford has really improved... Best car company in America!" Clearly he is not from around here, because he'd be singing another jingle -- common, you know I have to..."Ford is the best in Texas."


Becky Just LOVES Her Ford

At the keynote speech yesterday, Apple unveiled one of their newest additions to the iProduct category - iAd. As Steve Jobs continues his global domination strategy, he moves into one space he had yet to pioneer until recently, advertising. During the presentation, Jobs described the new advertising network, which will help app developers create higher quality, engaging advertisements that allow users to click on the ad without having to leave the app, since it is played on the OS itself. Jobs also mentioned that the average iPhone user spends 30 minutes a day on their iPhone applications -- which is an incredible amount of time for an average. Although I love to play Words with Friends, I definitely do not spend 30 minutes a day doing so. I would love to see how long the average consumer spends making dinner, because it is probably more like 3 minutes in the microwave -- just sayin'.


The new iAd platform will have the capability to serve over 1 billion ad impressions per day, which like Steve Jobs said, is "an incredible demographic." Apple's foray into advertising will allow developers to get 60% of the revenue from the ads within their applications. This figure seems reasonable enough, but I guess I feel that they should get more like 75% of the money, but I am sure that there is a "reasonable" explanation for the cut.


The iAd was announced in conjunction with the revealing of the iPhone OS 4, which is being positioned as the PSN or Xbox Live of the iPhone community. This operating system will allow gamers to tap into a centralized network where gamers can play against each other -- very interactive, which makes sense, given that the top downloaded apps are games, and that the most successful games had been those which you can play with other iPhone users. It looks like my iPhone Original 1.0 will need to be updated soon, not only because I will now be 3 models behind, but also because of the number of people that send me picture messages that I never get due to the lack of that functionality. Why the iPhone did not always have this feature from the get-go, I will never understand.


MacBooks, iPads, iMacs, iPhones, iTunes, iPods, and now iAd. My prediction for the future? Say hello to Steve Jobs and goodbye to Obama - Apple is going to take over the world. 

The Masters start today, which is reason enough for mass media coverage and buzz online. Nonetheless, the kickoff of one of the oldest and most prestigious golf tournaments in America is not what people are chatting about. As a matter of fact, they are talking about one thing, and one thing only -- Tiger's back.

After a public leave of about 4 1/2 months, with exception of his terribly unsympathetic public apology, Tiger has been gone from the public eye, spending time on his private yacht named "Privacy", training, and a stint at rehab for sex addiction (so typical).

Yesterday, Nike rolled out their first advertisement featuring Tiger since the whole scandal broke loose in November of last year. Did it feature him golfing? No. Was he making another public apology? Nope (thank goodness). Instead, the black and white commercial starred Tiger, wearing a Nike vest and hat, standing with those big, sad puppy eyes, staring straight into the camera, as you hear a tape of his late-father saying "I want to know what your thinking was, I want to find out what your feelings are, and did you learn anything?" Wow. I commend Nike (or should I say Weiden & Kennedy?). Tiger has proven to be rubbish at stirring emotion in the hearts of Americans (predominantly women), but this message from his father, who passed away a few years ago, made my eyes water. This emotional reaction may be related to the recent death of one of my best friend's dads, but that's exactly why this spot will move people -- everyone knows someone whose dad has passed away, if not their own. Do I like Tiger any more because of the ad? No, but maybe it's just the start of the journey back into the spotlight. After all, it is none of our business what he does in his personal life.

Simon Fuller, the mastermind behind American Idol, has a new pet project -- "If I Can Dream". This web-based reality show follows a small group of young Hollywood hopefuls as they train, audition, perform, etc. The premise is about watching these talented individuals grow from nobodies to stars, right in front of our eyes. An online American Idol, if you will. 


I had heard about the show in January when it aired, but it wasn't until the other day that it was brought to my attention again. I have long been an American Idol fan, but unfortunately this semester has been rather chaotic, what with graduation looming on the horizon. Over spring break, I was lucky enough to catch up on some of this season's Idol performances. I was absolutely heartbroken when my very favorite contestant, Alex Lambert, got kicked off way too early. At that moment, I swore that I was through with this season. And true to my word, I haven't watched a show since. 


Just two days ago, I read online about how Alex Lambert would be joining the cast of "If I Can Dream", and I was ecstatic -- even sent out a tweet saying "Our God is good for SURE. @truealexlambert is BACK -- Looks like I'll need to start watching @ificandream". This little message was retweeted and replied to by a fellow fan, @ohalexlambert, who told me that I need to check out the show's website. Late last night, I did just that. And boy was I creeped out by what I saw. There are lots of cameras throughout the house streaming LIVE footage. Not only that, but at the bottom of the page, there is a little picture of each individual and if you hover your mouse over the person, it will tell you which room they are in, and you can go to that room and watch them... live... all day long. It is literally Big Brother style. I had to get off the site ASAP because I felt intrusive and inappropriate. I still intend to watch the show, which is shown once a week on Hulu; however, I will probably be avoiding the website from now on. 

Yup, I've filled out my census form -- have you? To be honest, I don't really see how people couldn't have. Or more importantly, why they wouldn't have. I mean, there were all of 6 questions, nothing personal, nothing difficult to answer. The form was very cut and dry (and not Scantron, what were they thinking??). What's more is that the postage on the return envelope is already paid, meaning that there should be no excuse not to take the 45 seconds to write in your responses. Still, I have seen lots of US Census advertisements on Metro buses, on the TV, in the papers, etc., all encouraging individuals to submit their forms. It seems a little excessive to me, especially since you are bound by law to fill it out.  According to United States Code, Title 13 (Census), Chapter 7 (Offenses and Penalties), SubChapter II, if you're over 18 and refuse to answer all or part of the Census, you can be fined up to $100. As a recap -- it's easy to understand, very few questions to answer, the postage is covered, and you can be fined $100 for not responding. Why in the world is all of the advertising necessary? It seems like common sense to me.


The advertising effort for the 2010 Census doesn't just feel like it's everywhere, it literally is. And in lots of different languages, targeting lots of different niche demographics in the United States. A plethora of advertising agencies were hired to help advertise the census, including DraftFCB, GlobalHue, GlobalHue Latino, D'Exposito & Partners, Allied Media, IW Group, PLUM Agency, G&G Advertising, and DraftFCB Puerto Rico.


I did not originally realize the intensity of this campaign, but after thinking about the nature of the project, it is quite a task. Rarely does a communications message need to be disseminated to the ENTIRE United States. For the few media planning projects that we have done in TexasMedia, we have had fairly narrow target markets which has made communications material easier to prepare. I cannot even get my head around tackling a plan that needs to reach every individual living in America. So while I still may not think that this campaign was necessary with regards to the frequency of message delivery, I applaud the communications team working for the US Census for work.

During my workout this morning, I watched the most recent episode of "Modern Family" and was pretty surprised when the opening scene revolved around Phil Dunphy, one of the show's main characters, requesting none other than an iPad for his birthday. The rest of the show developed into a big plot to get Phil this coveted new gadget for his birthday, starting with his wife's sleeping in and getting to the Apple store too late to catch one of the first shipments. Normally there are a few different, evenly weighed plot lines going on; however, this week the focus really on the quest for the iPad. The show climaxed when Phil finally gets the iPad into his hands, and all of the characters are standing around "ooh"ing and "ahh"ing at the majestic nature of Apple's newest device. All riled up, Phil declares, "Touch it! But don't touch it!!"


The iPad wasn't just "placed" into this episode of "Modern Family" -- it was truly an iPad commercial. Phil even went so far as to say, "It's like Steve Jobs and God got together to say, 'We love you, Phil.'"


Wow. I'm not sure how I feel about the whole thing. Half of me wants to say "Touché Apple" and the other half is a little repulsed by how desperate the entire show seemed. If I found out that Apple had NOTHING to do with the show, then maybe I would think it was more humorous. After all, most "modern families" probably have THAT person who is dying to get their hands on the iPad.


All in all, I still love "Modern Family" and I still want an iPad, so no harm done. But maybe a little more subtlety next time, please?

Once known for his NFL football playing skills, Isaiah Mustafa's fame is now directed towards his acting skills. Starring in Old Spice ads has recently turned Mustafa into a cult celebrity, joining the likes of advertisement stars Milly Mays and the Dell Dude.

I cringed when I heard the news, although I was not even remotely surprised. Sarah Palin's got her own reality TV show? Bad idea. I mean, to be completely honest, I actually "liked" Sarah Palin a whole lot. I thought that she was funny, I liked her personality, and I especially liked declaring how great she was in front of my dad, who stubbornly declared that he would "move back to Scotland if she were to be his VP." Nevertheless, I do not think that a TV show is the right track for her to go down. She can throw her dreams away of having any major political position now -- reality television seems to bring out the worst in everyone (besides Whitney Port of "The City", who is flawless). I believe that the reason for this is that when someone signs up for a reality TV show, they are signing over the rights to their reputation to a producer who is more interested with ratings and profits than with your public persona. The power of editing threatens to take comments out of context and make things appear as they were not -- in essence, creating drama, which is what viewers want to see.


According to Peter Liguori, COO for Discovery Communcations, Palin's show will "reveal Alaska's powerful beauty as it has never been filmed" (hopefully not describing Sarah). "Sarah Palin's Alaska" will be on the TLC, home of the once-popular "Jon and Kate Plus 8". Getting advertisers to sign up for the show has been a challenge so far, as brands are uneasy about taking the risk to advertise on such a controversial figure's show. "Conservative companies don't want to ruffle any feathers," said Ira Berger, director of national broadcast at the Richards Group. Nevertheless, Berger points out, "If you're the number seven brand in a six-company category, then why not shake it up and take a chance?" It will be interesting to see who signs on, that's for sure.


Whether people wanted her as their vice president or not, Palin does have quite a strong following -- her book "Going Rogue" sold over 1 million copies in its first month on the shelves. Not to mention her sustained position in entertainment magazines due to the scandal involving her daughter's ex-fiance (and father of her grandson) Levi Johnson, who made headlines with his racy pictures in "Playgirl" magazine. Sarah Palin: from maverick to reality TV star? 

Justin Bieber is the reigning king of _____ (fill in the blank with just about anything you want).


For the past few months, "Justin Bieber" has been one of top the trended topics on Twitter and has been a permanent feature on AdAge's Top Tweeted Brands since the list's commencement. On February 28, 2010, 84,846 Tweets featured his name. In addition to being mentioned all over social media sites, his music is also setting records on the internet. In one day, last.fm played his songs 1,854,917 times. That is insane.


So what is the cause of this Bieber Fever? Why are there so many self-proclaimed "Beliebers" out there? Perhaps it is in his adorable grin, his cheesy lyrics, or his melodic voice? Or maybe it is the fact that Usher, one of the most successful music icons in the history of R&B is his mentor? Golly, I can't help but think that helps just a smidgen.


Regardless of why people love him -- they do. He is not just the newest "tween" sensation, he is loved by audiences of all ages. I'll be the first to admit that I've had "One Less Lonely Girl" stuck in my head a time or two. I strongly believe that the success of Justin Bieber is a testament to the power of the internet.  Once just a normal boy living in Statford, Ontario, his mother uploaded videos of him singing to this little website we know as YouTube.com, and just months later, he began getting phone calls from some of the artists whose songs he covered, like Ne-Yo, Chris Brown, Justin Timberlake, and yes, Usher. Dream come true? Check.


Justin is the first mega star created from YouTube, following in the footsteps of singers like Colbie Caillat who was recognized for her MySpace Music page a few years back. Not only do Justin's songs receive millions of views per day, fans' content also get picked up on, if their is a buzz-worthy element to it. Case in point: A 3-year old whose mother videotapes her crying because she is just so in love with Justin Bieber (the mom should go to jail for uploading this) -- the video went viral, and Jimmy Kimmel invited the little girl and her family to the show, where they were surprised by Justin backstage.


This kid is everywhere. And I must admit, I am not mad about it. It will be interesting to see how long he sticks around for, but with a mentor like Usher, I have high hopes for Justin's future.


www.justinbiebermusic.com (Warning: Will get stuck in your head)

Last week, SXSW stormed Austin, TX, and unfortunately, I was not there to see it happen. While I had originally intended to stay in Austin and check out some of the festivities from afar, life happens, and I was unable to make it. C'est la vie -- you can always read about it online, or get a zillion tweets about it on Twitter. Oh the joys of technology.


After reading some industry press about the brands present at the large indie music and tech summit, I am thoroughly impressed with some of the avant-garde tactics that marketers came up with for the festival. It is know for its breakout technologies though -- think Twitter's big push at SXSW in 2007, which helped the social media service get the ball rolling. Tony Weisman, president of Digitas, said, "The bar's pretty high for authenticity. It's not overrun with brands yet; it's still principally about ideas, not about posing."


Some of the most engaging implementations that I have read about include Microsoft's Bing and Chevrolet's Equinox and Volt. Attendees could get a free taxi ride within a certain radius of downtown Austin on the condition that they downloaded the new Bing application onto the phone (a no brainer). And Chevy, which was declared the biggest marketing winner by a plethora of blogs and newspaper articles, used a variety of marketing ploys to help grab attendee's attention. One example is their use of Volt-branded power strips which allowed individuals to charge their laptops and cell phones. Given that the attendees are constantly updating their status' using these two devices, the power strips allowed Chevy to brand themselves using a technique that is not only in their face, but also has actual utility -- an excellent pairing. I would have loved to have witnessed the hullabaloo firsthand, but I'll just have to wait another year when the festival storms Austin for the 24th year in a row.

Magazine industry execs met today to discuss the future of this dying segment of print publication, given the advent of the iPad and other e-readers. While only a small handful of magazines latched onto Amazon's Kindle, the biggest electronic reader to date, the new color feature of Apple's iPad has magazine corporations signing up to deliver their content on the newest gadget.


One of the biggest concerns with charging users to receive a magazine subscription to their eReader is that the content that is currently available on the magazine's website for free is too similar to the information in the print issue. If consumers who are already using the website as their dominant means of accessing information, it is unlikely that they will pay a subscription fee to receive the issue to their eReader if they do not think that there is a substantial difference in the free and paid versions.


Given that it is my spring break, I have finally gotten around to reading for pleasure again, not just for my Finance or Ethics class. I just recently started to follow my favorite author, Karen Kingsbury, on Twitter, and two nights ago she sent out a tweet that said her book "Take One", which I've been dying to read for ages, was available for free on the Kindle. Both of my parents have Kindles, so I instantly went to the Kindle store and downloaded the book. It was incredible -- so fast and so easy (and SO free!). I have nearly finished the entire book, and I have absolutely loved reading on the Kindle. I've played around with it before, but never read a book. I will be the first to admit that I was a naysayer when eReaders were first introduced to the market, but now I'm sold. I am pretty excited about getting to hold an iPad in my hands, and I really think that I would be easily persuaded into buying magazines on this new, colorful reading device. I'm not sure how proud I should be to admit this, but People Magazine is my absolute favorite magazine of all time, and I currently read the print version, use the iPhone app, and scour the website if I have a free moment. Since I am about to graduate, and with a job in consulting will be traveling quite a bit, I plan on buying a Kindle or an iPad to keep with me in my journeys. I think that reading magazines on one of these eReaders will be very enjoyable. This is one of the future pieces of technology and changes in the industry that I am openly embracing.

In the 70s and 80s, most manufacturers switched from using sugar in their products to using a cheaper substitute product -- high fructose corn syrup. Nowadays, HFCS is lurking on the ingredient list of most foods that Americans consume, but there is a move to change this. Some big manufacturers such as Hunt's ketchup, Wheat Thins, Gatorade, Pepsi and Mountain Dew are ditching the HFCS and adding real sugar to their products. The progression towards a more natural product has resulted from consumer demand, as parents and health-conscious individuals continue to raise awareness about the potentially dangerous effects of the artificial sweeteners. However, since the majority of the companies making the switching are not getting rid of HFCS in all of their product lines, the marketing efforts for the new and improved sugar-containing goods is relatively low key.
During all of the recent debate about whether or not HFCS is really unhealthy for humans, the Corn Refiners Association has launched several PR efforts trying to educate the public about the harmlessness of HFCS. However, more research points to the opposing side who claim that the human body was not made to digest this artificial sweetener. The controversy is reminiscent of the big tobacco law suits of the 90s, when the tobacco manufacturers were trying to inform the world that it was not unsafe to smoke regularly, despite convincing evidence proving otherwise.


For those who try to limit their sugar intake, there may be a saving grace. The FDA has approved the use of stevia, which is a natural artificial sweetener. In the past year, stevia has replaced lots of sugar and HFCS, but will results show in 10 years that this product is just as dangerous as HFCS? Why can't an unbiased third party prove or disprove the claims of the manufacturers and lobbyists? Surely there is an answer to the question of the sweetener's safety, one that should not be hidden in order to protect big money.

At long last, there is action being taken to remove high calorie soft drinks from schools all across America. A can of Coca Cola has 140 (empty) calories and 39 grams of sugar. This is atrocious, truly. And the fact of the matter is that kids should never have been allowed to buy these high sugar beverages during school hours in the first place. Perhaps without being hopped up on sugar, children will be able to concentrate better, and we can see the number of kids being medicated for ADHD and ADD decrease (that's a whole other ballgame). But I'll get off my soapbox now.

Coca Cola, Dr. Pepper and Pepsi have all joined forces to help remove full-calorie sodas from elementary, middle and high schools. While the program just happens to coincide with movements in the government to increase sugar taxes as an attempt to stifle soft drink manufacturers, the timing is definitely helpful in creating some goodwill for these three companies. The VP of Public Affairs for the American Beverage Association, Kevin Keane, said that while Coke, Pepsi, and Dr. Pepper are "the fiercest rivals you're going to get" these companies felt that the program was "the strongest way to convey what they'd done and that they'd done it together." I really like that these huge competitors are able to join forces in order to act in a way that is beneficial to the public's welfare.

In addition, I think that Michelle Obama's new plight against childhood obesity is wonderful. We need a national role model like her putting her foot down and demanding change. The children of today are the future of tomorrow -- how do all parents not understand that? The odds are against obese children, in that the vast majority of them will grow up to be obese adults. This is scary. We absolutely need to all work together to change the staggering statistics that are out there on obesity. Seeing Coke, Dr. Pepper and Pepsi's program is really a huge step in the right direction.

During the height of Toyota's public meltdown due to their massive recall efforts, Claire and Phil Dunphy were still trucking along in their Toyota Sienna for all of America to see. This couple, from ABC's new sitcom "Modern Family", are seen driving in their car on numerous times throughout the show -- all part of a massive product placement deal that ABC signed with Toyota, long before the days of their crisis. Unfortunately for "Modern Family", the episodes are taped in advance, and the show producers are unable to yank the Toyotas driven by many of the show's characters. Denis Riney, Executive VP at BrandLogic, believes that for at least a year, there will be "some negative rub-off on other properties and people that associate with [Toyota]." However, I am not sure that I agree with Mr. Riney's estimations.


Not much of a TV fan, I try to stay away from getting hooked on the latest shows, because I try to be as productive with my time as possible. That being said, "Modern Family" is a must-see. My best friend managed to corale me into watching it with her one day, and I fell in love. The show makes me snort with laughter -- the one liners and comedic timing are absolutely perfect, and they really do represent a true modern family living in America today. Do I think that Cameron and Mitchell, the show's happily married gay couple, driving around in their eco-friendly Prius is going to have a negative rub-off on the show? Not at all. There are still millions of Toyota cars being driven around in the world, and although Toyota's brand image may be damaged for the time being, I do not think that their product placements will harm the brand image of popular TV shows. Doesn't this just make the Dunphys and the Pritchetts more like, well, modern families? Perhaps they have already gone in to get their cars inspected, and like the masses of other Toyota users have gone back to to the roads, able to feel safe that their automobile has received the stamp of approval?


This opinion may seem counter to the idea of product placement's purpose being to associate the show with the brands being incorporated into the content -- a sort of "guilty by association" scheme. Personally, I do not fully agree with this idea. I think that product placements help to increase reach and the number of total impressions, but even after watching "American Idol", I do not position Coke as a young, hip drink coveted by all in America. Maybe product placement strategies need to be reconsidered in order to be more effective, or perhaps it's just that all of my advertising classes have rubbed off on me and I am now a more savvy-audience member, taking note of, and knowing the relationship behind, these strategic in-show ads.

After reviewing 17 food manufacturer's nutrition labels, the FDA has just recently issued letters demanding changes be made to the products. The violations include unauthorized health or nutrition-content claims, and unauthorized use of words such as "healthy," which have strict, regulated definitions by the Food and Drug Administration. I am a strong supporter in the fight versus obesity, a disease which is currently plaguing our nation. One of the main aspects which needs to be addressed in this "battle versus the bulge" is consumer education. I frequently have friends ask me about whether or not things are healthy, and what they should and should not eat. Granted I am not a nutrition major, I am not the most qualified source of information, but I am an avid reader of health-related publications, and I try to keep up to speed with wholesome, nutritious food items. I am glad that the FDA is enforcing the law, making sure that company's do not issue deceptive claims, misleading consumers about their food choices. One of the pillars that the American Marketing Association (AMA) stands on is that they will "Do no harm", specifically that they will "consciously avoid harmful actions or omissions by embodying high ethical standards and adhering to all applicable laws and regulations in the choices we make." The food manufacturer's who have knowingly put false, deceptive claims on products such as "Trans Fat Free" should absolutely be held accountable for breaking one of the core values of the AMA.


Another action that the FDA is moving towards implementing is a re-labeling effort for portion size. I have very mixed feelings about this practice, because I do believe that Americans eat too big of portion sizes, and that they need a guide on how much they should be eating. That being said, my cereal label lists 3/4ths of a cup as a portion size, and I eat just under two times that amount. In order to better educate the public about the real number of calories in the food that they consume, I think that nutrition labels should never be deceptive. An example of deceptive labeling is when restaurants' nutrition information (generally available for all restaurants online) has a portion size of two. Many Americans will eat everything that is on there plate, whether they are hungry or not; therefore, serving a customer with a plate that has enough food for two people is essentially just asking for them to overeat.


My hesitance with changing the portion sizes is that it seems to just reflect the fact that Americans do eat too much. I wish that there could be a way to say "Hey, if you eat 4 of these cookies, you will be eating 800 calories! You should really only eat 1, which has 200 calories." People need to be made aware of how many calories are in the servings that they consume. While I think 100 calorie packs are a decent idea, it drives me crazy the type of snacks that they package. 100 calories of Oreos, hmm that's nutritious. One of my favorite tricks is to use snack size Ziplop bags (reuse them!) and divide bulk items into smaller portions right after I unload my groceries. This way I'm never tempted to grab two Ziplocs, and I've created the portion sizes according to recommended guidelines. In conclusion, I think that labeling needs to be changing to get rid of deceiving claims, and portion sizes need to be updated to claims established by nutritionists, not by the manufacturers themselves. It is all about portion control and education -- ending this obesity epidemic is possible, and it is our responsibility to take action.

An article which appeared on Advertising Age’s website this morning detailed Procter & Gamble’s $57 billion acquisition of Gillette Co. five years ago. The author of the piece, Jack Neff, says that while P&G has had increased market share since obtaining Gillette, that the full price tag value has not be reaped just yet. $57 billion is a lot of money -- and these last five years have been tough economically. I bet P&G did not see the economic crisis coming when they handed over such a hefty sum of money. In the past five years, Gillette rolled out their newest “blade innovation” -- the Fusion. The problem with Gillette’s problem is that with people having less money and 10% of the population without a job, pricy razors are not high on people’s priority lists.

One of the things I find most interesting about this article is that as I was reading it, I could not think of a single competitor to Gillette. I sat and racked my brains and came up with Schick, but that was it. I suppose I am most familiar with female razor brands, but I could not think of any separate “male razors” either. Gillette seemingly has a monopoly in the razor marketplace. Even if the $57 billion has not proven measurable results equal to, or greater than, this acquisition price tag, I do not think that the decision was a bad idea. I feel like it is unwise to judge success of financial decisions in such a tough economic climate.

Lastly, this acquisition made me think of companies that I wish would branch out, or create subsidiaries, or even other product lines. I would LOVE for Whole Foods to create a separate entity, sit-down, restaurant where they served delicious, organic, healthy food off a menu. And TCBY needs to start selling their frozen yogurt at the grocery store. And iTunes should host concerts -- at a live venue. These are very random thoughts, but I love trying to think of new M&A or new ways that companies can create new products which compliment their current assets.

I find Twitter very interesting. Last semester, my Advertising Research group conducted a focus group about social media, and nearly every single person fervently denied having a Twitter, or even thinking about opening one. Just a couple of months later, nearly everyone in my Media class has an account. While I cannot pinpoint the tipping point just yet, I strongly believe that it is now “cool” amongst college kids. Don’t you know the people at Twitter are celebrating?!?

I opened an account mainly because I wanted to “follow” my favorite celebrities. Slowly, I began to post good movie quotes, inspirational verses, and random thoughts on my site (although I still have only about 15 Tweets!). However, I was asked to research a client’s Twitter usage at my internship and was given a crash course on how to best operate and utilize this microblogging site. The tool that I find most useful is to the “#tag”, which basically picks up trending topics that people are talking about on Twitter and pulls them onto one big list. AdAge.com just announced that they will produce a “10 Most Tweeted Brands of the Week Chart” which highlights the coolest of the cool trends. I believe that this is a great idea. I would like for them to publish this list at the end of the year, as a sort of “Twitter Yearbook: Trends through the Weeks”. I love to look back at my old yearbooks at the section in the back that highlighted the coolest songs, movies, stores, etc. of that year. Essentially, Twitter is capturing this for us, and AdAge is distributing the details.

As a marketer, having your brand be one of the 10 top “Tweet” subjects would be like striking a GOLD MINE. That is, unless they are bashing your brand. Then that could get ugly.

While I may be one of the only people in America who did not watch the Super Bowl last night, my roommate did beckon me downstairs when Tim Tebow’s commercial aired. And I was mildly disappointed at how ambiguous the spot was. I suppose the ad had received so much publicity before the game that I expected an ultra-controversial message, driving the point that abortion should be banned. However, the spot merely alludes to the fact that Mrs. Tebow’s doctors had suggested that she abort Tim due to medical reasons, but that she refused. She called him her “miracle baby.” And then he tackled her to the floor.

I actually thought it was very appropriate and cute -- but I would like to have seen a little more emphasis on the message that abortions should be made illegal in America. For the amount of money spent running that commercial, you think that there should be a little more oomph to it. At the end of the spot, the Tebows told viewers that they could go online to Focus on the Family’s website for the full story.

Interested in seeing what the press thought about the advertisement, I scoured AdAge.com this morning and came across an ad titled “WWJD? He’d Skip Most of This Year’s Super Bowl Ads” by Bob Garfield. The article says, “Seriously, have you not noticed that Jesus gets as many plugs as the Monday night prime-time lineup?” I was so excited to read that line. It’s true -- I always get so excited when I see prayer circles before games, or when you read bible verses written on players’ cheeks. Or even better, when you have sweet quarterbacks like Colt McCoy thank Jesus for his victory after a game. It is a beautiful and moving thing to see Christianity displayed in such a highly publicized industry. Both Colt and Sam Bradford are featured on www.IamSecond.com, which is a website devoted to celebrities discussing their faith and how they are second in life to Jesus.

Anyways, I thought that the Tebow spot was innocent enough, and I hope that all of the controversy surrounding the ad dies quickly. I know that a lot of Americans dislike Tim (the author of the article said he was “pro-TiVo” but I think that he seems so genuine and I like him a lot.

“Our 14-oz steak is going once... going twice... gone to the man in the black, pinstripe Armani suit!!”

While the restauranteurs at Smith & Wollensky in NYC may not be auctioning off their steaks, they certainly are bartering them off. In the New York Times today, a stark, yet bold worded, ad reads “STEAK FOR STOCK”, followed by body copy explaining the new deal. When the bill arrives at the table, customers are able to pay for the meal by presenting an original stock certificate and a separate stock power with a medallion signature guarantee.

The impetus for Smith & Wollensky’s innovative transaction idea results from large Wall Street banks’ paying of bonuses in stock, not in cash. The effects of their doing so will be catastrophic on the local economy, and therefore, the steakhouse decided to take action and seize the opportunity to advertise in order to gain positive publicity and increase restaurant traffic.

Allan Stillman, owner of Smith & Wollensky, said that the response has been “over the top.” He also commented on how rare it is to have such widespread media coverage of a restaurant’s advertising. He said, "When we do our advertising, we consider the fact that if you can get it to be cutting-edge, then you're doing something different from everybody else, and you don't have to worry about people copying your advertising."

I love this idea. It is well thought out, creative, and is aimed directly at their core target market -- businessmen and women. Bravo Smith & Wollensky (& Creative Team at Walrus), bravo!

After Apple’s reveal of the newest piece gadget -- dubbed the iPad -- many tech savvy bloggers have been blasting off messages of excitement, anticipation and feeling of awe at Apple’s ability to continually produce products that further the boundaries of modern gadgetry. However, there has been a large amount of criticism and disappointment from the tech community about features that are missing from the iPad, one of which being Flash software.

At first, I felt like people were overreacting about their dismay at the lack of Flash, but after thinking about it, I do find it strange that a product which Apple is touting as the ultimate personal entertainment device would be missing a software which enables most advertisements, websites and online TV shows to run. In an article on MediaWeek.com, Mike Shields points out that without Flash, the increasingly popular alternative TV venue Hulu.com will be unavailable. According to Shields, “Hulu, which reached 43.7 million unique users in November, streamed a record 924 million videos”. These numbers are staggering -- and I must admit, I am one of those unique users. Do not get me wrong, I am an avid iTunes downloader, mainly thanks to my parents generosity in giving me a monthly iTunes allowance.

However, as my hard drive filled up and my laptop began to move slower, I decided to try Hulu.com, so that I would not have to buy Ugly Betty and House episodes and have them take up so much space. Before using this site, I was morally against it -- thinking that it was furthering the death of commercials. However, after watching an episode of Ugly Betty and being interrupted four times throughout the show to watch ads (which you are unable to forward through), I realized that Hulu was even better than TiVoing for advertisers. After a couple of episodes of the show, I could recite to you the NyQuil spot in my dreams -- and this is an advertisers greatest wish.

So while I am still very excited to get to play with an iPad when it finally arrives at Apple stores, I may perhaps hold off from buying one until iPad numero dos comes to the market, hopefully with the addition of Flash software. Still an owner of the original iPhone, I am reminded that patience is a virtue with Apple’s techie gadgets every time that my little sister quips out her iPhone 3GS and whizs about Safari at a speed unknown to my seemingly decrepit cellular device.

In the news this morning, Merrill Lynch’s $20 million marketing effort stole the headlines. The focus of this recent advertising strategy is retirement, which is the number one savings goal for most people, according to Justine Mertz, the head of marketing for retirement and philanthropic services at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. In the recent recession, many people’s savings accounts shrunk significantly in size, and although our economy is yet to fully recover, Metz claims that Americans have proven themselves as “cautiously optimistic.” I believe that this newfound positivity about the financial markets will trigger a series of new advertising campaigns, as companies attempt to capitalize on what journalist Dan Neil of the LA Times describes as “Americans’ amnesia”. Neil also points out that the US economy is “led into and out of recession by consumer confidence, which turns on our faith in our institutions”. Perhaps Merrill Lynch’s campaign has arrived at the perfect time -- the economy is far from prosperous, with 10% of people in the United States still unemployed, but our country appears to be on the road to recovery.

Albert Einstein once stated: ”In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.” Well, here it is -- one big opportunity. I believe that firms should continue to be careful with their messaging, but that given the current optimism in our nation, they should begin to roll out new strategies with services offering to help Americans. Copy in one of the new “help2retire_____” Merrill Lynch campaigns reads “A Merrill Lynch Financial Advisor can explain the potential benefits and help you determine if one is a good fit for your long-term strategy.” People want help, they desire stability, they need security.

Following the recent earthquake in Haiti, many organizations set up funds and charities in order to raise money to help the victims of this devastating event. In the past two weeks, there has been an incredible outpouring of generosity from people all across the world. In America, universities, work forces, cities, religious institutions, and other groups have successfully raised millions and millions of dollars. For one charity, the medium used for a record breaking fundraiser was one not commonly utilized -- text messaging. An article posted by Peter Dunn on mediapost.com accredits the Red Cross with figuring out how to best reach into Generation Y's pocketbooks and urge them to donate. By simply texting "Haiti" to 90999, each individual donates $10 to Haiti relief funds. The best part? That there is no credit card information being texted -- the money simply is charged to the user's cell phone bill. As of January 21st, the Red Cross had received $23 mill in pledges from texts alone.

I, too, donated via text message to the Red Cross, although I'm not sure how proud I am of doing so. Granted, I know that my $10 will help out, but I am sheepishly ashamed of my generation's laziness. I know that my peers and I have grown up online and with cell phones in our hands since we were in junior high, but something seems off about this campaign. Perhaps it is that a large number of teens and young adults that typed in "Haiti" and hit "send" will never actually pay that money -- while their parents may receive a cell phone bill that looks a little pricier than the last.

That being said, the Red Cross have been very successful in their endeavors, and I truly believe that the money is going to help so many lives. It is devastating to turn on the news and see the country that once was Haiti. I am sure that the prominence of American's texting efforts will spark many other fundraisers using similar methods in the future.