let the world decide.

what's better than Paris Hilton as faux-running mate to Obama?

letting the world (agencies?) decide. [see slide 16; i also like 8 & 9, personally.]

TBWA\CHIAT\DAY:


but clearly, that would be a bad idea. incongruent governments and all. so when you actually go to lettheworlddecide.org, you get a "404" error message. one of the funniest i've seen in some time. something something iPhone.

to see other funny 404's, check these (that one's my fave!) out (that one you can refresh for something new, too).

on another note, you can read a recent analysis of Obama's slinking campaign from an ad POV here.
i didn't realize a new slogan right now was that detrimental, but, i am willing to buy it. especially considering Biden.

thin women effect: hating self, loving brands.

according to a study reported on by AdAge, thin women in advertising make women feel poorly about themselves, but good about the brand. viewers will eat less or choose low-calorie options after seeing a thin model, feeling inadequate, but will like whatever product better; yet, when faced with a "normal" sized woman, women are less inclined to purchase the advertised product, but won't monitor their eating. the study was comprised of "a sample of 194 college students aged 18-24."

i feel the need to address this, especially because it's getting attention as a reason for marketers to return to skinny models: they sell product better.

i don't think this is the case. i think for a long time now, women have been living in 'the valley.' no, not like valley girls. i mean this trench from which we try to crawl out of. on one side, expectations and traditions (and don't you dare get me started in a debate by saying 'but they aren't there any more'--bullshit); on the other side, a long way up and out, paved with dogmas and philosophies difficult to navigate, aiming to feel alright in this world and in our bodies.

this shift is still changing.
the valley is getting smaller, but it will take time. this movement is helping more than hurting, if marketers/brands can suck it up a while longer. only in the past decade (being generous) have girls been able to see 'real women' in the media around them. wait for these girls to grow up. then tell me about their confidence, their eating habits, their response to thin models. if the same results hold in 20 years, then i'd consent to maybe there being something in it.

because right now, the valley effect is such that women see skinny women in skinny jeans (for example). that's a goal and aspiration that they were brought up (in many cases) to fulfill, understanding that this is what our Western society views as desirable. they want to be the skinny woman so they can buy the skinny jeans. thus, they get down on themselves, eat less, and do like the brand more--it's a status symbol, a version of self-growth and attainment/contentment.

that is removed for current 18-24 year olds, many of whom grew up on Britney Spears and Spice Girls, when they are shown images like themselves. there is no push to better oneself, no goal to reach, no status attached to something they can readily buy. to put it in perspective: the iPhone. if it was cheap and easy to get, tech geeks wouldn't be all over that shit. the iPhone are the skinny jeans of today's market gurus.

but that desire for the skinny jean will dissipate when it is no longer a status symbol. if the regular jeans are as desirable as the size 00s. to extend the metaphor, when it becomes more about the cut and style of the jeans, rather than the size. this is the shift. don't cut it off from happening. the study also found that seeing regular women was self-affirming, though brand-denying. but i should know better than to ask the industry to consider the end user over the almighty dollar.

[side note.
i'm not even getting into the fact that 194 students is a shitty sample size to be parading this data around on.]

first impressions. om nom nom nom.

random smattering of thoughts. more structured posts to follow. i'm vocal today.

RANDOM: Om Nom Nom Nom
this site, despite my best efforts, has assimilated my life.
i do indeed now say "om nom nom nom" with surprising frequency. never underestimate the power of boredom, sleepiness, late work afternoons, and Microsoft Paint. it's like lolcats version 1.5, if you don't count manbabies.com (and i certainly don't).

FILM: The Strangers
advertising decent enough to get me to go.
however, after conclusions of the movie, tamara still "isn't there." in fact, tamara isn't even mentioned again. who the fuck is tamara? and more over, what did she do with the plot of this movie? because it doesn't exist. way to go for a suspenseful let down. as in, a suspenseful lack of plot arc, motive, and, dare i say, creativity.
prove me wrong. please, somehow validate that 12 bucks i won't get back.

FILM: Kill the Sequels
an uncountable number of sequels you really didn't need to know were occurring. or rather, you could know--but why? lemme go with... i will likely never go see nearly any of these. you could sell me on shrek 4 & 5 (i'm a sucker), the grudge 3 (i'll see any shitty scary movie that comes out; see above), and silent hill 2 (because i liked the 1st one). cars 2? for real? why? [watch. there'll be a Strangers 2. -headdesk-]

ADVERTISING: Change Lingerie
a campaign i think i like. not love, though.
i say "i think" because while i instinctively like the political overtones of the campaign and the aggressive, in-your-face tactic, i'm not sure if it's tasteful. i mean, i think it is? it's odd. it's like one of those things where you feel guilty for liking it. like i think i perhaps shouldn't like it. i'm not sure why. clever, to be sure. caustic? unsure.

ADVERTISING: Bob Garfield, Lasagna?
okay, bad joke, as in, i have shamed myself. regardless.
why the disaffection for cheese? that campaign doesn't offend me enough to get me to stop purchasing cheetos. no, i don't want orange underwear (unless i buy it that way!) and no, i don't think they're very clever commercials. but breeding baby drug lords? come on now. for serious. eat some cheetos and calm down, parents of america. i am losing serious respect for adage by the day.

@dailybiz @thegirlriot - garfield needs readers and no better way to get them than to say something completely ridiculous :)
(he is as wise as he is charismatic.) edit to include his wicked awesome post about this here.

DigitalNext doesn't want your...

...anything.

in fact, don't comment.
if you're passionate and opinionated, give up.
after all, blogging doesn't matter, anyway.

certainly don't attempt to have a conversation.
adage, screw you. take that for personal and offensive.

i went out of my way to REGISTER just to bloody comment on this post, which i addressed in my blog here. i am one for conversing, as many of you know. why not close the gap, get feedback from the person who wrote it? but since i can't use a url on AdAge, i just gave my abbreviated thoughts.

which have been deleted and censored.
"Ad Age reserves the right to delete comments that are insulting or personal in nature."

i did not insult the writer in any fashion. nor was anything i said personal. i was addressing the fact that, perhaps, this was not the best method, and that, perhaps, when i go to a store i like to see a person. a la the post i wrote.

what the fuck, AdAge? communicate this.

stupid advertising, stupid protests.

i love advertising. i also love protesting. i've protested many a thing in many a strange fashion (or state of unfashion, as the case may have been! bwuahaha, oh crazy times in NYC. anyway.).

i hate stupid advertising. i'm not saying piss-poor advertising where you know the budget wasn't high. i'm saying advertising without a thought process. incongruent advertising. hate that. hate hate hate. (take that twistori <3)

but i hate stupid protesting more. if that's even possible. like for example this shining gem for america's "offical" language. but okay. mistakes happen. even really stupid mistakes happen.

but one that shows you carefully thought out being stupid? FAIL.

this i found while browsing Adages, which always is or finds stupid things.

excerpt:
Mark Dice and his group -- which calls itself -- "The Resistance" will be boycotting Starbucks for its sluttly mermaid. "The Starbucks logo has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute," explains Dice in his press release. "Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves, Slutbucks."

[...]The mermaid's boobies are covered by her hair. As she is a mermaid, she ain't got no legs to spread. (Though Dice claims she is a Siren, not a mermaid).

errr, Dice? ...do you even know what a siren is?
...cos they are freakin' half-bird women. so sure, yeah, they could spread 'em if they liked--except that part's usually avian. and even if you want to get happy and make it a chick with wings, the Starbucks logo clearly isn't wings. clearly. it could be many things, but unless you failed a Rorschach test, it's certainly not wings. and don't give me that a siren and a mermaid are the same thing. they're not. even if they were, that would be an even stupider reason for Dice to use the "siren" tag as a defense of his extensive foray into moronic representation. if you can't get your mythology straight, check it with someone who can. seriously.

Yeas & Nays: II

the site, adrants review, re: whore diamonds.
Riot saith: NAY!
this is revolting on so very many levels--and probably none of the ones you're thinking of, either. Two cents from Sam Elhag, head of strategy for Drunk University Network: "We don't feel that only politicians and Emperors Club members should have an exclusive on rating today's generation of working girls. This opens up the process to the masses. Who knows, a 'five diamond' girl to a Spitzer may only be a 'three diamond' to the rest of the world." ...is the rest of the world buying?? i don't care what YOU think about this woman. YOU are (likely) not going to employ her. this is NOT a democracy; it's a business. you shouldn't be able to vote on how hot a "whore" is unless you're spending money on her or one of her colleagues. you could be hurting her sales simply because a bunch of numb nuts decided they don't like her nose, when she was making fine sales before--and now someone with money won't buy her for fear of what a hundred anonymous internet geeks will think of them for it. this is not Hot-or-Not. these aren't candids, this isn't Girls Gone Wild (don't get me started there). she is not your girlfriend, even if you paid her to be. if this is what it says it is, this is about employment, not your latest social network where you get to degrade women and their choices or situations. shame on you. go watch porn. at least you pay for that. on a side note, do these women get to opt-in to be on the site? that's also relevant. if they don't get a choice, it's worse. if they do, perhaps it helps the sales of lesser-known women? i am trying to see how this could be empowering, and i just don't.

cnet, eff, re: Universal.
Riot saith: YEA!
you go, EFF. i just don't understand how out of hand the record labels can get over this sort of stuff. Lenz was not selling her YouTube video. she didn't even show the full song. are we as humans supposed to never interact with the products you convince us to buy? she can own a Prince CD but she can't video her kid dancing to it and share it with her family and friends, who might also find the child somewhat adorable when dancing to Prince? it's not like Lenz is making DVD copies and selling them on eBay under the title 'Beborn Baby Prince' or something. ye gods. at least it's back on YouTube, the whiny brats. if record labels want to win people back, making us pissed off at you isn't the way to do it.

the site, adage review, re: Heineken
Riot saith: NAY!
wow. talk about shitty. that song is really, really annoying. the syncing of the images doesn't flow with the music, either. the cuts feel off and forced. some of it is really nonsensical. a ballerina serving beer to a sauna full of old guys? right. some of these situations i buy, and some i don't, at all. i don't feel united, or even happy. i feel like the spot instead grated on my nerves and took away my last interest in Heineken (which wasn't that great to begin with, so you didn't sell me on it). i don't think the heart of the issue is "get drunk" versus "pay it forward"--i just think the ad fails to relate to anyone currently. a better idea would have been to take where sharing beer is relevant: different party scenes (bachelor's, reunions, birthdays, etc) and show buying a round and celebrating. that's what we do, right? eat, drink, and be merry? bring in some more merry and less kumbaya.

men... are not idiots?

AdAge gets down on those who dis dad.

and yes, i agree. my dad is awesome. and no, he does not resemble homer simpson or peter griffin. but my dad is one of my best friends, along with my mom (hi mom!).

i am not refuting the fact that "Bashing Fathers and Husbands Isn't the Right Way for Marketers to Sell Products" but there has been women (mother/girlfriend/wife/etc) bashing for WAY longer.

[and you, AdAge, you are LUCKY that it is 5:09 PM because i swear a RANT will come from me one day, misters who say girls are more privileged now than men. my ARSE. PS >> great way to defend your point, as in, not at all. defensive much?]

i'm not saying that makes it alright, but what i am saying is, advertising is becoming an equal-opportunity offender just as we all become more and more sensitive.

my serious questions to you all:
are we getting too sensitive the more we are hyper-targeted?
whatever happened to desensitization through the media, or does that not apply here?



...man, i do talk a lot about the "humanizing" of gender lately, don't i.

proof that higher ups need a youth injection.

dear AdAge,

it is nice of you to finally notice a viral vid just last week that has been out since i was in high school. we sang about badgers throughout spanish class and then some. it was right up there with the llama song and material like the end of the world (dang that is a pretty sweet earth--WRONG!) along with a few other savory vids from albinoblacksheep.com and -my- 'childhood.'

i would laugh outrageously if Quiznos did anything of the sort. and i know i'm taking you seriously when i hope i shouldn't be--but even if you're joking, how did you not find this until now? it's been out so long there have been spoofs on spoofs on spoofs on the Badger Mushroom video. like this stellar one with great soundtrack on Harry Potter.

here. let me help you out. maybe this might come back and haunt you as a good idea, Charlie... we've been quoting Candy Mountain for a year.