I was just about to leave a Birmingham Venture Club event the other evening when I stepped into a conversation with Josh Watkins (an attorney at Feld Hyde) and Brian Cauble (an iPhone app developer with Appsolute Genius) on my way out the door. Both nice guys, to be sure. However, I am not a weeknight person—and when my internal Time To Go clock starts buzzing, it’s TIME TO GO. So I suggested we all talk again soon, and handed both guys a business card. That sparked an entirely new conversation.

Josh got a real kick out of my title (High Commander)—which reminded him of a story of he’d heard about the development a local website. Seems that the site developer had used cartoon drawings as image “placeholders” until the client could supply actual photos of its people. The clients liked the cartoons so much, they decided to keep them when the site went live.

Which reminded me, I told Josh and Brian, of a radio spot I’d produced for William Bell’s City Council campaign in 2005. The spot centered on testimonials from Bell supporters. One of whom was Mrs. Yvonne W. Turner, a sweet woman we used as the voice of District 5’s Senior voters. After Mrs. Turner finished her testimonial, I said to her (tongue in cheek), “Great! Now, if you’ll just sing a little for us, we’ll send your tape to the folks at ‘Star Search’.”

“Why I would be happy to,” she replied. Whereupon she turned back to the microphone, and began ad-libbing a gospel song proclaiming her intention to “do what The Spirit say do” (which was, of course, vote for William Bell). The instant she started singing, I turned to Nick Punch—my engineer for the session at Boutwell Studio—and pointed to the Record button. He got it. The results were so perfect, we ended-up using Mrs. Turner’s one-take vocals for the spot’s music bed. After which, Nick turned to me and said, “That was the most spontaneous recording session I’ve ever been involved with.”

“I know exactly what you’re talking about!” said Brian. “Because the other night, I shaved my cat.”

Silence.

Josh: “You did what?”

“I shaved my cat. She has really long hair, I have terrible allergies, so about every six months I have to shave her. And the other Friday night, I had a choice: Watch ‘Dear John’ with my wife, or shave the cat.”

Me (gasping for air): “OK, and that’s spontaneous how?”

Brian: “Well, because afterward, I thought to myself, ‘Should I Tweet about this?…Oh what the hell!’ I got more responses to that one Tweet—and they kept coming in for days. People loved it. And the photo.”

So what’s the point here? Brian tells me roughly 75% of all the new business he gets right now is coming directly from Social Media—which is more than I’ve ever heard from anyone. And these days, I’m reading at least one Social Media success story a day.

Obviously, the guy’s doing something right. Which just goes to show that, while a lot of people are working overtime to define “the rules” for marketing in the wild frontier, sometimes there’s no predicting what’s going to work.

At the same time, I learned a valuable lesson for myself: Sometimes it really pays to tell the old Time To Go clock to put a sock in it. Thanks to Brian for the best laugh I’ve had in months.

And oh yeah: Click Here to see Trouble, post-makeover.

Got a totally random Social Media experience that generated a huge response? I’d love to hear about it.

Our fine young intern Josh Hedrick recently pointed me to a New York Times article entitled “Climate Fears Turn to Doubts Among Britons” (http://nyti.ms/cy02W1)—which asks, “If the scientific consensus on climate change has not changed, why have so many people turned away from the idea that human activity is warming the planet?”

And while the article reports that Climate Change skepticism seems to be particularly high in Great Britain, it also noted: “A March Gallup poll found that 48 percent of Americans believed that the seriousness of global warming was ‘generally exaggerated,’ up from 41 percent a year ago.”

Even after a record June and July heat wave tailor-made for the Global Warmists’ predictions, I’m still not seeing the issue dominating weather-related headlines this summer.

So what’s going on here? Clearly, the most damaging blow to public trust came from the numerous media exposés of Climatologists playing fast and loose with their facts (IE: Naming, as allies, any number of reputable scientists who are resolutely agnostic, or even skeptical, on the issue. Suppressing valid evidence that contradicts their gloomy predictions). For years, I’ve been asking the question: Global Warmists have so much to support their position, what possesses them to undercut that position by incorporating outright lies into their argument?

If there’s one area where most members of my profession are profoundly understood, it’s this: Advertisers cannot lie. We can’t even make unsupported exaggerations. It’s a recipe for the death of your client’s business.

There’s also a converse proposition to that reality: Nothing will put a bad business out of business faster than good advertising. I once worked with a creative director who assembled a brilliant print campaign for a bar-b-q restaurant in Atlanta. The ads were so effective that, on the restaurant’s Grand Opening day, the line to get inside literally wrapped around the building. There was only one problem: The restaurant made appalling bar-b-q. And thanks to that remarkably effective campaign, word spread like the plague. Within a couple of months, the restaurant had closed its doors forever.

That said, I would argue that the Warmists’ second biggest mistake has been misguided messaging. While there is certainly a genuinely educated segment of our population that understands the threat, for the average “man on the street”, Global Warming rates a big So What. Particularly during the winter months—when Global Warming sounds like a pretty good deal indeed.

I haven’t given a tremendous amount of thought to formulating a messaging strategy for the Warmists, but my impression is that a far more effective platform would be, “Man-made POLLUTION is worse than ever. It’s poisoning us and our ecosystem. And by the way, it’s slowly heating-up the planet to the point where some really bad things are going to happen for all of us.”

Everybody understands pollution. You can look out the window (or down on the gulf), and you can see it. There’s absolutely no pretending that pollution isn’t created by man’s activities—and there’s no intelligent way to argue that it isn’t bad. What’s more, if we tackled the pollution problem, guess what: The global warming threat would pretty much take care of itself.

And where that aforementioned converse proposition is concerned: Let’s just say that we did everything Climatologists want us to do, for the sake of preventing Global Warming—and the planet just keeps on heating up, utterly disproving (at least in the public’s mind) their predictions. Nobody will ever listen to them again.

Finally, think of how many effective public service campaigns have used memorable icons to represent their message: Smoky the Bear. The crying Indian Chief in the legendary anti-litter TV spot from the 1960’s. Global Warmists need the same thing: Something that’s going to either grab our hearts, or put just enough fear in those hearts to spur action.

None of my suggestions are rocket science. Just common sense. Unfortunately, for all the solid science Global Warmists have on their side, the one element their campaign appears to be lacking altogether is plain common sense.

Originally published 7/23/10 in the Birmingham Business Journal. http://bit.ly/bqjO7E

(By the way, if you didn’t get the comic strip joke,
think about the warning verbiage in Viagra’s ads)

Note: This column was originally posted on the B-Metro website July 15, a week after the column above, and a couple days after the iPhone 4 “dropped call” problem made headlines.

Apparently, Apple Computer is bigger than Jesus. If that intro line made you mad, 1) It should, and 2) The line was a reference to a previous column in which I advanced the argument that Apple has become this generation’s Beatles.

That said, given the company’s initial public responses to the discovery that the iPhone 4g drops calls whenever it’s held a certain way, we are very possibly witnessing the dawn of a PR disaster on par with John Lennon’s offhanded “We’re bigger than Jesus” remark in 1966.

Let me emphasize that Apple’s real problem is not the phone’s design flaw. It’s the company’s response—starting with Steve Jobs’ catastrophically-stupid suggestion for solving the problem: “Just don’t hold it that way.” Yesterday (July 14), I ran a Google search for “iphone 4 don’t hold it that way”. It generated 5,500,000 results. To be perfectly honest, I did not click on all 5.5 million results—but of the sites I hit, not one said, “Great idea! Thanks, Steve!”

Now comes the news that not only has Consumer Reports slapped a Not Recommended rating on the iPhone 4g, but that the Apple.com Forum moderators had deleted multiple customer posts reporting CR’s decision. What’s more, there’s still no indication that Apple intends to fix the problem (although, to be fair, the company is offering refunds).

All of which has a lot of longtime loyalists wondering why they never noticed the emperor’s suddenly-conspicuous lack of clothing—while instantly boosting credibility for crackpots (like me), who can’t tolerate the restraints that come with buying products from consumer technology’s number one Control Freak.

A few of my Jobs-related complaints over the years: He builds the best, and most user-friendly, computers money can buy—then equips them with a never-ending series of infuriatingly typist-unfriendly keyboards. He refuses, for years, to equip his computers with a 2-button roller mouse, because it isn’t as aesthetically appealing as his plain white mouse.

He makes the best MP3 player in the world, but won’t allow it to work with Rhapsody—a music service which enables subscribers to download (to any MP3 player but the iPod) virtually any track in its 750,000+ album library. All for a single monthly fee of $14.99. Wouldn’t that be neat, to fill your iPod for less than the purchase price of 13 songs from iTunes? Not gonna happen.

Finally, there’s the aforementioned iPhone—which you cannot use without an AT+T Wireless subscription. I freely admit that The iPhone is one of the coolest things ever made. But I’ve never heard anyone, particularly former Verizon subscribers, say they loved AT+T’s service—whereas I’ve certainly heard people say they hated it.

All that said, I’ve shared those rants, ad infinitum, with Apple customers over the years—and you know what? They don’t care. Frankly, they shouldn’t care. Not as long as their products’ positives outweigh the negatives. What’s more, they won’t care as long as they perceive that, ultimately, Apple is serving them. Rather than vice versa.

And that’s the real problem with the current iPhone design fiasco: Given the tone of the company’s response thus far, suddenly the issue of who’s serving whom is not nearly so clear.

Following-up on Monday’s entry (two posts down from this one), the topic is, once again, PR blunders.

#2: THIS LITTLE PIGGIE WENT WEEWEEWEE ALL THE WAY TO COURT.

The National Pork Board is threatening the makers of Canned Unicorn with a copyright infringement lawsuit. One would assume the Pork Board did not want this issue to become widely publicized. However, I learned about it from a TIME tweet. At last count, TIME.com had 2,088,677 followers on Twitter alone. Oops.

Here’s the story: On April Fool’s Day, Think Geek—a web-based novelty product shop—introduced (for $9.99 a pop) Canned Unicorn, under the headline Pâté Is Passé. Unicorn – The New White Meat. Obviously, that last part is a play on the Pork Board’s 23-year-old slogan, Pork: The Other White Meat. A slogan which, Think Geek notes on its Facebook page, the Board is strongly considering replacing anyhow.

Apparently, the Pork Board was not amused. On May 5, Think Geek received a 12-page Cease And Desist letter from the international law firm of Faegre & Benson—ordering said novelty shop to forever refrain from using the slogan The New White Meat.

To be fair, I can see why the Pork Board would want to protect their own brandline’s integrity. Even from obviously fake products like Canned Unicorn.

But it seems to me that the best way to handle a case like this would be to call the happy-go-lucky folks at Think Geek.com personally, and ask them real nicely if they’d please not use the line anymore. Maybe even offer to buy a few cans of Unicorn as a token of goodwill.

If that approach didn’t work, for a fraction of the money they spent on Faegre & Benson’s Cease and Desist letter, they could’ve hired a freelance copywriter to offer Think Geek alternate brandlines.

Or they might have even had some fun with the whole matter by posting a tongue-in-cheek entry on their own Facebook page assuring Pork fans that Canned Unicorn contains no pork—and should, in no way, be confused with the Original Other White Meat. If, of course, they had a Facebook page. Which they don’t.

Instead, they paid a lot of money to get a lot of unwanted publicity that rightly makes The National Pork Board look, yes, downright pigheaded.

Our topic is PR blunders, and was inspired by two classic gaffes I discovered just today.

NUMBER 1: THAT’S YOUR LAST SHRED OF CREDIBILITY SAILING AWAY.

By now, you’ve surely heard that BP CEO Tony “I Want My Life Back” Hayward gloriously reclaimed some of his old life this past weekend by competing in a yacht race. Unsurprisingly, that bracing jaunt was in the jolly clean seas around Great Britain’s Isle Of Wight. Not the Gulf Of Mexico—where Hayward has, once again, defied predictions that his image couldn’t get any worse than it already is.

Let’s be honest here: There is nothing good Tony can do for BP at this point, short of allowing the company to fire him—and issue a tersely-worded press release announcing the decision.

Let me make this point clear: Hayward would be doing BP an additional disservice by resigning. The public doesn’t want to see an act of sacrifice from Hayward—and wouldn’t believe him if he said it was his decision. We want to see his ass summarily tossed to the curb. And if he ever wants people to like him again, a public firing is a lot more effective than a resignation in generating the sympathy “foundation” on which he can begin rebuilding his image.

So what else would I do if I were BP? First, I’d hire another PR firm. One, by the way, that’s smarter—and more experienced—in crisis management than I am. But off the top of my head, I would start by using Social Media the way it’s intended to be used: As a dialog medium—not a broadcast medium. Angry people are going to be posting nasty messages about you all over Facebook anyhow; why not give them more freedom to do so on your own page—where you can at least control the response?

Second, I would expand the campaign BP has already launched—profiling actual Gulf area residents involved in the cleanup effort. I like Barryl Willis, the Louisianan whom BP has featured in print and TV ads, discussing his commitment to Gulf residents in leading his company’s legal claims process. For starters, he’s not Tony Hayward.

But I’d take that idea a step further: I’d start profiling non-BP employees working with the company on the cleanup. LOTS of them. I’d even consider building a website featuring those people. Maybe even allow them to blog about their experiences.

Yes, there’s clearly a risk this idea could lead to some negative blogging. But if BP demonstrated absolute goodwill with those people in its mission to make things right, and faithfully followed-up on problems those folks encountered in their own cleanup efforts, I’ll bet they’d start winning some converts.

Got a classic PR gaffe—new or old—that you’d like me to add to this column? Shoot me an email ( francis@harebrains.com ), and I’ll post the best of the best.

COMING SOON…Part Two: This Little Piggie Went WeeWeeWee All The Way To Court.

(Theodorick Of York, Medieval Barber, bleeds a patient
suffering from “an imbalance of bodily humors”.)

A couple of weeks ago (after years of stubborn resistance) I replaced Outlook Express and Microsoft Schedule for Office 97 with the full version of Outlook. Much as I dreaded it, my initial reaction was unexpectedly optimistic. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that it wasn’t so bad after all. Not only that, it offers several technical advantages that I formerly didn’t have.

Now, after spending two weeks really getting to know Outlook inside and out, I am absolutely positive that there is no hope of my ever regaining the efficiency I once enjoyed with my “outdated” programs. Just one example: Outlook’s AutoComplete function—which apparently cannot remember from day to day that when I type “E”, I want to send an email to Erin.

In a related vein, I recently completed an excellent book entitled Beer Blast (The Inside Story of the Brewing Industry’s Bizarre Battles for Your Money)—by Philip Van Munching. If you’ve ever peeled a Heineken bottle, you’ve probably seen his last name on the top label—after the words “Imported By”. Philip worked several years for the family business—then several months with the corporation that bought Van Munching Co. from his father.

One of the more poignant chapters in the book describes, in detail, the sweeping changes Van Munching’s new bosses introduced to a number of policies Dad had rigidly enforced over the years. They gave local sales reps broad freedom to offer periodic discount-pricing incentives. They added brand extensions—most notably Heineken Light—thereby broadening their product line beyond just Heineken and Amstel Light. They developed a 7-ounce Heineken bottle. They updated the advertising—with humorous spots that featured sophisticated people having good times while drinking beer, rather than focusing strictly on the Heineken brand.

Every change resulted in unqualified disaster.

That got me to thinking how easy it is for an ad agency to fall into the trap of Change For Change’s Sake—particularly in serving a new client. But here’s the thing I’ve learned: Just because we can do “better”, that doesn’t mean it’s always the right thing to do. For instance, have you ever gone shopping for a specific product, and literally couldn’t find it on the shelves because the new package design looked nothing like the one you’ve bought for years?

I’m not suggesting, by any stretch of the imagination, that change is bad. Just be sure that—when it comes to your marketing communications—your agency has a perfectly sensible reason for recommending the change. And that the change is consistent with the brand you’ve presumably spent years building in the marketplace.

Now, if someone could pass this message along to the half-wits who make Outlook, I’ll  be really happy.

Our web programmer Richard Thomas recently removed himself from consideration for a significant new business opportunity—after receiving a series of abrasive communiqués from the organization’s top executive (a physician). The last of which concluded with a direct order: “From now on, you will refer to me as Dr. [Whatever].”

Shortly after that decision, Richard’s partner Wesley mentioned it to a friend—who told him, “I didn’t want to say anything before, but I saw Dr. [Whatever] as a patient once. And he was not a friendly person.”

Richard told me his story, in part, because he knows my agency’s longstanding policy: We don’t work with a-holes (which, of course, is the print-friendly version of the word). For the sake of argument, I define an a-hole as someone who gets most of his or her pleasure by taking it from others.

Now, does that mean we don’t work with clients who demand their money’s worth—and get mad if we don’t deliver? Of course not; that’s what clients are supposed to do. But we will not work with that personality profile described above, for two reasons: 1) They’ll make your life miserable while you’re working with them, and 2) They’ll usually invent some reason to screw you in the end.

Talking with Richard made me realize there’s another reason—and one that’s equally important: Working with a-holes (particularly well-known ones) is bad for your reputation, and your brand. Which means it’s bad for business. It’s a case of guilt by association, and everybody’s a judge.

Years ago, I worked for a shop whose main client was in a controversial industry (one I don’t particularly admire myself), and lemme tell you: When my job description was expanded to include new business, my introductory calls to prospects routinely ended shortly after I answered the question, “So who are some of your clients?”

The point here is that—whether you like it or not—your brand in the marketplace is often defined as much by who you work with as it is by what you do and how you do it. Which is why your core messaging strategy should at least imply what kind of clients or customers you want to serve—and don’t want to serve. Which is one reason why I’ve always loved DavisDenny’s brandline: “We do good work for people who do good work”.

I’m now working with a great young builder, Daniel Murray, whose construction company has a unique way of doing business: Full disclosure on every expense involved in a budget—all the way down to his job-related cell phone charges. It’s a policy that’s been consistently well-received, but he’s learned—the hard way—that there are certain types (yeah, you know who) who’ll contest any number of his perfectly legitimate expenses. Why? Because that’s what those people do. Which is why a critical part of the brand strategy we’re developing for Murray Building Company will include the same subtle message implied in DavisDenny’s brandline: If you’re one of them, don’t call us. Please.

At the same time, there are plenty of otherwise good companies whose branding places them in a distinctly negative light. I can’t think of a better example than GoDaddy—which, judging from their ads, has defined its core market as oversexed teenage NASCAR fans in rut. Imagine how that sleazy campaign makes the good people of GoDaddy feel about working there.  Imagine how many prospective customers that campaign has repelled over the years. CEO Bob Parsons has heard the criticisms. He doesn’t care. Sounds like an a-hole to me.

And yes, as Mr. Parsons clearly demonstrates, there are plenty of companies doing quite well for themselves despite having major a-holes in charge (even some, shockingly, in my industry). And while there’s a natural tendency to resent—or even envy—their success, you’re better off feeling sorry for them. I know I am. And as a business owner, I have the luxury of avoiding them. But if you don’t have that luxury, remember: Nights and weekends, you get to be around people you like. A-holes have to be around themselves all the time.

Originally published in the Birmingham Business Journal May 7, 2010: bit.ly/a-holes

I miss T-Buff’s white suit, and his reassuring vow: “We will…approve your credit.” I miss Suzuki Man. I miss Jim Skinner’s quivering liver. Heck, I even miss Jim and Jimmy.

Re-gard-less of what the tastemakers might say, not all “bad” advertising is bad. And today, nobody does Bad better than Rhett McLaughlin and Link Neal—a North Carolina-based comedy duo who joined my roster of all-time ad heroes early last year with a musical-comedy masterpiece for The Red House (“Where black people and white people buy furniture!”).

Several months later, Rhett&Link created a dark epic in the grand Clint Eastwood | Sergio Leone tradition for Cullman Liquidation (used mobile home sales).

Now comes their latest creation: A jingle-driven love letter for Corydon, Indiana’s Butt Drugs. Yes, that’s the store’s real name. And yes, they have a lot of fun with it (“free parking in the rear!”).

I’d describe the primary tone of Rhett&Link’s spots as heartfelt irony. They select overtly peculiar or utterly humdrum businesses as their clients, and celebrate their actors’ absolute lack of star quality. But they never do it at the expense of the businesses, or their “stars”. Yeah, they’re playing these folks for laughs, but they do it with genuine affection—and they always leave me loving the people (and the businesses). That’s a special talent.

Better still, they benefit their clients’ businesses. Just to make sure, I called The Red House and Cullman Liquidation—and both reported a very positive impact from their spots (although Robert Lee from Cullman Liquidation did lament the stifling credit environment’s impact on his ability to finance new customers).

If you’ve never seen their work before, you owe it to yourself to spend a few minutes with Rhett&Link:

THE RED HOUSE

http://bit.ly/redhouse-spot

CULLMAN LIQUIDATION

http://bit.ly/cullman-spot

BUTT DRUGS

http://bit.ly/butt-drugs

Don’t Just Make Sales. Create Experiences.

This past Christmas, my wife decided she wanted a night away from the house, instead of a “thing”—so we booked a room at Aloft for Friday, January 8^th.

Full story at this address: http://bit.ly/bbj-aloft

I’m on a horse - -

If you haven’t already seen the latest Old Spice body-wash ad, stop reading and click on this link immediately: http://bit.ly/smell-like-me

First, I love the creative strategy: Don’t sell this product directly to men. Sell it to women—who make the majority of those purchasing decisions.

Next, find a guy who’s so gorgeous no woman could take her eyes off the screen—and yet, so funny (in a manly-man kind of way) that guys really do wish they could be like him. BTW: His name is Isaiah Mustafa—and before his acting career, he was a wide receiver for the Seattle Seahawks. And yes, that’s his voice.

Then there’s the script—which is as strong a piece of writing, from a language standpoint, as any I’ve ever seen. Ever. And did I mention it actually sells the product?

Then there’s the production—and here’s where it gets really cool: The entire spot is a single, live shot with no edits, and no green-screen effects (except for the diamonds and the bottle that appear on his hand). The bathroom / shower backdrop is physically pulled up and out of the shot, revealing the boat. When the camera moves in close on Mustafa, he carefully sits on a device that slowly slides him onto the horse for the final shot.

Again, it’s a single shot. Of course, it took three days—and 57 takes—before they got everything perfect. Think about that. You have to love an actor who can deliver that kind of enthusiasm on Take 57.

Finally, there’s the media strategy: Although you know you probably have the best spot that would run on the Super Bowl, ignore your ego. Take that single-spot price of $3 million, and buy half a dozen spots on the Olympics—which skews decidedly female. And then get super-lucky with the ratings—which have not only exceeded all expectations, but are actually setting all-time Olympic viewership records. How big? Wednesday the 17^th, the Olympics did something no show has done since 2004: Beat “American Idol.”

Major kudos to the creative team of Craig Allen and Eric Kallman of Wieden + Kennedy in Portland, Oregon (the agency you might know better as Nike’s main shop). If you guys ever get tired of rainy winters, there’s a corner office at Hare Communications with your names on it: Mine.