JKR

There is plenty of evidence of brands opening up their products to consumer customisation. Timberland are the latest to offer a ‘build your own boot’ facility. Meanwhile, crowd sourced design competitions allow us all to have a hand in the branding (for example the Chiquita stickers above). And we now have crowd funding – entrepreneurs pitching for our cash to produce their products on sites such as Kickstarter. So does all this tally with the notion of putting ‘the brand in the hand’ in the hands of the audience? This funky promotional film from Brothers and Sisters would suggest so – click to watch.

What do you think? The revolution sounds pretty groovy and to “um” and “ah” risks making one appear less with it. But I’m not so sure this isn’t a false dawn, in the whole comedy / cooking / whatever is ‘the new rock’n’roll’ kind of a way. Great brands have prestige because they are made by ateliers not amateurs (or really good tradesmen rather than journeymen to be a bit less fancy about it). And great brands tend to build over time in line with a big vision. Whereas, if one were to crowd source one’s brand’s strategy, I would hazard it would zig and zag incoherently, as consumers offer a barometer of the here and now. Strategy needs to be more than an extension of the trends on twitter. Sony famously ignored research advice not to launch the Walkman, believing consumers lacked the vision to see beyond the here and now.

I guess this is not a case of having to back a horse. There is room for all kinds of approaches. And the wisdom of crowds can be as powerful as the insight of a visionary. I guess I am just suggesting that while things are certainly changing it doesn’t automatically mean that any brand following a more traditional “we are the expert, you are the consumer” approach is missing the future. And of course we are at the start of a new journey – overtime we will presumably get more sophisticated in the way that consumer input is integrated into brand behavior and design, without actually having to hand over the keys to the car.

Back to customisation, it feels like a challenge for household brands, but it is possible – there is a bit more on that here…

A simple observation today – the typography on the posters for True Grit is great. It’s a good example of how something as clichéd as a ‘wanted poster’ can actually be ownable and can glue the various communications together, from the arty ‘teaser’ version with the bullet hole, to the various character portraits also being used.

There was also this piece of fantastic hand lettering produced for the film, although it does not appear to have made the cut…

Beyond being a good example of typography as branding, it does beg one thought – why are the actual words not a little more arresting? “Punishment comes one way or another” is a rather unmemorable statement, the kind of generic homily most trailers carry. The famous line from the first True Grit, repeated in the re-make, was “Fill your hands you son of a bitch!” (delivered as a tetchy John Wayne rides straight at the baddies, dropping his reins and firing away with both hands). This line has headed most movie nerd blogs about the re-make, so it surely resonates.

I guess my point is, if you are going to present a typographic solution, the right words can raise the hairs on your arm. Below is the original poster, whose long copy approach is certainly different from the wham-bam approach posters take these days…I guess research shows we like our concepts a bit more immediate now, hence ‘Snakes on a plane’ or the forthcoming ‘Cowboys & Aliens’ – both of which ‘do what it says on the tin’.

Speaking of graphical wordplay, Google’s topical versions of their logo can be hit or miss affairs, but their Valentine’s day pastiche of Robert Indiana’s famous ‘Love’ image was sublime and a good, simple example of using the content as well as the typography to join up an idea.

Hats off to Pepsi – their slimmer Diet can (designed to promote their sponsorship of New York’s Mercedes-Benz Fashion Week) has pulled off a rare thing in packaging design: it’s got mainstream media attention.

Once upon a time packaging design was a ‘channel’ where we could happily toil unnoticed. Frankly nobody outside of the marketing department (and the consumer at the shelf) really gave a damn what we did. But lazy journalists looking for a quick story have become the seagulls following the trawler of Twitter outrage. And whatever the subject, even one as dull as packaging, there is always someone around who will be outraged by it on Twitter.

The PR around the can made it a hostage to fortune and might have been a little less blatant around its ‘skinny = better’ sub text. Lines like “Get the skinny” might mean “read about the backstage fashion world” but also, y’know, could be read as “lose some weight girls”. They also called it a “taller sassier version” of the regular can in “celebration of beautiful, confident women”.

Now, let’s look at the actual design: it’s a diet product. So I guess the designers elected not to make it look shorter and fatter. They were, if you want to be pretentious, semiotically suggesting the product benefit – that it is anti-‘full fat’. I doubt they were thinking of promoting anorexia. So here’s the rub. As every channel becomes considered ‘media’, it gets more heavily promoted. “This isn’t a can, its advertising” the thinking would go. “So lets promote the hell out of it.” But this shines too much light on the thinking. What was once suggested in the design is now blatantly spelt out in the PR.

Conclusion: the design is actually totally fitting with the product, promotion and a general ‘look more elegant and feminine’ strategy. It’s the PR that has caused the issue. If ‘everything is media’ then PR needs to re-think how it promotes design and choose its language more carefully.

Read more here.

Unrelated thought – spare a thought for the naming strategy folk. Coke does Diet. Then Pepsi does Diet for girls, Max for boys. So Coke adds Zero for boys (because us guys like an all or nothing aspect to our sub-brand names). So Pepsi keep Diet for girls, but add a big Zero to the pack, just to cover that off. Would anyone care to come up with the next logical development?

Yesterday was the twelfth day of Christmas, time to move on. But please indulge me in one last seasonal observation. Down the high street the shops were going the extra mile to make their windows enticing. Some then offered to gift-wrap the purchase. And most put your goods in a seasonally themed bag the better to advertise their wares as you went on your way. But if you did your shopping online, what turned up to be wrapped? Nine times out of ten it would be an anonymous brown card box with little or no branding. Now, even if your purchase was for someone else, and you were only going to toss the box, this was a highly underwhelming way to take receipt of costly purchases.

One could argue that a delivery with a little more panache might drive shopper loyalty, and a decently branded envelope might inspire others who see it (for example as it comes to your desk in the office) to also make a purchase – in other words, why doesn’t online make much attempt to follow the high street model?

Against this is one shining example – Selfridges’ envelope comes in their signature yellow, the goods inside stylishly wrapped in black tissue. Kind of makes you think they give a damn, compared to many others. Also a great example of how a brand can come to own a colour simply by dint of single-mindedly using it at every opportunity. Anyone got more good examples?

Here’s a fun idea for a condom brand – let the guys know how much they will be saving by buying one. Sir Richard’s does just that (interestingly, the eco-footprint savings are not mentioned – obviously it was decided the wallet is mightier than the environment).

Either way it’s a cool idea and a good looking pack. Typically, as an agency, we hold that advertising and packaging should not be confused as mediums. Advertising tells a tale. Packaging signifies values at a glance. And just because one’s marketing budget has been cut, or some “integrated marketing” strategy wants to co-opt the pack, one dilutes pack equities with advertising clutter at one’s peril.

However, never say never – here, the idea is brilliantly integrated by subverting the language of the price sticker. And the decidedly non ‘new man’ ethos of the idea chimes with packaging whose patterns could grace a tie at Sterling Cooper. I guess the point is that if the thinking is joined up,
so too can the packaging and advertising.

You can read and see more here