Recently in Branding Category

As a 2-year-removed college grad, an adherent to no particular religion (other than The Religion of Non-Stop Awesomeness), and a relative newcomer to the Facebook scene, I was surprised to hear the WSJ report that giving up Facebook for Lent was all the campus rage last year and has since spread to include the equally hapless older demographic (i.e., parents).

It's incredible to me that Facebook's has achieved "vice" status and that abstaining from it for little over a month now qualifies as honoring Jesus' 40 days in the wildernes. I mean, dude didn't eat, practiced strict abstinence, and resisted temptation from the Devil himself all in the name of his faith. And what are we doing? Why, 40 days without Facebook, of course!

Wait a minute. None at all? Cold turkey? Just like that? Does that mean I can't update my status hourly to tell all my 360 "friends" that "Alex Weaver is super psyched for the Snuggie Pub Crawl!" or throw a virtual snowball at some kid I went to kindergarten with?

Clearly I am not nearly as hooked as most. But I still find it ironic - nay, downright hilarious - that by abstaining from Facebook for Lent, college kids everywhere are basically freeing up time otherwise spent poking strangers to partake in activities that, piously speaking, they'd probably be better off giving up instead. (I've seen people driven to the bottle for less.)

Whatever the case, I can't find a more convincing proof of the power and persistence of social networking in today's society than the fact that people, both young and old, feel like giving it up actually means something. My question now is...

UPDATE! Seems I'm not the only one who didn't like the rebrand. Check it out here.

As the recession wears on, popular brands nationwide are putting considerable effort - and dollars - into rebranding strategies designed to make us feel better about buying the products we didn't used to think twice about ponying up for. Our taste in Pepsi may not have changed, they fear, but the "unemployment jitters" are quickly becoming fuel aplenty to get us through that all too familiar afternoon lull.

The question is: Do companies, in an effort to make consumers more comfortable with paying for "premium," actually make them uncomfortable by changing what was once familiar?

I think it might. It seems ironic to read, for example, that PepsiCo-owned Tropicana Orange Juice would shell out $35 million for a new ad campaign positioning them as America's "main squeeze."

I liked the old brand identity better; you know, the classic straw sticking out of the orange motif. It was visually appealing and clever and got the message across without a lame tag line or cap in the shape of a halved orange (though that is rather, um...peachy). But more importantly, it jumped off the shelf not because it was new and flashy looking, but because it was familiar. The new carton is nice, but by simplifying the design and deviating from their previous look, it has only made itself blend in more with the competitors. Seems to me in an effort to make purchasing their brand feel more comfortable (and therefore justified) to the penny-clutching public, all Tropicana did was water down their already juicy product and put themselves into a $35 million dollar hole in the process.

I guess in the end it squeezes down to one important question: In today's economy, is it smarter to rebrand a product in the hopes of making consumers more comfortable with its price, or to keep the familiar brand but devise a marketing strategy that convinces consumers that the same old good stuff is still worth the extra ducats?

I tend to favor the latter option, but I'd love to hear why you disagree.

Image Courtesy of poopface_productions (yes, it's really called that).

Good news for all you wannabe Mad Men (and Women)! There's now an alternative to getting into advertising: becoming an advertisement. That's right. Anyone with untouched skin space and no self-image issues can now create an online profile and pimp...I mean, rent your most personal space to hungry advertisers willing to shell out considerable coin for the services of a living, breathing billboard.

Sound ridiculous? Don't be too hasty to judge. Not only will this gig not interfere at all with your daily routine, but think of the implications - or rather lack thereof - for your diet. The rail-thin model look will be replaced by "rotund but resourceful," and your extra pounds will be worth their weight, or at least surface area, in new ad revenue.

Personally, I couldn't be more behind this movement. And though my forehead belongs to Aquent for the next 3 years ("Register with Aquent and this won't be you"), I do still have some available space left on my abs.

This post was written by Aquent's Alex "Get Your Damn Re-branding Off of Me" Weaver. This is a picture of him.

Maybe it's the sinking feeling that what we've been doing with our lives up to this point is precisely what got us into this recessed moment in history. Or maybe it's the inverse; maybe it's the feeling that since there's nowhere to go now but up, we want to put our best foot forward by turning over a brand new leaf. Whichever the case may be, one thing has become clear: today's recession is driving the brands of yesterday to rebrand for tomorrow.

America itself, of course, got the ball rolling with its inspirational new look (love it or hate it, this ain't George Washington's Union anymore). Pepsi kept it going with their daring new (burping?) logo. And then Kanye West had to just plain take it over the top with his outlandish new name ("That's Martin Louis the King, Jr, to you"), which, I understand, is some sort of dual homage to the civil rights movement and a new line of Louis Vuitton shoes (read: sellout), though it's probably just his way of increasing the number of things he can rhyme with himself.

The question is, is all this name-changing and logo-altering a good idea? Isn't it possible that, in these turbulent times, the American consumer will end up seeking solace in the comforting familiarity of things that never seem to change? I've said it before (apropos of Joaquin Phoenix' recent experiments in rebranding): if it ain't broken, don't fix it. But what do I know? I'm just a card-carrying member of Generation Y with one hand on my wallet and the other one waving a peace sign.

A couple weeks ago, Mr. Randall Rothenberg published a manifesto on interactive advertising creativity, which I missed at the time but discovered thanks to a post by Alan Wolk on whether or not creativity still matters.

Mr. Rothenberg's lengthy (by web standards - it took me minutes to read rather than seconds) manifesto is a well-written, informed, and impassioned defense of inspired creativity as the heart and soul of advertising, as that which not only gives it value but, more importantly makes it meaningful to the lives of real human beings. Against the rising tide of commoditization, he says, "We must stop acting as if we're selling schmattes, and start acting like the makers of magic that the best of us are -- and always have been."

Aside from pointing out that Rothenberg explicitly confirms my assertion that interactive design is a team sport - "There are several new skill sets creative agencies today must possess to attract, engage, and influence consumers -- Flash video development, software design, information architecture, animation, CRM, iPhone app design, and ActionScript development among them -- and no one individual will have expertise in all" - I would like to highlight one other critical point he makes: Great advertising is not aimed primarily at consumers; it's true "target audience" are the employees of the company that it promotes:

"This is perhaps the most important reason advertising creativity matters. It inspires the marketer. It encourages the sales force. It provides them, and all the other constituencies in and around the company and the brand, the faith that they will be able to sell the product in to the retailer, close the sales on the dealer's lot, win new commissions, and better their own lives. Great advertising is their rallying cry, the flag they march under. The mouseclick must be matched by their heartbeat."

Forget about the customer for a second. Does your creative work actually inspire your colleagues?

This post was written by Aquent's Alex "Dr. Love" Weaver. This is a picture of him.

With Valentine's Day hard upon us, I couldn't help but sit back and reflect on all the great matches that Aquent has made since its inception back in 1986. I'm not one to boast, but it seems that a broad swath of companies are just now trying to bust the marketing moves we made popular over the years.

Now I don't want to pat Aquent's collective back here, but if I did, I would probably talk about how Match.com and their "Love. Guaranteed." slogan is a total rip-off of the "Work. Guaranteed." ad campaign we were on about back in '89.

Then I would point a finger at Axe's "Dark Temptation" commercial and remind our loyal readers of the "Temp Temptation" fragrance we released back in 1996 to commemorate our 150,000th placement (though instead of Mr. Chocolate, our poster boy looked like this).

Finally, I would really, really have to thank Joaquin Phoenix's latest personal branding exploit for shedding light on what we've known all along: when you're the bomb at what you do, you don't need to do it any differently.

I would, but I won't.

AdAge published a story yesterday on what is supposedly Arnell's design strategy brief for the new Pepsi logo. As that article states, it is unclear whether is this a viral hoax or what but, if you haven't read through it, it's actually pretty trippy (check it here pepsi-arnell021109.pdf).

The strategy described is called "Breathtaking," and the document explains that "BREATHTAKING is a strategy based on the evolution of 5000+ years of shared ideas in design philosophy creating an authentic Constitution of Design." This statement is accompanied by an amazing chart that documents the evolution of human thought from the mystical numerology of the Hindus circa 3000 BC to Pepsi circa 2009 CE.

I have a Phd in German Studies so my tolerance for pretentiousness and intellectual bravura is pretty high, which is why I'm totally captivated by this, particularly the lengthy section describing how Pepsi's iconic geometry depends on ever-evolving perimeter oscillations. I can only imagine that future generations will find in this document a post-modern Rosetta Stone and view it as the hieratic key to the mysteries of contemporary culture.

For you brand strategist and ad types out there, is this sort of document the typical fruit of your labors or just a particularly grandiose and amazingly awesome example thereof?

Image Courtesy of brownpau.

I didn't need the Fake Steve Jobs to tell me that blogging won't make you rich (though I'm comfortable). And while I do believe that blogging can help you find work, I understand from this ex-CNN head writer/senior producer that it can just as easily foreclose numerous career options.

Do you have a blog? Has it helped or hurt your job prospects? Even if it hasn't made you rich, is it worth reading by people who don't know you (yet)? Talk to me and I'll tell the world via this incredibly powerful communication platform!

This post was written by Aquent's Alex Weaver. This is a picture of him.

Though still teary-eyed from the vision of eight gold medals and one giant pot leaf now hanging around the neck of Michael Phelps, I could not help but notice this article about Britney Spears and what her website - britneyspears.com - can teach the world of web marketing. And since my esteemed colleague and blogger extraordinaire touched on the Pop Princess in a recent post, I thought it only pertinent to do my part.

Admittedly, after throwing up in my mouth a bit, I scoffed at the notion that the reborn Pop Train-Wreck's marketing strategy could provide any valuable insight to legitimate online business practices. To me, modeling your web marketing approach after Britney Spears would mean reaching the pinnacle of your online existence only to hand off the site management to a team of monkeys, shave your head, and marry your HTML coder.

If you can fight through the shameless song title allusions (it's a "Circus" in there!), author Jay Lipe makes a lot of strong parallels between Britney's web approach and your potential lack thereof. If by chance you've stumbled on this post before reading Lipe's entire article, congratulations!, because here are the juicy parts and my unabashed opinion on whether or not you should care about them.

1. Link Popularity

You could substitute any famous person with a website in here and the basic premise still stands: you will never have as many people linking to your website as they do. That doesn't mean you can't proactively try and catch up, however. Lipe recommends running reverse lookups on your competitor's sites and sending link requests where you think you should be as well. It's a lot of work, but so is rehab.

2. Site Stickiness

Getting viewers to bookmark your site should be a top Web marketing goal for any site. Clearly, strategic SEO and PPC, homepage design, and clean usability are a must to both generate and retain traffic. But you'll be playing to high school proms in no time without fresh, constantly updated content such as press releases, job postings, featured articles, videos of the day, etc.

3. Directory Submissions

I admittedly don't know much about this. Lipe recommends forking over $299 each for directories such as Yahoo!, Looksmart, and Open Directory Project, claiming the investment is almost always worth the return, which it very well may be. Seems to me that starting with one and seeing where it gets you may be the best way to avoid your company's front row seats at the upcoming "Oops...I did it again" tour.

4. Discussion Group Buzz

Getting people talking about your company is perhaps the most effective way to generate great leads. Hold a contest, hire a troupe of interpretive dancers, hell, book Britney for a benefit concert for all I care (God knows she could use the business). Succumb to the power of word of mouth marketing and your site will be singing a different tune in no time.

5. Call to Action on Site

If you don't know this already your future is looking bleaker than Britney's sons'.

6. Newsletter Subscription

Newsletters are great sources of fresh content and calls to actions, so if you've got it, flaunt it (Britney would be so proud!), and if you don't, well that's just "Outrageous"!