Лапшин В.Ю., доктор экономических наук, профессор;
Прохоров А.В., кандидат филологических наук, доцент (отв. ред.);
Прохорова М.Е., кандидат филологических наук;
Пядышева Т.Г., кандидат филологических наук, доцент
Налетова И.В., доктор философских наук, профессор;
Хватова М.В., кандидат биологических наук, профессор
Актуальные проблемы рекламной деятельности: теория и практика : сб. науч. тр. / отв. ред. А.В. Прохоров ; М-во обр. и науки РФ, Г ОУВПО «Тамб. гос. ун-т им. Г.Р. Державина». Тамбов : Издательский дом ТГУ имени Г.Р. Державина, 2009– .
RUSSIAN FEDERATION STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF
HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
«TAMBOV STATE UNIVERSITY
NAMED AFTER G.R. DERZHAVIN»
Topical Issues of advertising:
theory and practice Collection of Papers Issue III
Recommended for Publishing by the
Editorial-Publishing Council of Tambov
State University named after G.R. Derzhavin
Lapshin V.Yu., Doctor of economics, Professor;
Prokhorov A.V., Candidate of philology, Associate professor (Editor-in-Chief);
Prokhorova M.E., Candidate of philology;
Pyadysheva T.G., Candidate of philology, Associate professor
Naletova I.V., doctor of philosophy, professor;
Khvatova M.V., candidate of biology, professor
Topical Issues of Advertising: Theory and Practice : Collection of Papers / Editor-in-Chief A.V. Prokhorov ; Ministry of
Education and Science of the RF, SEIHPE «TSU named after
G.R. Derzhavin». Tambov : The Publishing House of Tambov State University named after G.R. Derzhavin, 2009– .
Issue III. 2011. 230 с.
The volume contains the articles by theoreticians and practical workers on the most topical issues of advertising.
It is oriented at teachers, post-graduate students, students and advertising agencies employees.
Soboleva E.G., Khoreva O.A. (Yekaterinburg) Collage as Innovation in the Genre System of Books Advertising
Shtukina E.G. (Kostanay, Kazakhstan) On PSA in the North Kazakhstan (Exemplified by the Advertisements in Kostanay)
Shtyrkina T.Yu. (Tambov) Appearance as an Element of Advertising Communicative Efficiency
Section II Innovations in Advertising and Marketing
Pronina L.A. (Tambov) Use of Innovation Criteria in New
Pavlova V.S. (Chita) Innovative Approaches to Development of Modern Creative Advertising
Section III Linguistic Aspects of Advertising
Galimullina N.M. (Kazan) Ethnic Aspects of Russian Advertising
Goryacheva O.N. (Naberezhnye Chelny) Specificity of Speech Influence Training Students Majoring in Advertising
Katynskaya M.V. (Blagoveshensk) Modeling Image of Australian Education in Network Texts
Kravchenko O.N. (Vladivostok) Manipulative Potential of an Advertising Head
Lazareva E.A. (Yekaterinburg) Advertising Discourse of Internet: Invariant Characteristics
Matveeva E.O. (Moscow) Advertising Copy as a Reflection of Contemporary Language Dynamics
Prokhorov A.V. (Tambov) Evaluation as a Mechanism of Implicating and Inference in Advertising Texts Understanding
Stolyarova E.V. (Arkhangelsk) Variety of Political Advertising Texts of Analytical Genres Group
Tumskiy S.V. (Moscow) Conceptual and Cognitive Mapping of Advertising Texts
Khakimova E.M. (Chelyabinsk) On Punctuation in Advertisements
Sharafutdinova L.F. (Kaliningrad) Inter-code Model of Interaction in Advertising Texts
Section IV StateandConditions of Regional Advertising Markets Development
Gorbunova Yu.I. (Tambov) Prospects and Problems of Internet Advertising Use on a Regional Level
Krut O.B., Kolpakova N.S. (Tyumen) Advertising Campaign Planning for Tourism Sphere (exemplified by Tyumen Travel Agency «Glarus»)
Morozova L.V. (Tambov) Modern Advertising Market. Risks and contradictions
Usanov A.I. (Kazan) Features of Advertising Agency Promotion in Regional Market Conditions
ПРЕДИСЛОВИЕ В сборнике научных трудов «Актуальные проблемы рекламной деятельности» представлены статьи теоретиков и практиков рекламы, связей с общественностью и маркетинга из Архангельска, Благовещенска, Владивостока, Екатеринбурга, Иркутска, Казани, Калининграда, Москвы, Набережных Челнов, Санкт-Петербурга, Сургута, Тамбова, Тюмени, Челябинска, Читы, а также специалистов, представляющих Португалию и Казахстан.
Раздел I посвящен общим аспектам рекламной и маркетинговой деятельности, специфике рекламы в определенных сфе-
рассматриваются в Разделе IV (Ю.И. Горбунова, О.Б. Круть,
Н.С. Колпакова, Л.В. Морозова, А.И. Усанов).
Редколлегия FROM THINKING IT TO ACTUALLY DOING IT
- THE PROCESS AND WHY IT'S FAILING –
Carlos M. Garcia Pinheiro*, Isabel Mariano Ribeiro**
**Universidade Nova de Lisboa There are many steps in the conception and execution of a campaign and its success is dependent on many small parts that represent millions of jobs. Having as its cornerstone the issue of trust, the main concern of this essay is to promote the debate about advertising as praxis. We will also question why successful and original campaigns are so infrequent by analyzing one of the most common practices in advertising: focus groups. Есть много путей разработки и исполнения кампании, а ее успех зависит от большого количества мелких деталей, которые связаны с миллионами рабочих мест. Имея в качестве краеугольного вопрос о доверии, главной задачей настоящего эссе является содействие дискуссии о рекламе как практике. Мы также поднимем вопрос, почему успешные и оригинальные кампании так редко обращаются к одной из наиболее распространенных практик в рекламе: методике фокус-группы. Maybe the biggest challenge that Advertising today faces is how to be relevant. It's not just a matter of being seen since advertising is everywhere. The problem is that now it is muted. We have learned to take advertising in its many forms or mediums as white noise, we create ways of taking the multiple instances of advertising as being part of the landscape of our daily life and by doing so we escape it, we escape the noise, the colors and more importantly we escape the obvious and mind-numbing message of advertising: «buy this».
How can advertisers, ad agencies, marketers and agency creatives surpass this trend, this attitude towards their hard work in which billions of dollars are invested every year? How can a brand or just an idea make its way into someone's brain and stick there long enough to have some sort of impact? Our answer is quite simple: by doing the job right.
Truth be told nothing has really changed that much, advertisers are still that old salesman trying to get one foot through the door. Of course they've had some help along the way; whenever the medium changed, a door would open (or a window as it is the case on the web) and the hard part was already done or so they thought; through the introductions of new mediums, advertisers were inside people's homes and were getting their full attention. But, as an industry, they failed miserably when it was really important to succeed, they failed to deliver a meaningful message (i.e. a message that resonates to the consumer) and people shut the door smack on their faces. And the people were right to do so. Of course that once in a while brilliant people arise, people like Bill Bernbach with is passion about elevating the role of creative in the business, a man that joined copy with art and spawned a creative revolution; or David Ogilvy a visionary that crafted the art of strategy and research almost to perfection these are the people that broke the mold and that gave advertisers (whether they are creatives, sales representatives or marketers), the tools the trade, tools that could and should make a difference in creating some meaning while trying to sell something. The debate about which is best, creativity or strategy, is still far from over1 but it is our understanding that nowadays, due to the changing nature of the business as a whole one cannot be without the other. The old adage that states that if it sells, it's creative just doesn't fly in this day and age and there is no shortage of examples of products that have appalling ads but do quite well on the market2.
Seeing things from the craftsman (the adman) point of view, one should face the crafting and the answering of a briefing as an opportunity to answer to four different questions from four different sides: the client, the agency, the creative and the public. First, one should answer the client's challenge: how to increase sales and bring together product and consumer? While doing this, one must also answer the plea of the agency: how to make the client happy while producing top quality work that can help boost the agency profile? Of course that if the creative didn’t have himself and his own career in mind the job wouldn't be complete. He will want to answer the briefing with the best possible idea, but one that will put his name on the award shows and maybe lift his career to higher grounds. Finally the ad, in whatever forms it may take, must speak to the consumer and relate to him. Therefore the crucial difference between a good ad and a great ad is that a good ad can give an answer to some of these questions but a great ad answers to all of them. This is where most agency creatives nowadays fail, because they forget that they have been given a wonderful opportunity that is to speak directly to millions of people but instead of doing it, instead of pushing forward great ideas they cop out and opt to give bland speeches about some product and when this happens, the reality is that everything, the industry in itself is being put in jeopardy basically due to a lack of trust among all intervenients. This is what really matters to us, and should matter most in advertising as a discipline and as an industry: trust.
If our final goal is to establish trust between the consumer and a brand all the parts of the process must start trusting each other. And this isn’t just a matter of agency versus product managers or even creative versus accounts. At the core of this industry are ideas that have to mean something and have to serve a purpose.
Trust is the intricate part, the glue that can make something like an idea worthwhile. If a product manager is too afraid of failure and will not trust in the ideas presented by the agency, experience tells us that he will indeed fail. The agency might be fired first, or just leave by its own accord but that product manager will be out of a job for certain. Trust has to start somewhere so why not make it start at the beginning of the whole process? Managers, directors, creatives, accounts, the whole industry as to realize that it's their job to push boundaries. It’s their job to trust that the agency that was picked will be working for the greater good and not for itself. In fact all the elements that compose a campaign, from start to finish, all of them want the same thing: to be recognized. And the best way to get there, like we have been saying all along, is to get the job done right. To trust. To get that briefing done properly, give it some true insights, asking the right questions, knowing what to say, what the message must be, knowing what should given to the public and asking if it is relevant, not to the product, to the creative or to the agency but to the consumer and if that idea will in fact add value to our world. Advertisers shouldn’t be afraid to try something unique, there shouldn’t be a problem in demanding that the agency brings its best to the table and produces breakthrough ideas, but one must bear in mind that this has a price: space, time and trust. There has to be the realization that if the creative gets what he wants, the account will get what he wants and the product manager and the brand manager and so on. And by doing this the consumer will be a lot more receptive since he will be dealing not with a brand or a certain product but with people that know how to speak a language outside the corporate cannon.
Since one of the main stages in approving a campaign is the focus-group test, and since these exist in order to "test-drive" the concept idea on its early stages, we believe that the issue of trust leads inevitably to the old question of the benefit of focus groups and group-testing. Let's take a moment to see what’s wrong with this method.
Even with the advent of digital and social media, clients, and worst of all agencies, still rely on focus groups to test multi-media campaign ideas at the concept stage. Groups are generally used for three reasons: to test comprehension and to seek out red flags and to try to predict magic i.e., determine if the campaign is memorable and likeable, with breakthough potential. That is to say, if the campaign can answer to those questions we’ve talked above. Focus groups tend to be a very blunt instrument, and are especially hard on ideas that are truly new and different. Why?
Focus groups assume people care. People at groups are forced to look at your campaign. Unfortunately, nobody’s handing out cheques to people in their living rooms. The sad fact is that the vast majority of advertising is simply ignored. Groups can’t predict whether people will view the ad- and can actually give clients the false impression that average people actually care about their new product, whatever it may be.
Focus groups are inherently negative. When you pay someone for their opinion, they’ll give it to you and we can guarantee they’ll feel like they have to mention at least one thing they find wrong. People have seen enough examples of groups in popular culture to know they’re being paid to be critics. This is their chance to have a say. And usually the saying is equal to be negative about something.
Focus groups are subject to group-thinking. Despite their best efforts to control bias, groups are easily (and invariably) influenced by alpha dogs. This person is not always the loudest voice, but simply the most persuasive. People also tend to give answers that reflect how they want to be perceived by the group1, rather than what they truly think2.
Focus groups reward the tried and true. Truly new ideas sometimes feel uncomfortable at first. It’s far easier to comment on an idea when you’ve seen something like it before. Which is why so many TV hits from Seinfeld to All in the Family bombed in pre-testing. As Gladwell puts it, “The problem with market research is that often it is simply too blunt an instrument to pick up the distinction between the bad and the merely different.” (GLADWELL, 2006)
Testing digital or social ideas at the concept stage is even more problematic, since user experience is key here and is virtually impossible to test except in finished form.
As a result of all of these issues, small things can become red flags in groups that kill promising ideas. All the sharp edges can be whittled away until you end up with something that offends no-one, but also delights no-one.
From this reflection we can have an idea about the urgent need of refocusing the question about the good practices in advertising, not in terms of efficiency but in terms of trust. It is from this factor that the maximization of creativity, originality and, last but not least, sales and success can prosper. At the end of the day it’s still only advertising but that doesn't mean that it should be only what it is now, when it can be so much more, so much more entertaining, thoughtful and engaging. All we need is trust.