Joseph Jaffe posts about GM and Frito Lay's recently announced "user generated" advertising scheme for Super Bowl 2007. He makes some salient points about their upcoming experiment...the jury's out as to how well it works, if at all. However, while the whole thing seems a little more creative (and it might even end-up being entertaining), aren't they (the advertisers) missing the point? I'll pick on GM because they give you so much meat. Here's a quote from them (Chevrolet) about the campaign that makes my point...
"This is a contest that fits in well with our overall campaign for 2007," said Steve McGuire, advertising manager for Chevrolet. "We are asking the people entering to look at how we can market to a younger group, to get that audience interested in Chevy products, to ignite passion and increase the buzz about Chevy cars. We have a specific creative brief, and we will look to see how the entries match against that brief."
Read these parts again..."to get that audience interested in Chevy products"..."we have a specific creative brief".
Why do so many other people, like Joseph, understand this...but, GM can't seem to get it...instead of making cars they want or can afford to make, and then spending Billions (yes, with a capital B) annually on ads trying to convince prospective customers that thier product appeals to them, why not build a car the customer actually wants? If you want to attract younger customers (the average Chevrolet buyer is 46...hey, I think that's young), then start making cars like Mini or VW...but, different, of course.
Figure out what excites people...first. Then, see if you can deliver something that blows those people away. Not the other way around.
I'll be sure to tune in to Joseph's show, Across The Sound, where he plans to disect this further.