UPDATE: Just before posting this blog tonight, I put a few puzzle pieces together and figured this out, which helps all of the post make a little bit more sense:
The “screaming” commercial, along with a host of other marketing pieces for jcp, was designed by Mother NY, who does work for Target. The cover of the February jcp catalog and the “good” commercials were created by PMH, the same agency that worked with Target for nearly a dozen years until May 2011. PMH also does work for GAP (see logo reference in first paragraph) and is now the Agency of Record for Sephora, which has their retail locations inside jcp stores. I am not sure who did the new logo for jcp, but I can tell you that it is their THIRD logo in THREE years! And honestly, I am hoping there will be a 4th within the next year, because I am not a fan of this one.
So, “things are changing” at jcp today. You may have seen their new logo, or a TV commercial about the “change”. Maybe you noticed something was shifting from their Facebook page. For me, I first noticed something was happening with their marketing campaign when I saw the new logo (and I instantly thought of the horror that was the GAP logo mishap) and then received a catalog in the mail (and was pleasantly surprised by how “nice” it was, although very Target-ish looking). Next, I happen to walk through my living room when one of their TV commercials was airing – and it kinda scared me. Seriously. There were lots of women (and a couple of men) screaming. It definitely wasn’t a TV commercial that made me want to continue watching it and then go shop at jcpenny.
Last night, while checking my email and catching a glimpse here and there of whatever my husband was watching on TV, the screaming commercial came on – and reminded me again, that I didn’t like it. Since I had the computer on my lap, I decided to do a little research and see what other people thought about it. According to the jcp YouYube channel, apparently more people like it than don’t. Hmmm. Guess I am in the minority there.
However, I actually really DO like some of other new jcp TV commercials (I am not sure if they are airing yet, but you can see them on YouTube). Again, they are very similar to Target ads, but hey, mimicking is one of the best compliments someone can give, right?
So, I have two thoughts that I want to post here about the new jcp marketing campaign. One is, that I am surprised by the inconsistency of the campaign as a whole. I like to live by “consistency is king” when it comes to marketing campaigns, but I actually believe the INconsistency of this campaign might actually work for them.
Second, the more I think about it and the more I watch the “screaming” commercial, the more I don’t like the way it is portraying women that shop for deals & discounts. This spot makes women look absolutely crazy – which is insane in itself. Nearly every woman that I know – wealthy or living paycheck to paycheck – uses coupons. It is almost a way of life nowadays with the way our economy is. In this commercial for jcp, it is making women who clip coupons, look like total freaks.
Below are a few of the new spots – along with the one I don’t like. What are your thoughts on this new campaign? Do you love it? Hate it? Don’t care?
Not-so-good TV commercial:
Good TV commercial:
Another good TV commercial:
By the way, does anyone else find it interesting that Target is a CIRCLE and jcp is a SQUARE?
L2, a think tank for digital innovation that brings together thought leadership from academia and industry to drive digital marketing innovation, released their FashionDigital IQ study, with one of our favorite brands coming in at the top!
Kate Spade received a “Genius” ranking which means:
Digital innovation is a point of differentiation for these brands. Site experience is searchable, shareable, and mobile-optimized. Social media is embedded into marketing DNA, and campaigns are integrated across multiple digital platforms.
Sheesh, that’s a long explanation. For all of us visual folks, here’s what that means:
The top reason that American users stop following a brand is because “information was published to often” and “the information available was not interesting.”
If brands treated their fans more like they treat their real-life friends, they would be much better off.
“Brands got blinded by the technology, forgetting about the basics of relationships in the way they interacted with consumers,” said Sebastian Genty, DDB’s planning director. “They need to learn to behave like any human being, with respect and transparency. Rhythm is key, as in any new relationship.”
Facebook brand fatigue is on the rise. Compared to last year, U.S. fans are following fewer brands; are less likely to press like, post on a brand’s wall or recommend it to friends; less inclined to participate in brand pages’ games, events and competitions; and, truth be told, would like to hear less from marketers altogether.
Why?
Marketers have been doing a bad job and shoving boring [content] at consumers – Michael Scissons, CEO of social-media software and services firm Syncapse.
Too many brands went for the lowest common denominator, which was free stuff and so consumers began expecting the freebies. It became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Sarah Hofstetter, senior VP-emerging media and brand strategy at 360i .
Side note: I feel this way with email marketing! If I constantly get emails about Free Shipping, but have to pay for shipping once I place an order because the offer has ended, I’m not a happy shopper.
Brands aren’t activating their fans. “There is no intrinsic value to a fan, It all depends on how you manage him to expose him to your brand’s message, make him your advocate and activate him through CRM or e-commerce.” – said Catherine Lautier, business intelligence director at DDB, Paris.
Can a brand come back from a Facebook faux pas? Maybe, but it could be too late. Whether or not you appear in a fans newsfeed may depend on how long it has been since they have interacted with the brand. The below snippet from AdAge gives insight to the hush-hush algorithm behind Facebook:
Facebook’s EdgeRank algorithm, which quietly controls what users see in their news feeds. Every piece of content — every post, every comment, every like, every tag — is weighted according to your relationship with its creator and how much time has passed since its creation. Your ability to see a post in your feed depends on it having enough “edges” derived from your past interactions. As a result, if fans aren’t constantly interacting with a brand’s content, its edges begin to disappear, making it harder and harder to drive engagement.
Google users may soon see celebrity endorsements included as annotations under paid search results as part of new advertising program that the company has just started testing.
Only a handful of advertisers are in the program right now, with no other details being revealed. The screenshot below is from a Google search for ‘kardashian collection sears” which includes an annotation that Khloe Kardashians had endorsed an ad about the Kardashian clothing line at Sears.
It will be interesting to see how this feature will be integrated and how it will affect both the ad prices and the click-through-rates. Only time will tell!
I was flipping through a magazine last night and came across a Kenneth Cole ad.
It read: ‘Should it be a woman’s right to choose if she’s the one carrying it?’ The photo is of a woman holding two handbags.
My initial thought was ‘WOW’, gorgeous handbags! (Naturally, I’m obsessed with handbags!) But then I realized it was implying not only an advertising campaign, but also bringing to light a current and relevant women’s rights issue. Hrm…an ad that makes you stop AND think. What do you think of ads and ad campaigns such as these? Is it clever marketing or exploitation?
Digging a little deeper, I found Kenneth Cole’s micrositeWhereDoYouStand.com. The site gives users a platform to debate issues surrounding guns, pro-choice, gay rights and war. Not the direction that most clothing designers go in. Would you participate in the debate on the microsite?
