Hopscotch Chalk Talk

My kids are watching TV so I can write this blog post

2011-10-28T16:29:00.000-07:00

We must all be obsessed with children's media.

Seriously. It feels like not a day goes by without a headline touting the ill-effects of kids' media use and screen time. And that's just for this week.

More Kids Sleep With TV, Study Finds (Wall Street Journal)

Screen Time Higher Than Ever (New York Times)

Infants and iPads? It’s Not As Farfetched As You Might Think! (ABC News)

Kids Increasingly Staring at Glowing Screens, Study Finds (PBS NewsHour)

Trying to gauge the impact of growing up digital (Boston Globe)

Common Sense Media released a report this week, and the results are not surprising: Kids ages 0 - 8 spend an average of 1.44 hours watching TV or videos in a typical day. Forty-seven percent of babies (gasp!) watch TV too; up to two hours a day. And...(double, draw dropping gasp!!) kids have TVs in their bedrooms.

And here I sit, writing about all of this as my kids sit in front of the Disney Channel so I can write this blog post.

I'm not so shocked by the results of the study or the news media coverage, but by our collective obsession as a culture. Are we in denial? Clearly, the TVs and iPads and mobile devices are ON. And despite YEARS and YEARS of negative coverage when it comes to the ill effects of children's media consumption, we're not slowing down. Maybe it's the American Way. More, not less! Why should someone tell me what, where and when my kids can watch?

Meanwhile, apps abound. Good apps, too. And really excellent educational TV. It's all part of living in the modern age... or is it?

Thoughts?

Pop! Goes the Brilliant Marketing Strategy: Teen Vogue Gets it Right

2011-09-07T10:27:00.000-07:00

As any teen fashionista knows, shopping malls are SO yesterday. To get a head start on the hottest trends, fashion-savvy teens are browsing online boutiques, Googling their favorite designers and devouring images from the hippest fashion blogs. And then there's Fashion Week.

Which is why Teen Vogue is so smart to drop their pop-up mall store strategy and move to Lincoln Square where the real action is about to begin. As Ad Age reports, Teen Vogue's "Haute Spot" will be open from Sept. 8 through Sept. 15, including makeovers sponsored by Maybelline, book signings, IMG Worldwide casting agents, fashion bloggers and editors, and "screenings" where visitors can view runway show videos.

Okay, so it's not like anyone is going to actually get a front-row seat at Fashion Week, but it's pretty darn close to the action, and a brilliant marketing promotion. Here's how Teen Vogue gets it right:

1. Fashion focus. Teen Vogue isn't another run-of-the-mill teen magazine. It's the sister publication of Vogue and that means fashion, fashion, fashion.

2. Awareness of core audience trends. The trendiest, savviest, most fashion-forward youth aren't shopping at the mall. Or maybe they are... but they no longer want to admit that. Downtown New York City in the middle of Fashion Week is way, way cooler.

3. Perfect partnerships. While Maybelline is not exactly high fashion, it's price point and accessibility is perfect for teens. Paired with makeovers, style experts and runway videos, the package is sure to draw visitors in.

4. Image is everything. Did someone say casting agents?? Attracting a bunch of gorgeous would-be models is sure to draw in... more gorgeous would-be models. Not to mention anyone who wants to be seen standing next to a gorgeous would-be model.

5. Brand synergy. The entire promotion not only promotes the magazine Teen Vogue and its partners, but everything the brand stands for. Fashion, high style, and savvy insider tips. Oh yeah, and high magazine sales, too.

Scholastic Ceases In-School Corporate Propaganda Program

2011-08-03T19:49:00.000-07:00

Way to go Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood! After more than 55,000 people signed a petition through Change.org last May, Scholastic has just announced that it will limit its “InSchool Marketing” program so that school kids are less subjected to corporate marketing propaganda via their classroom materials.

The black mark on Scholastic’s image began with coal, a lesson packet paid for by the American Coal Foundation, which contained all kinds of information about benefits of coal - but none of the nasty stuff like toxic waste and greenhouse gases. Oops.

So now Scholastic is on the retreat. According to an article in this week’s New York Times, “in addition to the coal curriculum, Scholastic distributed a program stressing the environmental wrongs of plastic water bottles, sponsored by Brita, which sells water filters. It also had a $3 million Microsoft campaign in which schools could earn points toward prizes for each Microsoft search, as well as a program featuring Playmobil’s small plastic figures. Those programs have ended, according to Kyle Good, a Scholastic spokeswoman — and last week, after a reporter inquired about them, all traces of them were removed from the Scholastic Web site, as other programs, sponsored by Disney, Nestlé and Shell, already had been.”

Cool! Gotta love what can happen when parents speak out. As for me, I'm not really sure why corporate marketing has any place in school curriculum in the first place, but maybe that's just me.

Rethinking kids, COPPA and online safety

2011-07-14T20:14:00.000-07:00

Do you let your kids use Facebook? MySpace? Club Penguin? Webkinz? How about Imbee, KidsWorld, Togetherville, Everloop or Yoursphere?

Maybe you haven’t even heard of some of these sites. Which is too bad, since most are terrific and offer wonderful, safe online experiences for young children. Believe it or not, the tween space online is extremely competitive and has been for a long time. It’s also extremely difficult to create a sustainable business model. But not everyone knows that. On more than a few occasions, I’ve received calls from the CEOs of promising new startups, business plan and beta website in hand, claiming “we’re going to be the next Facebook for kids under age 13!”

The question we should all be asking ourselves is: do parents – or kids for that matter – even need or want a “Facebook for kids?” Isn't it just easier to lie about your kid's age? But wait - what kind of message does that send?

This recent NPR article, Social Networks: Thinking of the Children, got me thinking. The conversations still very much focuses on online safety. But is that even the main decision factor for parents?

When COPPA was enacted back in 1998, I was running a website for tweens called FreeZone.com. Online safety was a big deal for us and we worked closely with the FTC and CARU in getting it right. Chats were monitored. Ads were labeled. We had each and every parent fax in a signed registration form before we'd allow their kids to interact on the site. Yup, pretty labor intensive. Maybe that's why the site isn't around anymore.

We wrote to the FTC in 1999: “Our business is based on the highest possible safety and privacy standards that have become our competitive advantage in drawing kids into the FreeZone community. We are eager for technology to catch up to our standards, so we can implement more convenient and cost-effective ways to gain parental consent.”

Today online safety PSAs abound. It seems like there isn't a day or an hour that goes by without a well-informed article about online safety, cyberbullying, sexting,"Facebook depression," predators and the like. The general public is more aware. Yet COPPA hasn't changed since 1998. It's clunky and it forces tween sites to stay within antiquated boundary lines, creating a permissions process that is a pain in the ass for both parents and website developers. Meanwhile, Facebook is allowed to keep paving the way into the 21st century simply by stating that their site is open to anyone over 13 years of age. Leaving parents two choices:

1. Lie about my child's age and let them go on Facebook, where I will keep tabs on what they are doing.

Or

2. Let them play around on one of the tween sites listed above, safely, of course - which means active, parental involvement.

Hmmm.

Actually, there's a third choice: Skip any sort of online social networking until the child turns 13.

Crazy? That's what I'm going to do. Easy for me to say. I've got an 8 year-old and a 4 year old (neither of whom has expressed any interest in Facebook let alone any other social networking site) so ask me in a few years. Maybe this whole dilemma will be solved by then.

Guilt-Free Kids TV

2011-05-13T12:16:00.000-07:00

Finally, a report on children's media that doesn’t make parents feel bad! Released this week in the UK as part of the Hello Campaign, an initiative focused on making communication a priority in homes and in schools, a quarter of parents who have young children admit using the television as a babysitter. And 70% percent of them do not feel guilty about it.

Surprising? Not really. Amazing? A little. Even though the American Academy of Pediatrics has long advocated or reduced screen time, setting guidelines that children watch no more than 2 hours of television per day, the data demonstrates that kids are watching much, much more than that. Which, we all know by now, can lead to problems. As recently as April of this year, a study came out linking kids TV to heart disease.

Feeling guilty yet? Don't. The reason why parents in the UK feel good about their children’s TV watching is because there are so many wonderful, educational shows. 42% of respondents said that quality children's television is a great way for kids to learn. It's all about context.

Take Babycenter's posts Why you should never feel guilty about kids watching TV and Watch that TV, guilt-free! CommonSense Media's Best TV for Kids provides even more reasons to enjoy a little screen time.

I also like what Dimitri A. Christakis and Frederick J. Zimmerman, authors of "The Elephant in the Living Room: Make Television Work for Your Kids, have to say: "At its best, TV can educate and inspire. High-quality documentaries offer insights into history that no book can equal. Children's educational shows have the proven ability to help children learn to read to be kind, and to share. In short, when used appropriately, television has the power to expand horizons and help children's cognitive, social and emotional development."

Spokeswoman for the Hello campaign, Wendy Lee, also points out how parents can get more involved and use television as a launching point for communications in the home. "TV can be used as a fantastic opportunity to bring children's favourite characters and shows to life beyond the box as well... chatting about characters, making up stories and even acting out adventures can help parents develop their child's language and communication," she said.

In short, children's TV doesn't need to hide in the closet as a guilty, forbidden pleasure. And we as parents can actually admit to feeling good about it. Companies like my clients Ameba TV (http://amebatv.com) and The Mother Company (http://themotherco.com) are redefining screen time by offering high-quality, educational, slow-paced, commercial-free shows for kids - and that's something both parents and kids can feel pretty great about.

‘Baiting outrage’ and other social media marketing tactics

2011-03-28T21:45:00.000-07:00

The way I see it, ABC News and the Today Show just ran a ten-minute infomercial for Abercrombie & Fitch. The lure? The “oversexualized” push up padded bikini on Abercrombie Kids. Mommy bloggers and social media parenting experts all took the bait and jumped right into the outrage feeding frenzy. It’s bad for girls self esteem. Who needs padding when you are 8? The only reason for a push up anything is to push sexuality.

Okay, okay, we get it.

Actually, we all got it a long time ago, as in the 1970s, which is why I think this whole outrage thing is kinda silly. Even my 8 year-old daughter was rolling her eyes at the experts on the Today Show this morning. “Bad for girls? Huh? It’s just a boring striped bathing suit.” And then... “Mommy, what does ‘oversexualization’ mean?”

Thank you, Meredith Vieira, for today’s word of the day!

Lucky for Abercrombie & Fitch, they’re back in the news as being an “edgy” brand targeting youth, which is exactly where they want to be. The moms who ban Barbies and Bratz dolls aren’t shopping there anyway, so for them, this latest stunt amounts to a whole lotta free publicity and traffic. I can just hear the A & F execs in their closed-door meetings... "oh yeah, nice boost in traffic... all we had to do is name the product 'push up' and then change it to something boring like 'triangle' and the hub-bub will be forgotten by tomorrow... meanwhile, sales are great."

Baiting outrage, a term coined by Amy Jussel, media literacy expert and founder/executive director of ShapingYouth.org, seems to be the new normal for going viral. Amy pointed me to a new Tufts study on media and incivility, further proof that the headlines just keep getting worse and worse even while the hard data on news and trends often proves otherwise.

Here’s the problem. Traditional marketing doesn’t really work anymore and we’re all getting a little tired of social media and blogging and e-mail marketing, with all of those #giveaways we can #win and #promo codes that are about to expire and #exclusive offers that aren’t really exclusive at all. Every marketer is clamoring for attention so it’s not surprising that “padded push up bikini for 7 year-olds” was able to cut through the clutter and actually grab out attention. Only… you’re smarter than that and you’re not going to fall for it next time. Right? Right.

I was in a client meeting this morning discussing – you guessed it – an upcoming marketing campaign for a product targeted to children and one of the partners mentioned in an aside, “You know... my husband is one of those tech people who’s always a year or two ahead of the trends. And guess what he just did? He erased his online profile. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Foursquare… poof! Gone.”

In a virtual world full of media frenzy – one that doesn’t necessarily mirror the real world we actually live in – erasing one’s frenzied social media presence has a lot of appeal.

So, marketers, how will you reach your customers then?

Oh Baby! Here’s what a little Bieber can do for you.

2011-02-24T07:14:00.000-08:00

Justin Bieber is making headlines again with his recent haircut, a cute new ‘do that I happen to think says a lot about the crossroads Bieber is facing in his career – and the longevity of his brand.

Depending on how you look at it (for all you Beliebers and non Beliebers alike), Bieber had either a not-so-great week or a pretty awesome week last week. There was the Grammy’s snub, the Rolling Stone’s controversy and the New York Times article, that according to E! Online, “practically predicted his obituary.”

Personally, I think the haircut was a great career move. Bieber is back in the news and he didn’t have to resort to sex tape making, pole dancing or drunk driving! And… word on the street is that his recently-released movie, Never Say Never is a true delight. (This just in from my 70 year-old mother and my 8 year-old daughter: “We went to see it to see how bad it was, but now we love him! It’s the most inspirational movie we’ve ever seen!”)

Now. What the heck does this have to do with you and your brand? A lot. Right now things may be humming along with your latest product launch or ad campaign, but even the best companies eventually face a few blips and start to lose their mojo. The buzz simply begins to peter out. When this happens, you can either choose to make a lot of noise and generate a lot of hits with a sex-tape type of brand strategy move, or you can pull a Bieber and simply get a haircut. He even turned it into a positive PR spin by donating his locks to charity!

Any recent controversy aside, the message that's still stuck in my mind (and I'm willing to bet is still in the minds of millions of fans) is that Bieber’s message is 80 percent squeaky clean. He sings pop music. He's a kid. He's got a whole lifetime ahead of him that he can fill with silly love songs, so I just don't think the jury is out yet. Perhaps most importantly, his ultimate propaganda vehicle at the moment, Never Say Never, focuses entirely on his back story. This is what I truly believe (Belieb) is his most powerful tool. Yours too. The best way to connect with fans of any kind is to reach them at a deep emotional level and to pull at the heartstrings a little bit. A compelling back story or archetype can work wonders for a brand's longevity and one could even argue that without one, you don't really have a brand. Bieber’s is all about overcoming obstacles and unleashing the hero within.

What’s yours?

Move over, virtual worlds, it's all about "entertainment ecosystems"

2011-01-31T17:46:00.000-08:00

I don't normally cover the video game industry but this weekend's New York Times article, Allowing Players to Assume The Ultimate Role: Game Creators by Seth Schiesel definitely caught my eye. And it wasn't just because of the cute bunny. One of the things that has been a little puzzling over the last decade is how traditional media and new media have collided into a user-generated frenzy of information and entertainment while the video game business has left players on the user-created content sidelines. “One of the saddest aspects of the electronic age is that even as computers have become more powerful and pervasive (ubiquitous, even),” writes Schielsel, “the ability to create software for them has escaped the reach of everyday people.” Until now.

Enter Sony's LittleBigPlanet 2. The game allows everyday folks to create their own games - and share them. Amazing, really, in today’s world of daily YouTube hits and reality TV and blog-turned-book-turned movie deals that it took this long. Schiesel likens the game to a "stunning new entertainment ecosystem," a game that is so much more than a game because the users are literally in control of the play. "Of course making anything that lots of other people will actually enjoy still takes a tremendous amount of dedication and perhaps even skill. That is true in any realm of creation," writes Schiesel, "but if you are, say, a parent who worries that video games are melting your children's brains, ask them if they wouldn't like to try their hand at actually making a game."

But of course! Couldn't it be this easy? We can solve the kids-on-the-couch epidemic and foster the technological leaders of tomorrow by simply providing kids with the tools they need to create their own entertainment. Now that's what I call 21st century play. How about you - what kinds of things are your brands doing to engage kids in tomorrow's technology?

Ire of the Tiger

2011-01-24T10:54:00.000-08:00

I’m still not quite over it. Amy Chua, author of Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, a.k.a “Tiger Mom” and I shared a tense moment Friday night at her book reading at Seattle’s Elliot Bay Book Company. Given her continued media coverage, perhaps your thoughts are lingering in tiger territory too.

First of all, I’m still not even sure what compelled me to attend the event, but I just had to go. I don’t know if I was expecting a train wreck or a Jerry Springer show or an Oprah confessional but what I was not anticipating was a mostly middle-aged, older (about half Asian, half white) smartly-dressed-with good haircuts overwhelmingly-sympathetic crowd. When Ms. Chua came out, she paused right in front of me (it was standing room only; I snagged a spot in front) for a few moments before walking to the podium, our auras intersecting. Awaiting a sense of revulsion, I instead felt drawn to her. I suddenly had this urge to tap her on the shoulder, give her a wink, a smile, even a hug. What’s the big deal? I thought. Why do so many people hate her? Petite, holding her head high, dressed in a red sweater, black mini skirt and pointy red and black shoes, she looked very much like a neighborhood mom on her way to work. Like someone I might have gone to college with or (gasp) even a close friend. On stage, she was self-deprecating and funny and the audience laughed at all of her jokes. I did too–- at first; feeling her pain when she told us that the Wall Street Journal had chosen an obnoxious, unfortunate headline and that all of the resulting vitriol was because her words had been taking out of context. She was misunderstood. Her text is a memoir, not some soapbox prescription for parenting.

So she did what any self-respecting author would do. She read from her book. “My story is a journey,” she told us, “writing this book was like family therapy. I’ve learned from my mistakes!” she said, flinging her tiny arms in the air with exasperation. Ms. Chua chose to read seven pages from the last chapter of Battle Hymn and this is when my emotions took a turn. In a matter of seconds my blood shifted from a happy mellow soup to a perturbed simmer and then into a hot, rolling boil. I wondered if I had anything suitable in my animal-print purse that I could throw at her.

Ms. Chua read a scene that takes place in a Russian restaurant during a family vacation where she bullies and berates her youngest daughter, then 13, into taking one bite of caviar. Astonishingly, the audience roared with laughter as she read.

“Do you know how sad and ashamed my parents would be if they saw this, Lulu—you publicly disobeying me? With that look on your face? You’re only hurting yourself. We’re in Russia, and you refuse to try caviar! You’re like a barbarian. And in case you think you’re a big rebel, you are completely ordinary. There is nothing more typical, more predictable, more common and low, than an American teenager who won’t try things. You’re boring, Lulu—boring.”
“Shut up,” said Lulu angrily.
“Don’t you dare say shut up to me. I’m your mother.” I hissed this, but still a few guests glanced over.
“I hate you. I HATE YOU.” This, from Lulu was not in a hiss.
“You don’t love me,” Lulu spat out. “You think you do, but you don’t. You just make me feel bad about myself every second. You’ve wrecked my life. I can’t stand to be around you. Is that what you want?”
A lump rose in my throat. Lulu saw it, but she went on.
“You’re a terrible mother. You’re selfish. You don’t care about anyone but yourself. What—you can’t believe how ungrateful I am? After all you’ve done for me? Everything you say you do for me is actually for yourself.”

In an instant, everything that was wrong with my own childhood-- the Chinese mother-like terror, the threats, the verbal abuse over A- grades and swim races lost -- flashed in front of me. Lulu was now my heroine. I’d never had the guts to tell my mother how much I hated her, and now I felt the rage welling up inside of me. Even now, as a 40 year-old, I harbor so much resentment over my upbringing. Go Lulu go, I thought. Your mom is a mean, self-righteous bitch. She has Totally Wrecked Your Life.

Then the strangest thing happened. Someone in the back of the room collapsed. A few people knelt down around the collapsee; others stood back, annoyed. Ms. Chua held a fixed position at the podium with her arms crossed in front of her chest. A woman with a cane who was seated near me shouted “someone should call 911!” and I dug into my bag for my phone. The woman standing next to me saw what I was doing and hissed, “She’s old. I’m sure she just fainted because she was standing up too long. These things happen.” Oh, right. Sorry. I guess I missed the part about not helping old people at an Amy Chua event. Browbeaten into submission, my phone remained untouched.

A few minutes later, with the old woman in question hydrated and revived, Ms. Chua continued her reading. The scene ends with her daughter Lulu smashing class in the Russian restaurant and Tiger Mom running through Red Square. She returns later and says to her daughter “You win. It’s over. We’re giving up the violin.” This is the big cathartic moment. As Ms. Chua read these last words she looked around the room as if to say, “see, I’ve changed. I let my daughter win the battle. This is what the whole book is about.”

I shifted uncomfortably against the table behind me, horrified.

Ms. Chua began to take questions and a few people began to leave. Part of me hoped that their exits were due to the fact that they were just as disgusted as I was, but it could have had more to do with the fact that the room was hot or they were bored or had to get home to feed the dog. It’s Seattle, land of the passive-aggressive, so I guess I’ll never know.

The Q & A did nothing to reduce my temper. Chua took the opportunity to further tout the benefits of Chinese parenting and hard-working immigrant work ethics, railing against ‘Western’ values, like “coddling one’s children” or “focusing on self esteem.”

I raised my hand. “How can you make these broad generalization about Western parenting vs. Chinese parenting?” I asked. “I have a Chinese mother and there haven’t been any immigrants in my family for several generations.”

Chua was disarmed only slightly by my ‘Chinese mother’ comment. It’s fairly obvious from my appearance that I’m not a Chinese descendant.

“I clearly state this in chapter 1,” she responded, annoyed, “weren’t you here when I read from chapter 1?”

I nodded. I did hear her description of how she was using Chinese and Western parenting “loosely,” as she wrote (and I have since read the actual chapter), but still found it to be totally judgmental, stereotypical and racist. I guess that was my real question: how can you be such a blatant racist? How can you be so rude and mean?

Chua looked around the room for some friendly faces, as if to say, this stupid woman in the tan sweater on my left, she doesn’t get it, does she? “I’m an academic,” she said, looking me in the eye. “This is what we do. We come up with a term for something and use that description throughout our texts. I’m just so surprised that I have to keep defending my footnotes.” There were a few chuckles from around the room.

My voice began to crack. “You’ve said that people have written to you and said that they are scarred for life due to this style of parenting. What’s your response?” I asked.

“I really can’t say,” she shrugged. “I don’t know the particulars of each family. Perhaps there is some mental illness.” Later, she talked about her Chinese father, a “black sheep” in his family because he rebelled against his parents by pursuing “creative” endeavors. He immigrated to America and never spoke to his family again. Scarred for life, I assumed.

Other audience members spoke. One was a woman of Chinese descent who said, “I really identify with you (to which Chua responded with “Thank you! At least someone does!!”) before explaining that she has two special needs children and that this kind of parenting doesn’t work with her kids. Chua told us about her sister with Downs Syndrome and how her mother worked with her relentlessly, drilling multiplication tables. Today the sister happily works at WalMart. Another woman in the back said that she was a “type A person, very successful in everything I do” but that she completely lacked creativity and couldn’t think out of the box. Chua’s response: “I think there have been some books written about creativity. Maybe you should read them.” It went on like this for almost an hour.

In the end, I had more questions than answers. Why does Chua think she’s learned from her mistakes if no mistakes were actually made? Why is she so convinced that her methods represent love even though she says the word "love" isn't actually used in her family? How does she sleep at night? Why does my (Western, Texan) husband, with his two advanced degrees and incredible work ethic, call his parents every Sunday and talk for an hour whereas I cringe every time I see “Mom” on my caller ID? Why am I so bothered by Amy Chua? Why do I even care? I tortured myself by thinking about all of the mean things that my mother has ever said to me -- and me to my own children -- and wondered if I might be a Tiger Mom myself.

I suppose if I were a Tiger Parenting "success story" I would suck it up and recognize the "tough love" for what it is. I would appreciate the criticism and thank my parents for pushing me beyond my limits. According to Chua, "the proof of the superiority of Chinese parenting is how the children end up feeling about their parents" and I knew in my heart that nearly everyone in the room at Elliot Bay would have absolutely no sympathy for the wimp that I was as a child or perhaps the wimp that I will always be.

There’s a scene in the American Girl Movie “Chrissa Stands Strong” that I've watched multiple times with my 8 year-old daughter, when the art teacher (played by Jennifer Tilly) explains to Chrissa that bullies bully because they’re really insecure and by putting other people down they can feel better about themselves. Given the recent attention on kids and bullying, we also know that bullies learn from other bullies. Not that long ago, when my Grandmother was still alive, my mom and I paid her a visit. She looked up at my mother from her wheel chair and exclaimed “Your hair looks gawd awful! And that’s a really doggy looking outfit.” My mom’s response: “At least I’m not in assisted living!”

So, I guess, it takes one to know one. My mom, my grandmother, her mother and grandmother perhaps -- and yes, I have to include myself in here as well -- we’re all insecure, self-loathing wimp/bullies. Mean, bitchy Tiger Moms.

On the drive home, I turned on the radio. It was an NPR re-run, an interview with Karen Armstrong, author of Twelve Steps to a Compassionate Life. "There's a mood of despair around, whether we're Easterners or Westerners," Armstrong said. "And despair is a dangerous thing, because once people lose hope, they can resort to extreme measures."

Armstrong goes on to say that compassion isn't an easy or popular virtue. "People often prefer to be right," she says.

The last line of Battle Hymn reads "Lulu will plug her ears, and we'll fight, but I'll have gotten my message out, and I know she knows I'm right."

I was going to end here with a line about how I'm right about Amy Chua but that would be a little too ironic. So instead I'll just say that I'm looking forward to reading Battle Hymn in its entirely, in addition to Twelve Steps.

Chinese mothers, clash of the parenting styles (again!) and what this means for kids

2011-01-13T10:37:00.000-08:00

I finally figured it out! My mother is Chinese! Not literally (mom is blond and blue-eyed and likes to cast judgment by looking down at her children over her pointy, up-turned caucasian nose) but, according to Amy Chua in her controversial WSJ article, Chinese Mothers are Superior, my mom fits the stereotype in a lot of ways.

Here's how Chua, author of Battle Hymm of the Tiger Mother, spells it out:

"A lot of people wonder how Chinese parents raise such stereotypically successful kids. They wonder what these parents do to produce so many math whizzes and music prodigies, what it's like inside the family, and whether they could do it too. Well, I can tell them, because I've done it. Here are some things my daughters, Sophia and Louisa, were never allowed to do:

• attend a sleepover
• have a playdate
• be in a school play
• complain about not being in a school play
• watch TV or play computer games
• choose their own extracurricular activities
• get any grade less than an A
• not be the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama
• play any instrument other than the piano or violin
• not play the piano or violin."

I can relate. Childhood was no fun. In between the piano lessons and grueling swim team workouts and extracurriculars, there was little time for eating and sleeping. My sisters and I were forced into activities, punished for grades below A- and brainwashed into thinking that these efforts had some sort of bearing on our future success and happiness.

“You’ll thank me later” mom used to say.

No, I won’t.

In theory, pushing your kids to do their best and not letting them quit and give up before they’ve had a chance to really excel makes sense. But here’s the thing: not everyone can be a winner. As a parent, if you accept nothing less than perfection, you’re either setting your kids up to be perfect (unlikely, since nobody is perfect) or insecure, neurotic and highly competitive (yep) or – rebellious and hateful. Nice choices!

Recently, Harvard researches put the theory to the test (see the recent CNN article, Want to Get Your Kid Into College? Let Them Play). What they found is that kids who are encouraged to play (encouraging emotional development) do much better in school than the children who focused on skill and academic development.

Whatever you call it – east versus western values; skills vs. social and emotional learning - it’s not new. Of course, I'm sure Chua’s article adds more fuel the Mommy War debate, which was getting a little stale anyway. MediaBistro just reported that the Chinese Mother article had already generated over 2,500 comments so there you go. When it comes to raising kids, everyone’s got an opinion.

As a consultant in the world of children’s and parenting media, I am aware of the challenges and concerns on both a professional and personal level. Recently, my daughter (a TV addict, a little on the heavy side, not doing any activities right now because I couldn’t get it together) asked me: “When I grow up, are you going to be mean to me like Grandma is mean to you?”

“No,” I replied, “and you’ll thank me later.” But I didn’t say that out loud.

Here’s what I think: there are a lot of really smart, really creative parents out there who are raising their kids in new and different ways, challenging stereotypes and redefining boundaries. We live in a time of intense scrutiny but also of tremendous opportunities. You can be a slacker mom. Or you can go free range. Eco chic. Zero-waste. The playing (er, battle) field is wide open. Knock yourselves out.

Your thoughts?

Lamest Year Yet for Kids Holiday Shopping

2010-12-17T10:45:00.000-08:00

Presents!! Who wants presents? Everyone, right? All year long, my kids beg for stuff they see on TV, whine while I whisk them past the toy aisle at Target and pour through catalogs, circling their coveted items with red crayon. My canned response for 11 months out of the year has always been: “put it on your Christmas list.” Well, the time has come. What do they want to see under the tree? Not much.

It’s not they don’t want stuff, it’s just that there’s not much of anything that they are excited about. And as a parent and a children’s marketer, I have to agree. In terms of kids products, this just may be the lamest year yet.

I challenge you: name one hot toy for December 2010. The gotta-have item of the year. Something –anything-- that causes you to drive out of your way or engage in an online bidding war. The one thing that your child just can’t live without.

Yeah, I couldn’t think of anything either. Apparently, neither can my kids.

Back in October, the National Retail Federation issued their top 10 retail holiday trends, one of them being “Kids today are a walking contradiction” though they were referring more to Gen Y habits, not parental spending. Earlier, in July, an NPD study found that spending for young kids is on the decline. And the day before Black Friday, Kidscreen cited more NPD research on 2010 holiday trends.

"Among parents asked what's on their child's holiday wish list, 34% said toys, 15% answered video games, 9% said consumer electronics (with laptops and iPod Touch devices being the most popular), 7% said clothing and 6% answered sporting goods. Other noteworthy categories include footwear, gift cards, books, entertainment and cash.

Among toys, top categories are dolls, vehicles, building sets and arts & crafts. The Top 10 properties specifically coveted are American Girl, Barbie, Disney Princess, Dora the Explorer, LEGO, Pillow Pets, Star Wars, Toy Story 3, Transformers and Zhu Zhu Pets. Within the video game category, Wii and NDS hardware systems are the most requested items, along with the Xbox 360 Kinect."

See anything on that list that you A. haven't heard of before or B. Don't already have in your home?

I asked my kids again what they want for Christmas. The 8 year-old wants socks (socks!) and the 3 year-old wants a digger truck. At least in my house, ‘tis the season for for kids who want so little. In the midst of the chaos of the holidays and the lingering angst of the recession, I'm taking time to appreciate the simple gifts, mainly the intangible ones.

How about you- what's on your wish list?

Social media full circle miracle

2010-11-24T15:57:00.000-08:00

Fifteen years ago, when my career was just getting off the ground (read: I had no idea what I was doing) I somehow landed a job at a sexy Internet start up, one of those destined-for-greatness, ultimately positioned to fail ventures buoyed by Microsoft stock options and guys under 30 with Really Great Ideas. I was assigned to spearhead the editorial efforts of FreeZone.com, "the world's first safe online community for kids and teens." We had an online magazine. We had games. We had a homepage builder. And we had a monitored chat. This is all back in 1995 - 2000, which I guess makes me a sort of an Internet Grandma, but whatever. I loved my job at the time and was passionate about creating a safe and fun destination for kids all over the world. But then we got bought and moved everything to Chicago and then we got sold again and I jumped ship to go to work for Fox Kids (only to get sold to Disney two years later). And then, inevitably, there was this:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FREEZONE TO SAY FAREWELL
March 26, 2001

CHICAGO-- After five years of awards and accolades as the safest and most fun community for kids on the Internet, FreeZone.com (http://FreeZone.com) announced today that it is closing its doors. The final day of operation will be March 30, 2001.

I figured FreeZone and its mission were gone for good, along with the rest of the failed start ups of the 1990s. Maybe we were ahead of our time. Maybe we had the wrong business model. Maybe we just didn't "get it." But then I had other jobs - also in youth marketing and children's media - and found myself asking the same questions when ventures failed or changed direction. Is it possible to make money in the kid business and do the right thing at the same time? More importantly, do the children we're trying to serve even notice or care?

Last week, completely out of the blue, I received an e-mail, a social media full-circle moment if there ever was one:

Hello there,

I found your e-mail address on a couple of networking websites after looking up FreeZone (linkedin, scbwi), but this isn't a business related e-mail - instead I come to you just to send a simple thanks.

To give the creepiness of this e-mail some context, I was going through old boxes this weekend and came across a big one of letters when I was growing up and I had one from you. When you had your website, Freezone, operating I was a frequent (addicted is probably a better term) chatter there.

Even though it has been so many years since then, it really made an impact on me (both your letter, and my hours and hours of time in chat). I was a completely isolated kid and it was great to have a safe place to 'go'. I also met great people in the chat who I do continue to have periodic contact with after all these years. So, for whatever it may be worth to you now I wanted to extend again my thanks for really having an impact on who I am today even though we don't even know each other. I'm working towards doing things in my own career that I can only hope make the same kinds of difference.

All the best,
Crystal
(aka "Burn")

"Burn" and I have since corresponded via e-mail and we're now connected via the latest social media sites. She's 28!!! Which makes me feel very old - it's the same age that I was when I was running FreeZone. That time feels light years away yet fresh in my mind. Her note serves as a wonderful reminder that well-intentioned acts do make a difference, and that we have a tremendous responsibility as content providers and marketers in how we ultimately shape the lives of kids and teens who consume our products.

How is your children's media business impacting the lives of real kids? I'd love to hear your stories.

Preschool TV execs battle it out as kids watch way, WAY too much TV

2010-11-08T14:09:00.000-08:00

According to Nielsen, the company that tracks television viewership, preschool children between the ages of 2 and 5 years old are watching an average of more than 32 hours of TV each week. This alone should cause a concern-- or at least a raised eyebrow or two, but I’ll get to that later.

The recent buzz has been about Disney’s new preschool channel, Disney Junior, which is scheduled to launch in 2012. According to last week’s article in the New York Times, Disney Junior to Focus on Social Values:

“Mothers want preschool television to be more about teaching children social skills and less about pushing clear academic goals – at least that’s what Disney executives say new internal research indicates. For decades, most preschool programming has been built around an educational curriculum, whether that is numbers and letters (“Sesame Street”), language skills (“Dora”) or even math (Nickelodeon’s “Team Umizoomi”). Disney’s “Mickey Mouse Clubhouse” incorporates problem-solving and counting. The reasons for the educational focus vary, but the approach serves one major goal: reassuring mothers about plunking their wee ones in front of the TV screen.”

This has lead to a quasi turf war among television executives. Not over how much kids should watch (or when – data now suggests that parents are demanding kids programming not only during the morning hours but also during prime time and evening, from 5-11pm) but what kind of programming. According to the Wall Street Journal’s The Turf War for Tots

"Executives at Walt Disney Co., preparing their latest push for this audience, say that some TV for tots favors curriculum over storytelling. They argue that it's sometimes too much work, not enough play. They're offering themselves as an alternative to Nickelodeon's Nick Jr. channel, which emphasizes learning. Disney says that today's parents are ready for a change. In an age of video games and iPads, kids can learn their ABCs anywhere. What's missing are good, old-fashioned stories that kids can repeat to others, pretend to be the characters, and watch again and again."

And yet, a new study released by Seattle Children's Research Institute and the University of Washington demonstrates Preschoolers are Watching WAY too much TV. According to the MSNBC summary, "nearly 70 percent of the preschool-age children exceeded recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for limiting screen exposure (including TV, DVDs, computers and video games) to one to two daily hours. The recommendation is based on research linking screen time with adverse effects, including language lags, obesity, possibly aggressive behaviors and decreased academic performance, according to study researcher Dr. Pooja Tandon of the Seattle Children's Research Institute and the University of Washington."

There are other options for those of you who aren’t convinced that the Disney/Nickelodeon/PBS Kids food chain is the only option out there. Full disclosure: these are my clients.

Ameba TV is a set top box company out of Winnipeg, Canada with a content library full of thousands commercial-free, educational shows geared towards kids 3-8. Parents control the content; kids get a customized remote. Ameba has plans to update their site to include a subscription-based streaming service. Soon, you will also be able to subscribe to Ameba via Roku, a digital media player.

The Mother Company, out of Los Angeles, is producing a series of DVDs based on social and emotional learning, with a gentle, stylish approach (think Mister Rogers, only the shows are lead by a delightful creative-inspiring host named Ruby). The company is run by a group of "mamas on a mission" who are driven by a passion to redefine screen time.

Dr. Tandon of Seattle Children's also offers tips for limiting screen time:

* Use DVDs or on-demand television, because when the show is over, it's over. "The problem with television is it keeps going," Tandon said. These media also eliminate advertisements, which tend to promote unhealthy foods, she added.
* Set rules for screen time early in children's lives.
* Turn off the TV during meal times.
* Take TVs out of bedrooms. (Tandon mentioned research suggesting a certain percentage of preschoolers have TVs in their rooms.)
* Watch television with kids, and discuss the shows and the messages put forth.

As we live in an increasingly media rich world, parents should be mindful of what their kids are watching, how much and when. How do you limit screen time in your home?

A lesson in educational children's content

2010-08-26T17:11:00.000-07:00

One of my favorite people in the whole world is David Kleeman, President of the American Center for Media and Children (hi, David!) With over 25 years in children's media, the man knows his stuff. His column in this week's Huffington Post is so right on on so many levels. When it comes to "educational" children's media, it's a claim that we all want to embrace, yet it's too often become a term that is misinterpreted and even abused.

Says Kleeman: "The gap between producers' claims of educational efficacy and a consistent standard for assessing those claims, especially for preschool media, is today's primary battleground in children's media. Every parent wants their children's investment in screen time to be worthwhile, so producers are happy to say their TV, DVDs, websites, toys and software are intellectually enriching. Sometimes, those claims reflect deep and thoughtful work to infuse beneficial content into a developmentally-appropriate format. Sometimes, they're little more than bait for busy, guilty parents."

Did somebody say busy, guilty parents? Whoops, I digress.

At any rate, Kleeman suggests what I think is a brilliant idea: a list of ingredients! "Responsible producers would detail their vision of the target audience, the developmental or cognitive elements they intended to address, their philosophy of how best to teach them, and how those elements are expressed in their creative approach. Parents could then evaluate whether the focus suits their child's specific needs, interests and abilities; whether the interface and presentation sound engaging and match their values; and whether the technology is worth the investment."

Honestly, I couldn't agree more. What do you think?

Ready for Generation Z?

2010-07-22T21:52:00.000-07:00

Today’s MediaPost features an article in their Engage: Teens column that admittedly I found a little disturbing. Three Predictions about Generation Z purports that this up-and-coming group of teens are like a super-powered version of their Generation Y predecessors (I can’t help think of the scene in Eclipse with the “newborn” vampires are coming out of the water, stronger and feistier than their elder vampire counterparts).

Anyway. These forthcoming uber teens (who are younger than preteens, the offspring of the X Generation, ages 5 and under) are apparently 1. More technologically savvy than any other generation, 2. Adverse to criticism, and therefore likely to sabotage a brand or a marketing campaign and 3. Will continue to find loopholes so that they can access information more quickly. Numbers one and three I’m totally fine with; it’s just number 2 (excuse the pun) that stopped me in my tracks. These kids are barely potty trained! It's quite the stretch to predict that with "one slip of the tongue, they're likely to stomp on your foot, leave the room, and start an empire quicker than you can say Facebook." Yeah, maybe that's because most of these Generation Zers are still in preschool and therefore tantrums are not uncommon.

When it comes to generational trends, I prefer Penelope Trunk's Generation Z summary of predictions. She gives us some historical perspective but doesn't make any big claims. And really, as youth marketers, do we really need to start focusing on Generation Z now? Unless you've got an early learning program, children's book series or family-friendly movie coming out soon, I think not.

The Key to Kids and Healthy Products? Collaborate with a Licensed Character

2010-06-29T15:26:00.000-07:00

Surely it will come as no surprise that a recent study found that children’s consumption goes hand in hand with effective merchandising, licensing and marketing (Yale University: Licensed Characters on Food Packaging Affect Kids’ Taste Preference, Snack Selections).

But onions? Sure enough, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article about Shrek’s recent promotion with Vidalia onions.

The anecdote about the three year-old who threw a fit until his mother dropped a bag full of onions into her shopping cart pretty much sums it up. What parent hasn’t been there before? Not with the onions, I mean. The toddler pitching a fit in the grocery store over a licensed character.

This same mom went home with her onions, chopped them up into a casserole and the tot gulped them down. “It was like a toy in a cereal box,” said the mom.

Now, I’m not advocating marketing to children merely for the sake of marketing, but when it comes to stuff that is “good” for kids but not always an easy sell (healthy foods, educational products, etc.) the challenge is always this: how can you make it as fun and rewarding as a toy inside a cereal box? Sure, of course you can partner with a box office hit like Shrek and sit back and watch your sales rise… or you could do something even more fun and engaging.

If Shrek can sell onions to kids, what can you do for your brand?

TV and Todders: What’s the Real Scoop?

2010-05-25T13:07:00.000-07:00

We all know that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no more than two hours of “screen time,” (i.e. television, videos, DVDs, online games, handheld games, movies, virtual worlds…) for children, and no screen time for children ages 2 and under.

So what happens when toddlers and young children watch more than their daily-recommended allowance? They are linked with later problems in life, according to a new Canadian study cited in last week’s New York Times:

For those children, each hour of extra TV exposure in early childhood was associated with a range of issues by the fourth grade. Compared with children who watched less television, those with more TV exposure participated less in class and had lower math grades. They suffered about 10 percent more bullying by classmates and were less likely to be physically active on weekends. They consumed about 10 percent more soft drinks and snacks and had body mass index scores that were about 5 percent higher than their peers. While it may be that children who watched more TV also had less involved parents, the researchers said they controlled for factors like a mother’s education, whether the child was in a single parent family and other parenting concerns. The findings suggest that the differences were strongly linked with television exposure, not parental care, and that excessive television is not good for a developing brain.

Indeed, children’s brain development is a critical factor at this age. Everything they see and do and experience creates connections that have a long-term affect. So – why didn’t the study look at the kinds of television that children were viewing in addition to how much? I think this is a critical piece of missing information.

According to Dimitri A. Christakis and Frederick J. Zimmerman, authors of "The Elephant in the Living Room: Make Television Work for Your Kids "At its best, TV can educate and inspire. High-quality documentaries offer insights into history that no book can equal. Children's educational shows have the proven ability to help children learn to read to be kind, and to share. In short, when used appropriately, television has the power to expand horizons and help children's cognitive, social and emotional development."

Similarly, according to University of Massachusetts psychology professor Daniel Anderson, an internationally known expert on television and early childhood development, “I am absolutely firmly convinced of the power of television for serving positive developmental ends. Well-made television that’s designed to benefit children really does benefit them.”

What do you think?

Marketing to girls: pink stinks. Really?

2010-04-02T15:20:00.000-07:00

“You need to buy me a new jacket.”
“Why? It still fits you. There’s nothing wrong with it.”
“It’s too girly.”

Actual conversation between my daughter and me last week.

She’s 7.

And then there’s this Time magazine article Not So Pretty in Pink: Are Girls' Toys Too Girly? about two London moms who recently launched the advocacy group Pinkstinks, which they hope will "spark a shift in a popular culture that they say puts girls "into a pretty little box" from birth, offering them toys that emphasize the importance of looking good and being feminine, while the boys are allowed to go exploring and get dirty."

Which is fine… I suppose, if it weren’t such a tired feminist argument that really has nothing to do with consumer marketing, gender inequality or unfair stereotypes.

Here’s the thing. The reason why all the girl clothes and toys are pink and purple and princess-y is not because the toy and fashion industries are sexist. It’s because that’s what sells. And it’s what the girls want… up until about age 6 or 7. And then it changes. Just go into any major retailer or department store and look at the different sections. Toddler/preschool clothing and toys are extremely segmented by stereotypical gender colors and genres, but merchandise for older kids (ages 7 and up) is not. It's not a conspiracy. It's just plain old market economics.

However, as a feminist and women's college graduate I do know that there are plenty of parents out there who are fed up with the mass merchandise and uninspired consumer products targeting our young children. They want products that are fresh, new and different. As a mother to a daughter who up until a year ago would only wear pink, I also know that it's frustrating to buy clothes or toys that simply don't get used.

The London moms (mums) behind the Pinkstinks campaign have launched a sister website where kids can participate in the discussion.

What do you think?

Tampon advertising that pokes fun at tampon advertising (pun intended)

2010-03-18T11:30:00.000-07:00

I nearly laughed out loud when I saw this latest (brilliant) “Break the Cycle” campaign targeting women 14 to 21 from U by Kotex, courtesy of JWT in NYC.

The ads poke fun at advertising, market research, out-of-date marketing concepts-- and prudishness. According to Tuesday’s New York Times article,

One spot which will make its debut next month, opens with a woman strolling confidently toward the camera. “I’m a believably attractive 18- to 24-year-old female,” she says. “You can relate to me because I’m racially ambiguous. Market research shows that girls like you love girls like me.”
The sense of an ad somehow deconstructing itself continues, as she says, “Now I’m going to tell you to buy something. Buy the same tampons I use. Because I’m wearing white pants, and I have good hair, and you wish you could be me.” Screen text near the end of the spot asks, “Why are tampon ads so obnoxious?”
A print ad, meanwhile, shows a woman driving a convertible with this text: “I tied a tampon to my key ring so my brother wouldn’t take my car. It worked.”

And so does the ad.

In another TV spot (see it on YouTube), a young woman in her 20s says “How do I feel about my period? I love it. Sometimes it makes me want to run on the beach!" while showing images of women running on the beach and dancing. The clips mocked in the spot are actually from Kotex commercials, believe it or not.

The result is a campaign that is fresh, different, authentic and terrific on so many levels. Online on UbyKotex.com visitors can sign a “Declaration of Real Talk,” vowing to defy societal pressures that discourage women from speaking out about their bodies and health. For every declaration, Kotex will donate $1 to Girls for a Change, a national nonprofit based in San Jose, Calif., that pairs urban middle school and high school girls with professional women to encourage social change.

According to MediaPost, a study conducted online in August 2009 by Harris Interactive on behalf of Kotex, among more than 1,600 North American women ages 14-35, 7 in 10 women believe it's time for society to change how it talks about vaginal health, yet less than half (45%) feel empowered to make a difference.

“We’re really out there and we’re trying to touch women and say we care about this conversation,” said Mr. Meurer, of Kotex. “We’re changing our brand equity to stand for truth and transparency and progressive vaginal care.”

Talk about breaking the cycle.

What is your brand doing to shake up preconceived notions when it comes to girls and health?

Gaga over product placement

2010-03-15T17:15:00.001-07:00

Here’s a modern day “telephone game”: See if you can count how many product placements are in the "Telephone" Lady Gaga video. Now, count the ones that are paid for. Pass it on.

According to AdAge,

"The most-talked about aspect of Lady Gaga's Beyonce co-starring, Jonas Akerlund-directed music video for "Telephone," which premiered Thursday night, was not the singer's flagrant partial nudity, girl-on-girl kissing or mass-murder sequence in a diner featuring Tyrese Gibson.

It was the product placement.

At least nine different brands make appearances in the nine-minute music video, from Gaga's own Heartbeats headphones to a "Beats Limited Edition" laptop, from HP Envy to "telephone" partner Virgin Mobile, and from Miracle Whip and Wonder Bread to Diet Coke."

But how many of these product placements were actually paid for? Not many, according to Gaga's manager. They were simply her ideas.

Put in pop-culture historical perspective, it's interesting to see how much creative license (or not) Gaga takes in her videos. They're definitely edgy but not necessarily original. Like my previous blog post on YA plagiarism, it appears to me as if Gaga is simply taking creative references from a variety of different sources and pulling them all together in a new way. Maybe I'm aging myself here, but all I see is a younger, next generation version of Madonna.

So who is the true material girl?

For YA novelist, plagiarism is the new promotion

2010-02-12T12:58:00.000-08:00

Today’s New York Times article “Author, 17, Says It’s ‘Mixing,’ Not Plagiarism,” tells the perhaps not-so-surprising story of Helene Hegemann a 17 year-old German author who’s debut novel “Axolotl Roadkill,” shot to bestseller status in the span of just a few weeks. The Times states that German newspapers and magazines “heralded the novel far and wide as a tremendous debut, particularly for such a young author.” So hey, it must be a good read.

The interesting thing about it is that Hegemann admits to lifting material from a lesser-known novel, “Strobo,” by an author writing under the nom de plume Arien.

Ah, the plot thickens. Says the Times:

Ms. Hegemann finds herself in the middle of a collision — if not road kill exactly — between the staid, literary establishment in a country that venerates writers from Goethe to Mann to Grass, and the Berlin youth culture of D.J.’s and artists that sample freely and thereby breathe creativity into old forms. Or as one character, Edmond, puts it in the book, “Berlin is here to mix everything with everything.”
A powerful statement, but the line originally was written by Airen, on his blog. The plot thickens, however, and shows that perhaps more than simple cribbing is at work. When another character asks Edmond if he came up with that line himself, he replies, “I help myself everywhere I find inspiration.”

In a final “gotcha,” the controversy does not at all seem to be hurting book sales – for either Hegemann’s “Axolotl Roadkill,” or Arien’s “Strobo.”

So here’s my question. In the era of “mixing everything,” of re-tweets and re-purposing content and blogging about bloggers and multichannel marketing and content aggregate sites and yours truly lifting a paragraph from the New York Times about plagiarism in order to make a point about plagiarism… is there any originality anymore? Perhaps not. A trendsetter for sure and perhaps wise beyond her years, Hegemann says “There’s no such thing as originality anyway, just authenticity,” in a statement released by her publisher after the scandal broke.

… and this little cookie launched a major viral marketing campaign

2010-02-02T20:28:00.000-08:00

The Girl Scouts have grown up a lot since they launched their lackluster “Girl Scout Cookies Venture Into Cyberspace” PR campaign a mere three years ago.

This year, the campaign is terrific. Why? Because it isn’t about the cookies. It’s about building a strong Girl Scouts brand, which is at the forefront of the messaging:

Every Cookie has a Mission: to Help Girls Do Great Things

This week’s BrandChannel “Brands We Love” column reports that this most recent Girl Scouts campaign is a precursor to an overall rebranding plan that will be unveiled later this spring, focusing on how scouting builds leadership, helps teach girls how to manage money and how cookie sales help drive philanthropic efforts locally and abroad.

Now that you know all of that… don’t you feel justified in buying a few more boxes of Girl Scout cookies? I know I do.

De-incentivizing socialization among children

2010-01-25T12:55:00.000-08:00

"One of the things I've seen over the last decade is that we've become so successful at creating incentives for online socialization that I think we have unintentionally de-incentivized face-to-face socialization for kids."

Wow. Did he just say that? Yes. In today's Seattle Times. Meet Jordan Weisman, CEO and founder of Smith & Tinker, creator of the interactive Nanovor game primarily targeted to young boys which includes the accompanying offline Nanoscope(tm).

Weisman goes onto say "kids are still human so they still desperately want to be in the room with the other 10 year-old. They just don't know what to do when they get there."

Excuse me? Are you trying to tell us that 10 year old children don't know how to interact with each other? And that your products are part of that solution? Apparently so. This is what the Smith & Tinker homepage has to say:

Reinventing play for the connected generation

We see a future in which unconnected products like toys, games, books and movies will not be able to compete with the dynamic and exciting world of the internet.

Maybe I'm the only one raising her eyebrows at this. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks that an offline children's brand is still a thing to behold and that online brands depend upon offline marketing and distribution channels just as much as offline brands need online marketing.

It also begs the question: whether you have an offline brand or an online brand or something that falls somewhere in between, what are you doing to promote face-to-face socialization among children?

Haiti donations pour in from Gen Y

2010-01-19T11:45:00.000-08:00

As of yesterday, $27 million has been donated to Haiti relief efforts via text donations. (CBS News). The Red Cross mobile campaign - texting the word "Haiti" to 90999 is simple and ingenious. According to Peter Dunn in a recent MediaPost article, The Red Cross has "cracked the code to Gen Y giving."

What made the campaign all the more successful was how quickly the viral and PR efforts took off. Facebook certainly did their part. As have the major news networks. There hasn't been a day that's gone by that I haven't seen the "Text Haiti to 90999" on multiple TV stations. Talk about free advertising!

The Red Cross isn't the only organization that has seen an major influx of donations of course. But they definitely have the best campaign and I'm sure marketers all over the globe are taking note. Or getting on the bandwagon. I Heart Daily posted today that Gaia Online, an anime-themed site for tweens and teens, will match Red Cross Donations submitted by members.

What is your brand doing to support relief efforts?

A brief history of cartoon animation

2010-01-04T14:39:00.000-08:00

Happy Birthday Popeye! (80) Scooby-Doo! (40), The Simpsons! (20), Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner! (60). You all look terrific, you haven’t aged at all. You’ve got what they call... timeless beauty. And a good story to tell.

Yesterday’s Seattle Times picked up the Toledo Blade’s recent retrospective of classic cartoons (and their 2009 birthdays) and I couldn’t help but smile. Regarding ancient classics like Felix the cat (90!) when cartoon shorts were just getting their start in the silent film era, Andrew Farago, curator of the Cartoon Art Museum in San Francisco, said “I don’t think the Disney empire could have happened without him.” (Was it a game of cat and mouse? Sorry—couldn’t resist that one.)

It reminded me of an Animation exhibit I attended earlier this winter at the Pacific Science Center where kids got to experience first hand the art of animation, including drawing, video and special effects.

One thing always leads to another. Yet as we go into 2010 and view new animated films – like the Princess and the Frog, getting back to the Disney magic minus all the bells and whistles or Avatar, and its breakthrough special 3D effects – I wonder what the next decades will reveal.

Roy Disney's brand strategy legacy

2009-12-17T07:08:00.000-08:00

Sometimes it's the quiet guy who makes the biggest waves. Roy Disney, nephew of Walt Disney, longtime Disney board member and avid sailboat racer, died yesterday at the age of 79. He left a legacy that anyone in the children's entertainment or marketing business should pay close attention to.

1. Stay true to your core. In the 1980s Roy grew frustrated with Disney company management and likened the company to "a real-estate company that happened to be in the movie business." (Los Angeles Times, 12/17/09). It was time to get back to the company's core roots, i.e. the feature animation film business.

2. Clear out the dead wood, bad apples and in-laws, if necessary. If there people within your organization that are not upholding or enhancing your brand's mission and values, particularly at the highest levels of the company, get them out of the way as quickly as possible. Ousting of company executives, first with Ron Miller (Walt Disney's son-in-law) and later with a shareholder revolt against Michael Eisner (whom Roy had helped bring into the company) certainly was not a pleasant process, but a necessary one.

3. Evangelize. "It was Roy who was the protector. It was Roy who was the godfather, the champion and believer in it," said Peter Schneider, former President of Walt Disney Feature Animation, "Animation doesn't work without someone who believed, and Roy believed." (LA Times)

4. Protect the brand. "People always underestimated Roy," said Schneider. "You underestimate Roy at your peril, as many have learned." It does appear as though company management is finally on track, as anyone can attest with Disney's string of recent animation, film, TV and other on-brand success stories.

5. Continue the legacy. "Roy's commitment to the art of animation was unparalleled and will always remain his personal legacy and one of his greatest contributions to Disney's past, present and future," said Bob Iger, current Disney company president, who early on made peace with Roy Disney. Smart move.

And the shark jumped over New Moon

2009-12-10T16:35:00.000-08:00

So I finally, finally got a chance to see New Moon. Yeah, you know, that one. The one with the cult-like following that’s breaking box office records? Maybe you’ve seen it twice already. All I have to say is… oh, what a disappointment. I laughed my way through almost the entire movie and not because the film was intended to be funny.

I did see the first Twilight movie and I’ve read the first two books. I wouldn’t call myself a fan necessarily, but I find the series to be entertaining – as well as wholesome—in a vampire meets werewolf love triangle sort of way of course. The first movie was pretty bad, mostly due to the lame special effects, poor acting and uninspired dialogue. With a new director, a new budget and the promise of a clan of shirtless young boys I had higher hopes for New Moon. How bad could it be?

Bad. I had a serious case of the giggles that began with the cheesy opening credits, increased with each gratuitous shirtless scene and glitter-glue-on-the-face special effect and resulted into flat out laughter when Bella and Edward took a Estee Lauder perfume ad-like jaunt through the woods.

Apparently I wasn’t the only theater goer who found the movie laughable. It seemed as if we (teens, moms, young girls, gray-haired couples) were all laughing and giggling at this ridiculous high-budget B-movie quality film.

So what on earth is driving sales? One thing: romance. Pure and simple, the Twilight saga connects with us on a deeper level and does an excellent job in this regard. What Stephanie Meyer has brilliantly done is created a brand that speaks to women and girls in a new old-fashioned way. When was the last time you saw a really good romantic film or read a great romance that wasn’t filled with gratuitous sex, violence or both? In my opinion, the market is wide open on this one. Even better, content creators and marketers don't even need to worry too much about quality.

Say what you want about vampires and werewolves being the next big craze, but it’s not about that. That’s just the icing—er, eyecandy—on the cake.

P.S. Go TEAM JACOB!!!

A hop, skip and an inside look at what's ahead for Hopscotch in 2010

2009-12-01T14:14:00.000-08:00

Wow, December already. November was a flurry of activity and I didn’t even have time to write a single blog post. Not that you needed to pay close attention... perhaps you couldn't even find the blog. That's because I changed the name and the URL. The Hopscotch Consulting business strategy has shifted somewhat as well, but I’ll get to that in a bit.

First let me tell you about November. November was National Novel Writing Month or (NaNoWriMo). On a whim I decided to participate. The challenge seemed daunting – what kind of person can write 50,000 words in a month and create some semblance of a storyline? I can, I discovered, and that was exciting. The fire is now lit under my rear end to finish this book as well as one other novel that I’m co-writing with a friend that we began last year. My goal is to have both complete by spring 2010.

So, here comes the change in strategy part. Hopscotch will now exclusively focus on more of the content and brand strategy side of things, in other words, copywriting, editing, strategic planning, a bit of focused research and analysis.

If you think that you might want to work with me, please check out the newly revised Hopscotch Consulting website and list of services that I offer. Then, let’s talk!

In the meantime… Happy Holidays!

TV viewing is alive and well

2009-10-27T10:47:00.000-07:00

In case you were wondering if kids were watching less TV now that we have so many new and exciting new media options, including online games, virtual worlds, consoles, iPods –not to mention the media blitz surrounding the links between TV watching and childhood obesity— in fact, TV watching is actually on the rise. At an eight-year high, according to a new Nielsen study released yesterday.

The report states that children ages 2-5 spend an average of 32+ hours a week in front of the TV. Children ages 6-11 watch about 28 hours per week. TV watching is now defined as watching what is currently on TV, watching playback programming via DVR, DVDs and videos.

As the Nielsen report states, "While 97% of kids’ viewing is through live TV, younger kids spend more time than the older group viewing via DVR, DVD and, to a lesser extent, VCR. Four percent of kids aged 2-5 watch via those devices on average across total day compared to 2.3% for those aged 6-11. Their considerable use of these devices at a young age points to them being able to adopt new devices comfortably as they grow up."

Also of note, especially for you media literacy types: younger children watch more commercials than the older kids. Is anyone surprised?

Educating Kids (and Moms) About Advertising

2009-10-09T05:55:00.000-07:00

Holy government intervention, Batman! Two things happened this week that caused me to smile:

1.The FTC finally issued a crackdown on mommy bloggers who write product endorsements without disclosing their relationships with those products (i.e. they got the products for free or—even better—they are getting paid to write the review) and
2. The FTC is also reviewing standards and practices around advertising to kids.

As David Vladeck, the new director of the Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection is quoted in this week's MediaPost article "The distinction between ads and other content is often blurred to the point that even older kids may not get when they are being pitched," he said. "The goals are to teach kids to be aware of ads, analyze and understand them, and the benefits of being an informed consumer."

The FTC actions include a new educational campaign aimed at tweens next year that will teach kids how to recognize and analyze advertising.

That's all fine and good, but what about the advertisers? As Meredith from YPulse points out in her update from this week's CARU conference, the discussions centered around "reconciling the unilateral marketing standards of the past with the ubiquitous connectivity and multiple platforms of the new media landscape. As the regulatory processes continue to be fine tuned and consumers of all ages become more active players (whether as Facebook fans, content creators, bloggers, etc.), we see a shift from messaging as a one-way broadcast to an ongoing dialogue with youth."

It's an interesting issue and one that is going to be mighty tough to regulate when the lines between advertising, editorial, social media, wireless communications and even mommy’s blog are blurred.

Marketers love tweens and moms right now. And why wouldn't they? Collectively tweens have a spending power of over $30 billion and they influence about 70% of household purchases. And their mothers, who influence 85 percent of their household purchases, collectively spend about $2.1 trillion per year.

Women and children of America, unite! The advertising issue is one that by and large, will be solved by you. Education begins at home.

Miley Cyrus mega marketing--oops I mean concert-- review

2009-09-17T13:25:00.000-07:00

It wasn’t the $39.50 tickets that somehow turned into $75 with fees and taxes. Or the hour-plus drive to and from Tacoma. Or the collective eardrum-piercing high-pitched screams from thousands of pre-teen girls. Or the wait to buy overpriced concert merchandise like a $10 glow stick (that should not have cost more than 25 cents.) Or the Walmart mannequins and banners lining the walls promoting the new Miley Cyrus clothing line. Or even the fashion booths (also Walmart) where moms and girls lined up their picture taken in front of a green screen next to Miley and other models wearing her new clothing line. No, no. I fully expected and embraced all of that.

The surprise was that the Miley/Disney/Walmart/Touchstone/ marketing machine took center stage on stage and passed for entertainment. Now, I know what you’re thinking… I’m in the business; nothing should shock me, right? Advertising is the new entertainment. But after having to suffer through the opening act (Metro Station, headed by Miley’s brother Trace Cyrus), the band closed with "Shake it" which also doubled as a…. Walmart advertisement. Every single video screen was devoted to promoting the Miley Cyrus clothing line as models danced on a runway showing off their new threads. Admittedly, the video was well produced and the song was catchy, but still. It’s an ad. On stage. Tacky.

That was just the beginning, the icebreaker if you will (incidentally, Miley herself opened up the show pounding inside a fake chunk of ice and then had a “Breakout” moment where she suddenly appeared amidst ‘fire’ and smoke—very This is Spinal Tap if you ask me but I digress…). Where was I? Oh right, back to the advertising-as-entertainment. Three or four songs into her performance, Miley paused for reflective moment. She told us about what a great summer she had on Tybee Island in Georgia: “It really gave me a chance to connect with people I love most in my life…” she said. “And now… to show you what I’m talking about, I’d like to show you a clip from my latest movie, The Last Song.” Really? We get to watch a movie trailer in the middle of a concert? Disney/Touchstone, you’ve reached a new low. I would like my money back! But wait—that's not all. Miley of course sang a few songs from the movie (the songs are not bad and Miley does truly have a lovely voice when she’s not screaming or violently flipping her hair). Perhaps the concert promoters thought we'd get bored if there wasn't enough going on on stage during one of her slow songs, so they played more movie clips while she sang. Why bother to go see the movie when you can see all the main scenes during the concert? Good grief.

I don't know, maybe I'm the only one who's bothered by this kind of insidious marketing. My 7 year-old daughter, her friend and the thousands of other little girls at the Tacoma Dome thought it was the best of both worlds.

Back to school retail roundup

2009-08-26T08:59:00.000-07:00

If you’ve seen the trailer for The September Issue, a documentary film about the fashion industry, you’ll understand why fall is such a critical time.

For kid, tween and teen retailers, back to school is the equivalent of the September issue.

While the economy has affected the situation somewhat, according to the National Retail Federation’s 2009 Back to School Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey, conducted by BIGresearch, the average family with students in grades kindergarten through 12 is expected to spend $548.72 on school merchandise, a decline of 7.7 percent from $594.24 in 2008. Total spending on back to school is expected to reach $17.42 billion. 2009 back-to-college and back-to-school spending combined will total $47.50 billion.

And that's about it for the bad news. The good news? According to recent research from Burst Media on back-to-school shopping habits, "only 15.7% of shoppers will spend less money this back-to-school season and almost one-quarter (24.9%) will actually spend more money than last year."

So, then, where is everyone shopping? Which retailers have the best merchandise? Which brands have the best campaigns?

Ypulse featured a great post yesterday "What Worked in This Year's Back to School Campaigns." It's a terrific summary of this year's best BTS promotions and current youth marketing best practices.

Our favorites? Nordstrom's Twilight Saga: New Moon promotion, including exclusive movie merchandise, Kmart's "Schoolebrity" campaign, featuring a sweepstakes, games and special layaway programs, and Sears' "Arrive Lounge” featuring celebrity Selena Gomez.

Let us know your favorites as well. Also, Targeting Kids is on the lookout for cause-related marketing campaigns (both current and up and coming) that target kids, tweens or teens so please let us know about those too.

Happy back to school shopping!

What PBS can teach us about educational children’s media

2009-07-06T22:35:00.000-07:00

PBS Kids recently earned the distinction as the #1 educational children’s media brand, according to a new GFK Roper survey that polled over 1,000 U.S. adults in April, asking questions about PBS Kids as compared to Leapfrog, Nick, Jr., Playhouse Disney, Noggin, Discovery Kids, National Geographic Kids, KOL (a.k.a AOL for Kids) and YahooKids, among others.

Surprise? Not to those who already know and love all things PBS Kids, including popular programs/brands such as Sesame Street, Word World, Super Why and Cyberchase.

According to the study, “PBS KIDS excels at addressing key curriculum areas and children’s cognitive and social/emotional developmental needs. Respondents concurred that PBS succeeds in delivering important topics to young viewers with reading and literacy (80%) ranking as the topic that PBS speaks to best. Other developmental areas that follow literacy include the arts (75%), science/technology/engineering/math (74%), social/emotional development (74%), healthy living (73%), and the environment (71%).”

Can any other educational children's brands be held to such a high standard? Apparently not. Truth be told, the FCC is partially to blame. The Children's Television Act (CTA) enacted by Congress in 1990, requires broadcasters to provide at least three hours a week of educational/informational (E/I) programming for kids between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. But there's no definition of what "educational" actually means. Therefore, it's no big surprise that a 2008 Annenberg study found that merely 25% of E/I shows were of "minimal educational value." Worse, nearly 70% of the shows aimed at school-age kids contained violence and harsh language.

But this blog isn't aimed at parents who have ample reason to turn off their television sets forever. It's targeted at you (and me): the children's media producer, the brand marketer, the content creator, the television executive, the toy licensor; those of us who fuel the amazing machine that churns out kids media and the related "stuff" that goes along with it. You and I both know that a lot of it is pure crap. And that it contains absolutely no educational value whatsoever.

So now what? I say take a few pointers from PBS Kids. Here are a few:

1. Establish a curriculum. Don't know how to do this? Hire a curriculum consultant! There are plenty of them out there and they would love to work with you.
2. Pick a subject area (or two) and stick with it - i.e. math/science, social/emotional, language development. Keep it simple, keep it fun.
3. Form an educational advisory board (yes, with real educators and child development specialists) to review scripts, storyboards, even licensing deals - to ensure that everything is on brand and that the content meets the highest standards possible.
4. Determine how you will measure the success and educational outcomes of your children's media property (hint: your curriculum consultant and/or educational advisory board can help you do this).
5. Get an independent, ideally educationally-based organization to conduct a research study or brand audit. For example, a Georgetown University study, "Educational TV: 30 Years of Sesame Street Research" found that the children who had watched more Sesame Street as young children had higher school performance as adolescents, as measured by grades in English, math, science and overall GPA.

Can your children's media brand pass the test?

Marketing to Kids: Our favorite titles

2009-06-17T11:56:00.000-07:00

“The average 10-year-old has memorized about 400 brands, the average kindergartner can identify some 300 logos and from as early as age two kids are "bonded to brands." Some may call it brainwashing, others say it's genius; regardless of how you see it, the approach is the same: target young kids directly and consistently, appeal to them and not the adults in their lives and get your product name in their heads from as early an age as possible.” --- Juliet Schor, Born to Buy: The Commercialized Child and the New Consumer Culture

According to recent research “even in these tough economic times, tweens wield $43 billion in spending power annually, and influence the spending of billions more on everything from cell phones to vacations to automobiles.” Statistics also show that kids and tweens influence another $150 billion of their parents' spending. So what are we to do with this information?

Wherever you stand on the issue of marketing to kids and teens, there’s no disputing that (done right), an early investment in the kids and tweens business can be a driving force in your company’s future and long term success. The question is… how do you do it right?

We at Hopscotch Consulting spend a lot of time pondering this issue, advising companies on appropriate marketing campaigns and brand strategies that empower kids (and don't exploit.) We have lots of great ideas and insights; eventually we'll write our own book. In the meantime, we'd like to share a number of titles on the topic that tackle the issue of marketing to kids from multiple angles:

Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives
By John Palfrey and Urs Gasser
As a lawyers who specialize in intellectual property and information issues, Palfrey and Gasser discuss the ways "downloading, text-messaging, massively multiplayer game-playing, YouTube-watching" youth are transforming society.

Born to Buy: The Commercialized Child and the New Consumer Culture
By Juliet Schor
Schor exposes what she believes to be a huge cesspool of materialism, consumerism and commercialization that perhaps is leading to a generation of kids that won't learn what is important and truly necessary in life.

Brand Child: Remarkable Insights into the Minds of Today's Global Kids & Their Relationships with Brands
By Martin Lindstrom and Patricia B. Seybold
Brand Child provides a comprehensive account on how current tweens perceive brands, react to marketing and decide to spend their considerable financial buying power.

Buy, Buy Baby: How Consumer Culture Manipulates Parents and Harms Young Minds
by Susan Gregory Thomas
"The moment a baby can see clearly, she becomes a consumer." Investigative journalist Thomas interviewed child development experts, product developers, marketing consultants and educators in this exposé on how marketers are targeting young minds - even before they leave the womb.

Consumer Kids: How Big Business is Grooming Our Children for Profit
By: Ed Mayo and Agnes Nairn
How do children become targeted by big business and why does it matter? Mayo and Nairn show how corporations have exploited and packaged childhood and why too much marketing can make you unhappy.

Creating Ever-Cool: A Marketer's Guide to a Kid's Heart
By: Gene Del Vecchio
What's secret formula for achieving “ever-cool” status- one of the key attributes that the most successful kids’ products have in common? Del Vecchio provides some great tips on how to best establish a lifelong relationship with the youth market.

Gen BuY: How Tweens, Teens and Twenty-Somethings Are Revolutionizing Retail
By Kit Yarrow, Jayne O'Donnell
Yarrow and O'Donnell argue that Gen Y consumers have revolutionized the way Americans shop by turning traditional sales and marketing strategies upside down. The book offers an in-depth look at what motivates these young people to buy certain products and reject others.

Getting Wiser to Teens: More Insights into Marketing to Teenagers
By: Peter Zollo
This book gives readers a thorough understanding of what teens think, feel, and need, what they do, what they buy, and how marketers should--and shouldn't--reach them.

The Great Tween Buying Machine: Capturing Your Share of the Multi-Billion-Dollar Tween Market
By: David L. Siegel, Timothy J. Coffey, Gregory Livingston
What drives tweens, and what are the social and personal implications for this market? This book explores how this target market has changed over the last few years and reveals key information on how to expand a company's marketing base.

Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation
By: Don Tapscott
As a result of their access to the digital media, today’s kids, teens, and tweens learn, work, think, shop and create differently than their parents. This book provides valuable insights for marketers who wish to understand this new generation that is surrounded by high-tech toys and tools from birth (full disclosure- when some of us at Hopscotch were employed by FreeZone.com back in the mid 1990s we worked with Don in providing many key insights)

The Kids Market: Myths and Realities
By: James U. McNeal
Called the "godfather of kids marketing," by U.S. News and World Report, James McNeal shares all his knowledge gained from years of experience marketing to kids in the USA and Asia.

Marketing to the New Super Consumer: Mom & Kid
By: Timothy Coffey, David Siegel and Gregory Livingston
Insights into understanding how moms make shopping decisions and how children are very much involved in the decision-making process.

Totally Wired: What Teens and Tweens Are Really Doing Online
By: Anastasia Goodstein
Ypulse founder and blogger Anastasia Goodstein explains how teens use technology--including the benefits and drawbacks--and how parents can set realistic boundaries in cyberspace.

What Kids Buy and Why
By: Daniel Acuff and Robert H Reiher
Grounded in brain development with a sound underpinning of why kids behave as they do at specific ages and across gender, Acuff and Reiher take you behind the scenes of many major successful brands.

Got a favorite book to share? Let us know!

So much texting, so little interest in mobile marketing

2009-06-09T14:55:00.000-07:00

My cell phone woke me up at the crack of dawn this morning. I thought, “Who could be texting me this early?!” Is it an emergency? Does a friend need some help? I anxiously reached over to my nightstand and quickly opened my phone. It was an auto company wanting to give me a 20% discount if I texted back “SAVE.” Talk about a rude introduction to mobile marketing.

According to a research study that was presented last week in New York by Peter Johnson, VP of market intelligence and strategy at the Mobile Marketing Association, “Mobile marketing represents 1.8% of all marketing expenditures in 2009, and while this may seem like a small number, the average mobile marketing budgets are growing by 26% per year…this growth, it should be noted, is happening when marketers are seeing a 7% drop in their average marketing budgets.”

Also recently released, results from the second annual Vlingo Consumer Mobile Messaging Habits Report show that this year, "nearly 60% of mobile phone owners use their phones to text, with 94% of teens the largest user group, and 20-somethings at 87%.”

With these surprising numbers, you would think that teens are a great target and would respond well to mobile marketing. Teens have embraced texting more rapidly than the other demographics and texting has become their ultimate direct response vehicle. However, there is another side to the research which shows that teens do not want to be bothered with SMS ads and they don’t like to use a short code displayed in an advertisement. At the recent YPulse Youth Marketing Mashup in San Francisco last week, Fuse presented their study which found that even though SMS ads were up 30% this year, less than 10% of teens surveyed approved of those messages or wanted to be marketed to via that platform.

So what's a marketer to do? Teens are more likely to respond to contests or freebies such as cool downloads, exclusive content and other items of value. In fact, according to a 2008 survey by the Direct Marketing Association, 19% of teens ages 15 to 17 have responded to a mobile phone offer. So my big question is: if teens are drivers of change in society, can they drive change in mobile advertising as well?

-- Posted by Chelsie Friend, Research Assistant, Hopscotch Consulting

A mishmash of thoughts from the Ypulse Youth Marketing Mashup

2009-06-03T16:50:00.001-07:00

I just returned from a whirlwind trip to San Francisco where I attended the Ypulse Youth Marketing Mashup. Overall I thought the conference was superb. I give a huge amount of credit to Anastasia Goodstein and everyone at Ypulse who helped "shape the discussion about how marketers, media and non-profit organizations connect with youth" (this is their boilerplate mission statement and I love it.)

Rather than get into any detail on specific panels and presentations, I'm just going to give you the quick and dirty sound bytes, buzzwords and quotes that made it into my conference notes:

Anastasia Goodstein, YPulse: "Trends may change but the core needs of teens and youth don't change. All teens want to connect with friends, spend time hanging out, figure out who they are and seek validation/fame."

Josh Shipp, HeyJosh.com: "Teens don't give a crap about your brand. If you are authentic, and figure out a way to make your self distinguishable, then you have the right to communicate. If you don't add value to your target audience, then you should not exist."

Doug Sweeney, Levi's: "Authentically insert your brand into culture and utilize multi-faceted ideas. Content is king."

Bill Carter, Fuse: "Stop wasting your marketing budget. Listen to teens."

Jacqueline Lane, SurveyU: "Awareness + useage + loyalty does not necessarily equal brand advocacy and success. You need to now consider corporate responsibility and ethics as well."

Don Tapscott, author: "If you understand youth, you understand the future."

Kate Connally, AddictingGames.com/ Nickelodeon: "Put your audience first. Build multitasking into game play. Add categories that build into their daily lives."

Lauren Puglia, Undercurrent: "Be experimental. If you screw up, fess up and then move on. Not everything has to be about ROI."

Rebecca McQuigg, The Intelligence Group: "Know your audience. Know where they are. Teens are not twittering. Make sure your marketing strategy is in line with who you’re trying to target."

Paul Yanover, Disney Online: "Create tons of engagement."

Jon Gaskell, Smarty Pig: "This generation doesn't think about money the way we do. They're not depressed about it. Money is purely a means to an end."

Matthew Palmer, Stardoll: "Tween girls don't carry credit cards. Pure ROI can't always be measurable."

Donna Fenn, author: "Teen entrepreneurship is the new lemonade stand."

And then Guy Kawasaki walked in the room and began moderating the final panel of the day. But it was time for me head to the airport...

Scholastic's Book Fair Flak

2009-05-19T15:01:00.000-07:00

Has Scholastic gone too far? Or are parents and teachers naive to think that kids will actually purchase what is good for them (i.e. 'real' books)? Or, perhaps, is this part of a much larger and sinister plot on behalf of all kids marketers to get kids to buy more and more and more licensed crap-- oops I mean creative merchandise?

Check out this week's press release from the CCFC:

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - May 19 - “Stop enlisting teachers to sell toys, make-up, and brands to students through book clubs.” That’s what more than 1,200 teachers said in a letter the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood sent to Scholastic, Inc., the world’s largest educational publishing company. CCFC sent the letter, signed exclusively by teachers, after a review of Scholastic’s 2008 elementary and middle school Book Club flyers found that one-third of the items for sale were either not books, like the M&M Kart Racing Wii videogame, or were books packaged with other products, such as lip gloss and jewelry.

I attended my first Scholastic Book Fair this fall and I have to agree... it did feel like the licensed merchandise was taking center stage, and as a parent I was completely put off. Then again, if you give a kid $5, what are they going to choose? This year's Caldecot winner, or something they already recognize and like?

Let me know what you think.

Butting in on the Burger King-SpongeBob ad campaign debate

2009-04-21T23:40:00.000-07:00

In case you missed it, Burger King and SpongeBob have stirred up a little controversy over their latest co-branded TV commercial promoting the 99-cent Kids Meals (and square butts, apparently.) Before I tell you what I think, I'll get you up to speed on what everyone else thinks:

The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood is issuing a "Spongebob and Sexualization Don't Mix" campaign to remove the ads. "It’s bad enough when companies use a beloved media character like SpongeBob to promote junk food to children, but it’s utterly reprehensible when that character simultaneously promotes objectified, sexualized images of women,” said CCFC director Dr. Susan Linn, a psychologist at the Judge Baker Children's Center.

According to the Washington Post, Burger King and Nickelodeon have issued the following statements:

"The 99-cent BK Kids Meal is a value-based offer aimed at adults and requires an adult BK Value Meal purchase. This value offering enables the entire family to enjoy an affordable quality meal. As with all Burger King adult advertising campaigns, the SpongeBob commercial
featuring Sir Mix-A-Lot's famous song airs only during shows targeting adult audiences, and with the King and a popular '90s rapper as the headliners, is meant to appeal to the adults who take their families to Burger King restaurants for good food and entertainment. This commercial is intended to show that even adults can have fun, laugh and be silly with entertainment genres -- such as rap and pop culture icons -- that have become part of everyday life. We also developed a second, completely different SpongeBob advertising campaign for kids, which is currently airing on kid-targeted programming."

Nickelodeon issued a similar statement:

"The Burger King ad is intended to be an adult-targeted and humorous take on the SpongeBob character's iconic "square" pants set to a famous pop song from the '90s. It is running on adult-targeted networks. This year marks SpongeBob SquarePants' landmark 10th anniversary, and with a monthly adult viewership of 45 million people above the age of 18, the intention was to offer a funny and playful take on the character for that audience."

Okay... so what do we have here? An adult targeted ad that is promoting what, exactly-- kids meals? Square butts? A really old (albeit catchy) Sir Mix A Lot song? As a feminist I kind of get the CCFC's point about the "objectified, sexualized" images of women, but fail to see how the butt shaking damages kids in any way, at least no more than say, Madagascar's "I like to Move it Move It." And then we have the canned BK/Nickelodeon response about the adult targeting. Which would make sense if... they weren't using the kid-targeted Kids Meal and the popular kids brand SpongeBob as the major themes of the ad. Never mind that the ad ran on "adult air time." It's all over YouTube now. And then there's the question of the big/square butts... which is supposed to make us want to... eat burgers? Or watch more SpongeBob?

Even if you can for a minute, set aside all of the ifs, ands and/or but(t)s --I still fail to see how this campaign promotes either brand.

The Best of Both Worlds: Predicting yet another Hannah Montana success story

2009-04-09T17:36:00.000-07:00

With the Hannah Montana movie opening tomorrow, I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction: it's going to be a huge box office success. How do I know this? Everything about the marketing and branding machine behind all things Hannah and Miley have been carefully orchestrated to optimal effect. Cute, wholesome teenage girl that doesn't remotely remind us of Britney, Paris or Lindsay? Check. Story line with a moderately appealing plot? Check. Perfectly timed movie release around Easter and spring break? Check.

This week's LA Times article, "Miley Cyrus Blaze of Modesty" further points out that the "ultra Disneyfied" fashions reflect the shift toward more parent-friendly tween fashions. And according to Common Sense Media, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping families manage kids media, the movie "is upbeat and perfectly G rated ... yet another marketing tool in Hannah's merchandise-rich world. The sexuality is completely innocent -- flirting, slow dancing, conversations about relationships, and three really short kisses -- and there's no language, drinking, or smoking. Expect frequent physical comedy (pratfalls, getting hit with a ball, bitten by an animal, etc.) and one scene in which Hannah and Tyra Banks fight over a pair of shoes."

So there you have it. What's not to love? Disney figured out a long time ago that the success of their brands depends not only on the popularity with kids but just as importantly with their parents. It's a winning combination. And that, I must say, is the best of both worlds.

Exploring Dora the uproar

2009-03-17T22:48:00.000-07:00

What's the big deal about Dora growing up? She's still "sweet, wholesome and adventurous, a perfect role model..." according to Mattel and Nickelodeon execs. She's just now, well, older. And therein lies the problem.

This new "tween" Dora, which is really just an interactive doll with a USB port and some new online adventures, has really hit a negative nerve among its core target audience, according to a recent AP article. And in my opinion, justifiably so. Remember "new" Coke? Tropicana? Allowing Dora to grow up is not just a brand extension, it's a major change in brand strategy.

I'm amazed that with all of the marketing and strategy muscle behind Mattel and Nickelodeon, they failed to recognize this basic premise.

Just because parents indicated that they wanted "a way to keep Dora in their children's lives and have their daughters move on to a toy that was age appropriate" does not mean that the core property (especially one that has been so successful to date) needs a makeover. It just signals an opportunity for a brand extension. Why couldn't they just create a new character, say, with a similar strategy as Diego? Hey, now there's a novel idea.

The older Dora doesn't even look like the Dora we know and love... and that's probably the saddest part. Once they launch this toy in the fall, there's no going back. I wish they'd just give her a new name. She could be a long-lost cousin, older friend, new stepsister. Anything.

Jean-Pierre Dube, professor of marketing at the University of Chicago's graduate school of business nails it on the head: "A lot of people think of Dora as something for their small kids. And part of the reason people like Dora is because it teaches their kids to be inquisitive and curious in an educational way, because no one wants their kids to grow up fast...people really cherish and value what Dora represents, and if you start trying to license that out or extend that brand, this is a really risky thing to do," he says.

Look Mom, candy mints that sure pack a nicotine punch!

2009-03-02T07:25:00.000-08:00

Question: Are the cigarette makers really, truly targeting kids? Answer: of course they are.

This is such a tired topic, so I'm a tad surprised that I'm choosing to comment on it. Yet it has such a fun new little twist...

In case you haven't heard, Orbs Dissolvable Tobacco is being test marketed in Portland, Columbus and Indianapolis by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco. These little pellets look like mints (and taste like...I don't know what but my guess is that they don't taste like crushed up cigarettes). Reynolds is also planning to test the Orbs in a chewable stick and a strip form later this spring.

The critics are already upset, understandably so:

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says "They are likely to appeal to children because they are flavored and packaged like candy, are easy to conceal even in a classroom and carry the Camel brand that is already so popular with underage smokers."

And the American Cancer Society says "it's a very dangerous product for children, who tend to become addicted more quickly."

R.J. Reynolds-- of course-- says the product is meant for adults and has warning labels on the package and can only be sold to adults 18 and older.

So here is my question: Is there anything about this product that isn't designed with kids in mind? Let's see... the candy-like flavor? The youthful colors and packaging? The cute camel silhouette? The highly addictive nature of the product? The fact that it's technically "off limits?"

Sara Troy Machir, spokeswoman of Star Scientific, a small tobacco company that sells two dissolvable products, Ariva and Stonewall is quoted in USA Today as saying "Teens like risk-taking behavior and a tablet, unlike a cigarette, won't lure them."

Wow. Did she really say that?

So really, it's a win-win for the tobacco companies. Continue the cradle-to-grave strategy (literally) by continuing to market to kids with not one, but multiple product offerings. Kids who don't initially go for the all-American appeal of the bright packaging and sweet candy-like taste of product number 1 might like the "risk taking" appeal and stench of the old standby product number 2.

The lure of cheap online advertising, the new economy... and you

2009-02-23T20:53:00.000-08:00

Do you want the good news first, or the bad news? It all depends on which side of the advertising coin you fall on...

Oh, all right, I'll give you the good news first: online advertising is becoming cheaper than ever. According to a recent Business Week article, Ad networks (the ones that buy space on lots of little sites as opposed to a few large ones) are transforming the industry in such a way that many big, traditional advertisers are choosing to shift their budgets.

"Several industry sources estimate that, out of the $8 billion advertisers spent on display ads last year, 70% went directly to Web sites and 30% to ad networks. This year, based on spending shifts in the past month or so, they project the mix could move to 50-50."

What does this mean? First, advertising is a lot less expensive (as low as $2 per 1,000 views as opposed to $40 per CPM) and second, your ads can be viewed by a whole host of target audiences and sub-targets that you might not ordinarily reach.

The bad news? If you're a content provider, times are tough. The whole industry is changing and it would be very difficult, if not impossible for a media outlet to survive on a diet of advertising dollars alone. But I bet you knew that already. Aside from the major kids entertainment players who still churn out original content on a regular basis (i.e. Disney, Nickelodeon, PBSKids, KOL, Discovery) nearly everyone else has shifted to a virtual world, gaming, retail or software-based business model.

The other bad news? If you are advertising to kids or their parents, your ads could show up on sites that --shall we say --aren't exactly in line with your brand. And you might not even know about it.

My advice? It all depends on your brand. What are you advertising? Who are you trying to reach? If kids are your primary target, you might be better off spending your precious ad dollars somewhere else (even if the CPM is higher) for no other reason than to preserve your brand's integrity. However, if the parent audience is the one you seek, go for it. Moms and Dads surf the net constantly, they've completely taken over Facebook, and the Mommy blogging community is growing about as fast as these ad networks are growing rich.

The key to parents' pocketbooks? Free - and family friendly

2009-02-09T13:40:00.000-08:00

Like many Americans, I find myself spending a little more time each month reviewing the monthly expenses now that we're in the midst of these exciting economic times. What I discovered though surprised me. I've given up on many of my favorite discount chains, warehouse clubs and specialty retailers in favor of something else entirely: the lure of a kid-friendly shopping environment, often with built-in free childcare.

My children are now almost 2 and 6 - and although I love them dearly; I absolutely despise shopping with them. The whining, the frequent bathroom trips, the standing up in the shopping cart... it's enough to drive a mother away from her favorite stores. Take grocery shopping, for instance. I used to love the convenience, prices and club card discounts at our neighborhood Safeway. The specialty items and inexpensive wines I found at Trader Joe's. Shopping in bulk at Costco. Supporting local farmers and selecting from cleverly selected kid-approved items at PCC. No more. Now I shop almost exclusively at QFC or drive across town to Fred Meyer. Why? Because they offer free childcare. I drop my children off at the "Quality Fun Center" or Fred Meyer's Kids Club and my kids have fun drawing pictures, playing dress-up or racing toy cars while I shop. In peace. Which gives me time to think: wouldn't Trader Joe's, Safeway, Costco or PCC like to have a piece of my family's $800 monthly grocery budget back in their pockets? What's holding them back? And, by the way, does QFC or Fred Meyer have any idea how much more money is coming to them because of their childcare offerings? I don't think so - they don't even promote the service online or offer any information about it other than what you can find out in store.

How about some of my other, formerly favorite retailers: Target? You stock so many great kids products and I love your merchandise, but my kids act so poorly in your store, it's just not worth it. There's no place for my kids to go except go crazy. Nordstrom? Used to love you too, especially when I could breastfeed my children in your luxurious women's lounge areas and park my stroller in an oversized dressing room. No more. The fish tank in the kids department just doesn't cut it.

At this stage (and by the way, retailers, it's a long stage... I don't anticipate that my kids are going to improve their behavior or suddenly gain loads of patience for many years to come) I find myself exclusively shopping at stores or dining at restaurants that are family friendly. Take Barnes & Noble. Never used to shop there before; was more of an Amazon.com or independent book store kind of girl. But now I heart Barnes & Noble and even bought into their membership program because I anticipate shopping there much more in the future. The story times, kids play area and free gift wrapping completely sucked me in. Outside of the holidays, I don't gift-wrap anything. Period. So that means that if a retailer does not offer this service to me for free, I won't shop there. It's just not worth it. I recently joined a gym. Why? Free childcare. Well - it's not free exactly ($3/hour) but free enough for me. Ditto for restaurants. High chairs, kids menus and crayons are so yesterday. Now when our family goes out to eat, we venture to places like the Montlake Alehouse, complete with padded kids mosh pit and dozens of toys, or Vios, an upscale Greek restaurant with a separate kids play area.

Now I do realize that this kind of thinking may not be especially financially savvy on my part. An article in yesterday's Seattle Times outlined 7 Bad Money Habits (and how to cure them). What's the number 1 bad money habit on the list: The lure of "free." Even Dan Ariely, the James B. Duke Professor of Behavioral Economics at Duke University and author of "Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions" is quoted in the article as having purchased the wrong car (car!) because Audi offered free oil changes for three years (about a $200 value.)

All I'm saying is that many retailers, restaurants, grocery chains, fitness centers, nail salons and the like could all benefit immensely from the lure of "free." Need help developing a strategy? Hey, feel "free" to contact me anytime.

Grrrr! Tony the Tiger exploits children, parents and the entire grass-roots community movement

2009-02-01T21:56:00.000-08:00

Normally I'm all for rebranding efforts, especially if say, your brand happens to be especially unhealthful, loaded with sugar and empty calories. But when I saw Kellogg's latest Frosted Flakes advertising campaign, complete with a Super Bowl ad, beautifully-designed website, theme song and a mission statement-- I thought: wow, the Kellogg's ad execs (or Leo Burnett) are either really onto something or this is one of the most egregious advertising campaigns I've seen in years. Are we really supposed to buy into the "Plant a seed. Nurture it. Help it Grow" concept from Tony The Junk Food Tiger?

Check out the campaign mission statement:

"Kellogg's Frosted Flakes believes that every kid should have a place to be active and play hard so they can be their very best. But as communities everywhere face difficult financial decisions, many are finding themselves without the funds they need to maintain their local playing fields. This is why we are committed to rebuilding athletic fields across America. On the right field, it's amazing what you can grow.

Here's the fine print listed in the Official Rules: 30 grand prizes will be awarded to local playfields in need of makeovers. Each amount will not exceed $15,000. Not including the cost of the website, publicity or the Super Bowl ad spot, which I'm sure was substantial-- Kellogg's contribution to this worthy cause will not exceed $450,000. This amount is essentially a drop in the pan for Kellogg's-- money that could have been spent on a campaign that is more in line with Frosted Flakes branding, personality and core values.

My final verdict? It' not a bad campaign. In fact, it's a very, very good campaign that just happens to be paired with the wrong brand. If a sporting brand were to embark on the same mission, it would be a perfect fit. Cause-related marketing is one of the best ways to engage your audience and do something good and Kellogg's simply missed the mark. Big time. If I were Kellogg's next time I'd choose something that makes them look less like a bunch of Frosted Fakes and more like a grrrreat cereal brand that understands the nuances of its target audience.

Get 'em while they last! Ty exploits Obama girls with plush dolls

2009-01-25T12:45:00.000-08:00

It's hard for any parent to shield their children from overzealous and exploitative marketing ploys and gimmicks. But pity Michelle Obama, who - less than a week into settling into the White House -- had to respond to the newly released 'Marvelous Malia' and 'Sweet Sasha' dolls created by Ty, the same Oakbrook, IL- based toy company that makes Beanie Babies.

These are tough economic times and the Beanie Baby craze is long since over - but still - is this really necessary? Couldn't have Ty's marketing and licensing executives just picked up the phone? "Hey Michelle, we realize that you're a busy woman and your daughters are already in the spotlight more than you'd like them to be, but would it be all right with you if we exploited their new-found fame with a series of products in their likeness? We'll start with the dolls, move onto a book series, and then maybe a theme park ride..."

Okay, better to ask forgiveness than permission. The dolls are kind of cute and I'm sure sales will be strong, especially since they're getting all this free publicity over the controversy.

Not so fast: new teen research indicates well, more of the same

2009-01-23T14:11:00.000-08:00

Today, MarketingVOX summarized the recently released Simmons Teen Study and found that teens are spending money on the same type of products that they did in the 1990s: music, clothes, video games and electronics. Couldn't this also ring true for say, the 1980s and 1970s as well? (okay, maybe not the video game part and certainly not mobile or online communications) but my point is this: for all of the talk about how kids and teens are "growing up faster than ever before" and the "world is such a different place"-- when you look at the research, their lives aren't all that different. Music. Clothes. Games. Communication. Pretty simple, really.

Marketers trying to reach kids and teens should most certainly stay relevant, get up to speed on the latest technologies and understand how trends in consumer behavior will impact their brands. Just don't go reinventing the wheel.

Kids Online Safety Resources

2009-01-18T12:56:00.000-08:00

This past Friday a group of kids industry experts got together for a monthly conference call. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend, but I did think that the follow up lists of internet safety resources was really worth sharing. Here goes:

From Melissa at kids online playground Dizzywood.com:

NetSmartz - http://www.netsmartz.org/index.aspx - offers Internet safety videos, presentations, activity cards and lesson plans, including cyberbullying "real-life stories"

Adina's Deck - http://www.adinasdeck.com/ - videos and worksheets on cyberbullying; you can also book an assembly with the cast and crew

iSafe - http://www.isafe.org/ - training curriculum on Internet safety, including cyberbullying; also offers iMentor program for students to educate their peers on the topic

Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use (CSRIU) - http://www.cyberbully.org/ - tips for parents and educators, including worksheets for students

Cyberbullying.us - http://www.cyberbullying.us/resources.php - primarily research on cyberbullying; also includes some activities to engage youth in discussions about the topic

Digizen - http://www.digizen.org/ - UK-based organization offering classroom resources, including a cyberbullying film, teacher's guide and lesson plan

From Amy at Shaping Youth:

I'd add the Ad Council/Nat'l Crime Prevention PSAs which are good teaching tools on cyberbullying prevention and imposter profiling: http://www.adcouncil.org/default.aspx?id=42
From a 16-yr. old boy's firstperson experience: this fellow in Australia had much to say: http://thewoodverdict.blogspot.com/2008/04/tom-woods-complete-guide-to-stopping.html

And on the Megan Meier/Lori Drew MySpace mom indictment: Andy Carvin (pbs teachers) wrote a good post bringing up 'terms of service' issues here: http://www.pbs.org/teachers/learning.now/2008/05/indictments_handed_down_in_the.html

Finally, here are a few of my own "link-laden" posts to cyberbullying resources/prevention/info, including the Harris Interactive poll/pdf, stats, to add to Melissa's starter list! http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=423 and http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=395

p.s. Of course, for real-time forums/w/pragmatic peeks at kids' foibles: Anne Collier's ConnectSafely is always insightful/pragmatic (but she's on this list so that's a given) and her NetFamily News is a must read...For tween books/fiction novels on the subject (informal experiential learning akin to Adina's Deck) here's a recent book out too: http://www.amazon.com/Truth-About-Truman-School/dp/0807580953/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206203777&sr=8-1

From Dave at G2 Strategic Services:

The following link contains very relevant content for parents.
http://look-both-ways.com/stayingsafe/protectingkids.htm

We also just launched a new community site that she/he can join.
http://www.ilookbothways.com/

Feel free to share any more links you may have.

Santa forgot something this year: children's healthcare

2008-12-31T13:18:00.000-08:00

I am dedicating my last blog of 2008 to an issue that I care deeply about: children's healthcare. Kristen Rowe-Finkbeiner, organizer for the nonprofit organization MomsRising.org sent out this e-mail today and I couldn't agree with her more... and that is why I'm quoting her text verbatim:

In my nine-year-old daughter's letter to Santa this year she wrote: "Dear Mr. Claus, I know you are extremely busy this year, but I was hoping that you could give healthcare to all kids as one of my x-mas presents. I'm sorry if I'm asking for too much." (Evidently I take my work home with me!)
There wasn't a wrapped present under the White House tree this year with healthcare coverage for all kids, however… it's not too much to hope for in the next year. President-Elect Obama has vowed to fight for healthcare as well as for other family economic security policies like early learning/childcare opportunities, fair pay, paid sick days, family leave, and flexible work options.

In order to make this happen, the voices of mothers and families are needed. Why? Prior to the election, Obama was quoted as saying: "If lightning strikes and I get elected, I will need a movement at my back, or I won't be able to accomplish anything." MomsRising is just that kind of movement. Yet with the current economic crisis it's harder than ever for non-profits like MomsRising to raise the funds that are need to keep building the movement to make this happen.

*Can you please donate $10, $25, $50, $100, or $250 now to MomsRising? Your donation will help build a strong movement to push important family economic security policies toward the finish line.

Online donations can be made at http://www.momsrising.org/TogetherWeCan

Happy New Year, everyone.

The Newbery Award's latest plot twist

2008-12-17T21:46:00.000-08:00

The literary world is currently debating the Newbery Award's value, questioning whether the latest winners are inspiring to children, or just plain obscure. In yesterday's Washington Post article, reporter Valerie Strauss cites an October article in the School Library Journal --- "Has the Newbery Lost Its Way?" by children's literary expert Anita Silvey as starting off the debate. According to Strauss, "of the 25 winners and runners-up chosen from 2000 to 2005, four books deal with death, six with the absence of one or both parents and four with such mental challenges as autism. Most of the rest deal with tough social issues." Not exactly light reading. This year's winner, "Voices from a Medieval Village" is a series of monologues that would be difficult for a child to read on his or her own. And... do I dare say that it sounds really boring? Not that I should judge a book by its cover.

Nobody ever said that Newbery Award winners are supposed to have mass appeal; it's not a popularity contest. Still, I do agree with Silvey that "quality and popularity are not mutually exclusive concepts." In order to stay relevant and to encourage and inspire reading among more and more children, The Newbery Award committee could rethink their strategy just a little. I wonder if they've ever asked kids what they think about the finalists before they make their selections. Just a thought.

Teens and mobile advertising: bad news/good news- or is it all just bad news?

2008-12-02T10:58:00.000-08:00

eMarketer reported last week that More than one-half of teens do not want mobile ads according to a Direct Marketing Association 2008 survey. Compared to adults (64% of adults said they weren't at all interested), this is the good news. The bad news? Harris Interactive and CTIA found that more than one-half of their teen respondents were not interested in mobile ads, even if there was some sort of incentive. Not all that promising given that teens are using mobile technology constantly and you'd think that they would be more open to paving the way. Which, of course, would only make sense if current mobile advertising and promotions were actually paving the way. Polls? Been there, done that. Contests? Ditto. Coupons? Snore. Music downloads? Better, but not quite good enough. C'mon, mobile marketers, you can do better. How about a game? A social networking component? A really cool app? Teens are perhaps the most technologically savvy and sophisticated audience you've got. They would appreciate it if you didn't dumb it down for them.

Motrin feels some pain with latest ad campaign targeting moms

2008-11-18T20:25:00.000-08:00

In case you missed all the hubbub on Twitter, Motrin has yanked its latest ad campaign targeting moms who "wear their babies as fashion accessories" after an online backlash this past weekend. According to yesterday's Ad Age article, "the campaign has been online since Sept. 30 and has been circulating in several magazines for weeks, but it finally caught the attention -- and ire-- of some influential bloggers Friday night before blowing up into a full-fledge cause celebre on Twitter over the weekend. " Take a look at the ad copy and see for yourself. What's the big deal? Well... first and foremost, Motrin failed to fully understand its target audience, and by doing so, it broke a number of rules:

1. The mommy wars are alive and well. If you are an advertiser, don't take sides, don't pretend you understand, and above all-- don't act like you "feel our pain."

2. The ad takes a stab at moms who "wear their babies as fashion accessories," which is problematic (if not offensive) on a number of levels. First- who would want to be accused of something as shallow as that? And second- of course my baby is a fashion accessory! He's way cuter than your expensive purse, too. See my point? Better to just not even go there in the first place.

3. Motrin also makes light of conventional wisdom promoting wearing your baby in a front carrier, a sling or a shwing (shwing - what is that and do I need one?) because then your baby might "cry less." Maybe Motrin didn't get the memo about how new moms will do anything, anything to keep a baby from crying all the time, including propping the car seat on top of the dryer, driving around the neighborhood at midnight, or purchasing any number of bouncy seats, swings (shwings?) and other gadgets designed to keep crying at a minimum-- including baby carriers. We really don't need an ad campaign to second-guess our parenting decisions when we haven't slept or showered in three days.

4. And speaking of, Motrin kinda sorta acts like they get it with "If I look tired and crazy, people will know why" and "I'll put up with the pain because it's a good pain, a worthy pain" but then ruins their entire sell with "it totally makes me look like an official mom." Ummm, what exactly is an 'official mom'? That's like, so, totally weird. And shallow. And kind of offensive. At least to me, not that I'm looking to become an 'official mom' or anything. I mean, really, wasn't childbirth enough? Speaking of pain...

The funny thing about Motrin's gaff is that bad publicity can sometimes be just as effective as good publicity. Honestly, I hadn't given Motrin much thought until recently. I'd really seen it as more of a younger female-targeted menstrual cramp type of brand. The bloating! The cramps!

But now that I know Motrin has moved their target audience to 30 and 40-something moms, I'll admit this particular form of pill popping has a new appeal. With a toddler in the house there are a few things that are causing me a bit of pain (which Motrin just as well could have highlighted in a humorous way instead of getting into the whole icky, shallow mom baby carrier debate), such as: lifting my kid in and out of the stroller, crib, carseat or high chair; plucking him off counter tops, play sets, stairs, the coffee table, the dinner table; chasing after him at the park; or waking up in the morning with unbelievable neck and back pain because I'd been up three times in the middle of the night, bending over the crib in a really awkward way and then clenching my teeth in my sleep, if I slept at all. Sometimes motherhood hurts. See, now, isn't that tagline already better than "we feel your pain"?

You want to know what else makes my neck and back hurt? Sitting at my computer, blogging.

What do teens, moms, Obama and vampires all have in common?

2008-11-13T16:20:00.000-08:00

According to Daily Variety, "Vampires have always represented a certain psychosexual allure that has appealed to women." I don't know about that, but I do know this: "Twilight," coming to theaters this November 21, based on the bestselling novel by Stephenie Meyer, has achieved a level of marketing and branding genius I haven't seen well, since Harry Potter.

The core audience, of course is female teens and young women.

"Since acquiring the film rights in turnaround from Paramount, Summit has carefully courted "Twilight's" core 13-24 crowd. In hiring director Catherine Hardwicke ("Thirteen") and scribe Melissa Rosenberg ("Step Up"), the studio is banking on two creatives who ostensibly know what young women want" reports Variety.

In doing so, they've very cleverly expanded the target market. "We've essentially taken the marketing tactics from a superhero film and applied it to a female property," said Summit marketing exec Nancy Kirkpatrick.

The site Twilight Moms connects moms and older women with the books and film hype, and now president-elect Obama is reading the series as well. What's next? Teenage boys, grown men and fathers flocking to this flick? Just you wait... I think there's enough action and suspense to keep them from rolling their eyes when their girlfriends or wives suggest the movie on date night. And then there's the whole "vampires as teenage metaphor" that Summit is exploiting in an effort to lure males under age 25. "A teenager, like a vampire, suddenly has a new kind of energy," says director Hardwicke. "They can drink, kiss and smoke. It's about how they control their impulses."

It's a coming-of-age theme that pretty much anyone over age 12 can relate to.

How do you get to Sesame Street? On YouTube of course

2008-11-11T12:34:00.000-08:00

With nearly four decades on air, "Sesame Street" is a brand that is near and dear to most of our hearts. I have fond memories of learning my ABCs, singing songs and connecting with loveable characters. 'Screen time' wasn't split between hundreds of television channels, websites, electronic games or iPhone applications... ahh, those were the days. But really-- times have changed and it's become harder and harder for kids brands (or any brand for that matter) to stand out amidst the clutter. And, truth be told, there's a lot of clutter out there. That's why I was so pleased to see that a trusted brand like Sesame Street was finally jumping into the game.

According to Monday's Reuters article: "Fans of Big Bird, Oscar the Grouch, Bert and Ernie and the Count will be able to see episodes and clips of the show in three ways (iTunes, YouTube and Hulu). The announcement comes on the same day that "Sesame Street," which is broadcast in 140 countries, celebrates its 39th year on the air."

Both YouTube and Hulu have launched specific Sesame Street channels, with more than 100 clips from the show. On Apple's iTunes, you can download full episodes from season 35 and onward for $1.99.

And that's a small price to pay for trusted, high quality educational content you can now download on the go.

iTouch, You Touch

2008-11-02T21:18:00.000-08:00

I just purchased a new iPod Touch this weekend and I can't tell you how excited I am about this amazing little device. Trouble is, my children (ages 6 and 18 months) can't keep their hands off the thing. Hands down, this new toy is more appealing to them than anything else in the house. My daughter gave up television, books-- even speaking-- so that she could escape to her room and play Monstar Make r and Kindergarten Math. I've barely had any time to download a handful of Apps but these are the ones that have grabbed her attention. The 18 month old? He's just fascinated with the interface - and Monstar Maker of course, but hasn't quite grasped the concept of basic navigation. Plus, he's a dangerous little devil so I finally had to take it away from him, tears and all.

I'd like to say that I'm ordinarily one of those parents that keeps expensive electronics away from my children, but clearly I'm not. And here's another dirty little secret: I bought this device for them, kind of. As a consultant in the children's media industry I happen to think that the iPhone/iPod Touch technology is the wave of the future and that anyone currently designing applications for the preschool and school-age market is onto something huge. So, naturally, I had to have one.

Letting my kids play with it all weekend is just the first phase of my market research.

As the 'real world' gets worse, virtual words get better

2008-10-19T15:07:00.000-07:00

If you're like every other adult I know, you're obsessing about the economy right now. Things, um, don't look so great. I've tried to put my head in the sand over the whole debacle, but this recent Forbes article caught my eye:

"Despite all the doom and gloom, one tiny sector is offering a glimmer of hope: virtual worlds. Companies such as Gaia Interactive and Habbo (targeting tween and teen girls) are expecting a boost as consumers reduce spending on real-word goods and console themselves with so-called virtual goods."

Really?

At first you might think that this is just another example of how parents are continuing to indulge their children with consumer goods (albeit virtual ones) but the psychology actually runs deeper than that. "As things get worse, people spend more time at movies or spend more time on a site like Gaia Online, which provides a relatively inexpensive respite from the offline world," says Gaia Chief Executive Craig Sherman.

Other kid-targeted virtual worlds like Club Penguin and Neopets have seen similar results. Teen-focused Habbo.com reports that 85% of the site's revenues come from virtual world transactions. This site's 2.5 million U.S. users spend an average of $18 a month on virtual goods and spend nearly 40 minutes on the site. From a teen perspective, when you compare this to say, a trip to the mall--including the high costs of gasoline, food and premium denim-- well, the virtual world begins to look like a pretty great bargain.

Honda rides with Disney and HS3

2008-09-30T13:53:00.000-07:00

Teenager to Mom: "Hey, as a reward for getting good grades, being such a great kid and having a perfect driving record, I think I deserve a really nice graduation gift. Like a car."
Mom: "Oh. What did you have in mind?"
Teenager: "A minivan. Pleeeease mommy?"

We've all seen Honda's clever Odyssey TV ad campaign that's been going on for a few years now-- hippie graphics, funky music and all. I assume I'm in the target audience as a Gen X mother with 2 kids who loathes the idea of a minivan but finds the Odyssey an attractive option, since it's not really a "minivan" per se, at least not in terms of its brand identity.

Now Honda is attracting a younger audience with its partnership as the exclusive automotive partner to Disney Pictures' High School Musical 3: Senior Year. According to Tuesday's Media Post article:

"Honda's co-branded campaign for the film, which opens Oct. 24-- includes TV spots, radio, print, and online elements. The film also features a raft of Honda vehicles, including a Honda Odyssey minivan driven by Gabriella's mother, Mrs. Montez; a pink S2000 coupe driven by Sharpay, a Pilot compact crossover and a Civic Hybrid.
The effort will include a cross-branded 30-second TV spot for the Odyssey that will run on cable networks and network shows in October, and a branded spot on the Disney Channel. One spot shows the minivan "driving" through the animated world of a Wildcats senior yearbook. A co-branded site, www.Disney.com/RidewiththeWildcats lets visitors watch videos and play a thematically related driving game.
Tom Peyton, senior advertising manager at American Honda Motor, says Honda is reprising a role it had in "High School Musical Two." "We started with Disney a few years ago when we became a partner of Disney Land," he tells Marketing Daily. "That gave us inroads to talk on other projects."
He said that while other Honda vehicles are spotlighted in "HS3," "it is primarily about Odyssey. We're trying to reach families; these are the right households for us to talk to."

And that's precisely the point. Honda and other automobile makers know that kids, tweens and teens have a huge influence over major purchases, especially the family automobile.

One other very important note: This may or may not come as a surprise, but the High School Musical franchise's core fans aren't teens. They're tweens and kids, some as young as 4 and 5. (I know this because my almost 6 year-old daughter and her friends are obsessed with all things HSM). This is the the audience that will think this whole branding and media blitz is cool. They also think (unlike the teenagers I know) that minivans are pretty cool too.

So much attention about moi! The Muppets get the Hannnah Montana treatment

2008-09-22T11:29:00.000-07:00

Miss Miss Piggy? I sure do. But guess what-- The New York Times reported yesterday (Fuzzy Renaissance, September 21, 2008) that not only is Miss Piggy coming out of cold storage, she and the rest of her Muppet Pals are getting the "Hanna Montana treatment, being blasted into every pop-culture nook and cranny that the company owns or can dream up."

For starters there are the specials on Disney Channel in which Muppets interact with High School Musical and Jonas Brothers stars. Then there are the viral videos on YouTube and the NBC Christmas special. And don't miss the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade Muppets float or "Nightline" political interviews. And of course there's plenty of merchandise: Muppet clothing at Urban Outfitters and Limited Too stores; Muppet-theme stuffed animals and tote bags at Macy’s; and a Muppet boutique at the New York flagship of F. A. O. Schwarz.

"We think there is a Muppet gene in everybody,” Lylle Breier, a Disney executive who is the new general manager of Muppets Studio told the Times. Still, she has a few challenges. Ms. Breier also said that recent focus groups indicated that some children could not even identify Kermit and Miss Piggy, much less ancillary characters like Fozzie Bear and Gonzo the Great.

It's really too bad. Since Jim Henson's death in 1990, his children have taken over the reigns to the family business but the Muppet characters have stagnated under changing ownership. Disney aquired the "Classic Muppets" in 2004; Children's Television Workshop owns the "Sesame Street" Muppets.

The article reports that while "Disney estimated three years ago that the Muppets would be generating about $300 million a year in merchandising sales by now, retail analysts say the total for 2008 will be closer to $50 million."

Dick Cook, chairman of Walt Disney Studios (and Ms. Breier’s boss) told the Times: “Developing the kind of high-quality entertainment we have planned for the global relaunch of the Muppets takes time,” he said. “We want to be very, very careful that whatever we do is in the spirit of the Muppets and that we are enhancing the brand."

I couldn't agree more. While it certainly appears that Disney will leveraging every ounce of marketing muscle to bring the Muppets back to center stage, what isn't so clear is how they'll keep the Muppet magic intact in doing so. Time will tell. Kermit and Miss Piggy were originally created to entertain adults with clever and irreverant humor; Disney's strategy appears to be one where they simultaneously attract nostalgic older generations as well as the 6-12 year-old tween market. I wonder what Jim Henson would think about all of this. Or, more appropriately, what would Miss Piggy do?

Love your veggies (and get $15K for doing so)

2008-09-15T11:02:00.000-07:00

Marketing to kids can sometimes be controversial, especially when it involves stuff that Americans tend to consume a lot of: junk food, violent video games or toys from China. This is why I was so pleased to come across the Love Your Veggies™ campaign. This is no grass-roots, mom-in-the kitchen kind of promotion (can't you tell already by the trademarked slogan?) If you go to the Love Your Veggies™ grant site you will learn:

"The Love Your Veggies™ grant program is sponsored by the makers of Hidden Valley® Salad Dressings in partnership with the School Nutrition Foundation and supported by Produce for Better Health Foundation. The campaign aims to increase access to – and consumption of – fresh fruits and vegetables in elementary schools across the country at a time when schools are required by federal mandate to strengthen nutrition and exercise programs as part of local wellness policies. "

Ah, it makes me salivate for carrot sticks just reading about how great this program is for our kids and our schools. Between now and November 7, 2008, elementary schools can apply for a $15,000 grant to be used towards fresh produce, kitchen equipment, program staffing, nutrition education supplies or food safety training. Details on how to apply are listed here.

But here's the bigger question: How will this translate into sales for Hidden Valley salad dressings? I've yet to witness a child in a supermarket whining for any type of condiment or salad dressing, let alone a specific brand of salad dressing, but maybe I just haven't been paying close enough attention.

This is a case of what we marketers call "long-term investment" marketing. The entire campaign came about after a 2006 study by the University of California Expanded Food and Nutrition Program found that children consumed 23 percent more vegetables when paired with "a moderate amount of ranch dressing." I'd have to see what "moderate" means but my guess is that the benefits of eating 23 percent more vegetables outweighs the extra fat and calories of the dressing. Just a guess though.

The folks at Hidden Valley Ranch are smart marketers. They recognized an urgent need in the marketplace (healthier food in schools), took a product not currently marketed to children (ranch dressing), backed it up with a clever study, obtained some credible partners (School Nutrition Foundation and Produce for Better Health Foundation) and voila-- they've got a promotion that they'll be reaping benefits from for years to come. Everyone already knows (especially the soft drink and junk food companies) that if you can market to kids in schools, you're likely to have them hooked for life.

It's also worth noting that this promotion likely didn't make much of a dent in Hidden Valley Ranch's marketing budget (or for Clorox-- the parent company for Hidden Valley salad dressings, Glad sandwich bags, Kingsford charcoal and Fresh Scoop cat litter). They're only offering ten $15,000 grants.

Messy branding, messy diapers

2008-09-05T12:58:00.000-07:00

Yesterday was my 16 month-old son's first day at preschool. I am grateful to have him enrolled in a great program where he'll be learning new skills and interacting with a fun group of kids and talented staff. They really know what they're doing, I kept telling myself after tears were shed at the morning dropoff and I started feeling guilty about leaving him. He's in good hands, I thought.

So imagine my surprise when I dropped his pants that afternoon and discovered that the good hands of his preschool teacher had arranged a backward-facing wedgie. My daughter and I nearly fell out of our chairs. While it was certainly reminiscent of SNL's "Huggies Thong" sketch, I still have to ask, how hard is it to change a diaper? Apparently, not so easy. Wiki How lists a full page of step-by-step diapering tips, as do most parenting advice websites. Now, when I was using cloth diapers with my firstborn, such tips were incredibly useful. But disposables? C'mon. Cartoon characters go in the front and the velcro tabs are in the back-- just hook 'em around to the front and you're done. How can someone with a college degree not be able to figure this out? Except that since yesterday's incident (and there have been others, including extended family members who I have previously labeled as being completely clueless due to their lack of diapering skills) I now think it's a branding problem. Take a close look at these photos of my son's lower half. Notice anything (other than his gorgeous little body?) Cartoon characters are everywhere on the front and back (or back and front.) Overzealous licensing deals are creating product usibility problems. In other words, too much cartoon crap on the outside of the diaper leads to.... uncontained crap. We don't need to see Elmo and friends on the front and back of every diaper. It's too confusing. Millions of us have already been trained that cartoon characters go on the front. Period. Now, I hail the brands like Seventh Generation that are cartoon- and chemical-free, I just wish they were less expensive and survived through the night. Pampers, Huggies, Luvs: hear me out on this. Please limit the characters to the front only. Either that or come up with some clever hello/goodbye or number 1/number 2 metaphors to use instead. That would give us parents more of a chuckle than a backwards-facing overflowing diaper.

CosmoGirl's concierge service almost works

2008-08-29T13:22:00.000-07:00

In a partnership with NearbyNow, a service that allows consumers to search local store inventory and place items on hold for same-day pick up, CosmoGirl's new concierge service allows readers to shop products they see online or in the magazine and either "find local" or "buy online." It's a great feature (one that is certainly not limited to the teen audience) and appeals to the "gotta have it now" impulses common to some of us shoppers. I mean, when you see a pair of Converse All Star Light sneakers, you don't want them tomorrow, you want them now! Which is why I was slightly disappointed to click on the "find local" button and discover that my only two options were about 40 miles away in either Lakewood, WA or Puyallup, WA. Excuse me, but I live in the city of Seattle, and I should not have to 40 miles to the closest Famous Footwear retailer to get a very popular brand of shoes. Ditto for the shop online option, which took me to just one online retailer, also Famous Footwear.

So, the partnerships have a ways to go, but the functionality is great and I can see how this type of shopping might very well become the wave of the future. Which brings me to my next point: Hearst, the publisher of CosmoGirl, is smart to start with a teen publication in testing out this new technology. They can build a business case, test out new features and build long-term brand awareness relatively risk free-- and that's the beauty of being in the kids business.

On the way to Kindergarten: Office Depot

2008-08-26T21:58:00.000-07:00

I just got back from vacation and one of the pieces of mail I was particularly excited to open was the Kindergarten welcome letter from my daughter’s elementary school. I hadn’t done much shopping for her yet and wanted to do it together so she felt proud and part of the process. We skimmed through the letter quickly so we could get to the important stuff: KINDERGARTEN SUPPLIES, listed on page 2. Listed on page 2 is an understatement. The list honestly took up the entire page. Here it is:

“[Name of school] will supply each student with scissors and paper. In addition, your child should bring:
Roomy backpack big enough to hold a folder, projects, papers, lunch and a jacket.
A dozen pencils, regular size #2
A dozen (or more!) glue sticks, any brand, to be shared by all
One bottle of white glue
One box of washable markers to be shared
One box of 16 crayons to be shared
One package of 3 x 5 note cards
One ream of white copy paper (8 ½ x 11)
One box of Kleenex (or more!)
One box of antibacterial or baby wipes (or more!)
Liquid hand soap dispensers or refills (one or more)
One box of band aids

Office Depot offers our school a generous rebate on year-round purchases so please remember to mention [name of school] to the cashier.

Now… it’s been a long time since I’ve attended Kindergarten and my daughter is my oldest child, so at the risk of sounding completely out of it, I still have to remark that this list came as somewhat of a shock. I do like the part about “the school will supply each student with scissors and paper” though. That’s a nice, generous touch.

Still, eager to do some shopping (remember, I was already in a shopping mood), we grabbed the little one and headed down to Office Depot to take care of the list. On the drive down I kept thinking that I never would considered Office Depot for my incoming Kindergartner had I not been so easily lured by the “generous rebate” copy on the school’s welcome letter. Apparently everyone else in the school district was too, because the parking lot was packed on a rainy Monday afternoon.

The store was somewhat prepared for us. The front entry had a display listing all of the area schools’ supply lists (in case you left yours at home – a very nice touch) and, although it took us a bit of time to locate the “back to school” section (in the back of the store) we did find almost everything on the list. Including hand soap, tissues, and baby wipes! Who knew you could get baby wipes at Office Depot. (I’m still not sure what’s going to happen with those wipes but I guess I’ll find out at parents’ night.)

The downside: the back to school section was crowded with parents and kids of various ages (including my one year-old who always makes shopping trips more difficult) and the rows were too narrow for a shopping cart. The visual merchandising could have been a lot better too, organized by grade level or with fun signs pointing out cool stuff. I was hoping for more of a traditional back to school shopping spree a la Target or other superstore where Back to School is made to feel like a special event and recognized as the important rite of passage that it is. Office Depot has also missed out on a lot of obvious licensed merchandise opportunities. Most of the school supplies we saw were really generic and “too boring” according to my daughter. Still, I was able to buy some Cars branded glue sticks (the last one in stock) and my daughter whined for a particularly ugly Hannah Montana backpack, but that was really it. (By the way, I am adamantly opposed to any licensed merchandise that doesn’t further the brand’s core values but that’s a topic for another blog post).

All in all, I give Office Depot huge points for partnering with local schools and offering non-traditional merchandise so we could satisfy our supply lists in one trip. We filled the cart and spent $40. The salespeople were exceedingly helpful too. I’ll definitely be back next time we need to stock up, but I won’t expect the trip to satisfy any rite of passage urges for me or my daughter.

Still feeling the “urge” to do something special for my daughter, I eagerly opened a marketing e-mail from Hanna Andersson about their back-to-school specials, and promptly drove down there and spent $70 on an adorable striped backpack, matching wallet and pencil case. And I got her a new outfit. We were both hugely satisfied. How’s that for retail therapy?

Gross-out books get boys reading

2008-08-13T06:37:00.000-07:00

Not into "Charlotte's Web, "Little House on the Prairie" or any of the other popular titles part of middle school curriculum? Instead, try "The Day My Butt Went Psycho" or "Getting to Know Your Toilet: The Disgusting Story Behind Your Home's Strangest Feature." Or my favorite: "Help! What's Eating My Flesh: Runaway Staph and Strep Infections!" While some of these are obviously science books with shockingly clever titles, others are just juvenile with a capital J. In last week's Wall Street Journal article Problem: Boys Don't Like to Read. Solution: Books That Are Really Gross, John Hechinger reports that "Scholastic and other publishers are heeding the research of such academics as Jeffrey Wilhelm, an education professor at Boise State University. Prof. Wilhelm tracked boys' reading habits for five years ending in 2005 and found that schools failed to meet their "motivational needs." Teachers assigned novels about relationships, such as marriage, that appealed to girls but bored boys. His survey of academic research found boys more likely to read nonfiction, especially about sports and other activities they enjoy, as well as funny, edgy fiction."

Now, as unappealing as some of these titles may seem (or not!), I believe that the power of these brands to tap into the "motivational needs of boys" that Wilhelm outlined is absolutely critical for success. Just look at the amazing success of the Captain Underpants brand. First published in 1997, the "Butt" line has now sold over 1.2 copies. It just goes to show that with kids, just as with adults, "one size fits all" branding and marketing doesn't work. It's all about understanding the nuances (and in this case the capacities for nasties) of your audience.

Retailers txt teens

2008-08-11T21:01:00.000-07:00

When I received my Ypulse post alerting me to yesterday's Tampa Bay article Retailers know texting is the totally best way to reach teens, I saw that Anastasia had commented "this seems like a no duh one to me...as long as it's opt in and not sneaky at all." Ah, but I disagree. You'd think that major retailers and other large companies who have some sort of teen initiative would rally behind mobile marketing efforts. Because, of course, that's where the teens are, right? If only it were that simple. Yes, teens are glued to their phones. Yes, they text incessently. But does this mean that they want to receive mobile marketing messages from their favorite retailers? The article reports that Beall's department stores gained 5,000 opt-in subscribers since March. Let me repeat that. 5,000 subscribers. Since March. Just about any print, e-mail or online advertising campaign would far exceed those results. Couldn't those marketing dollars be put to better use?

The article does point out that while text messaging is not a great way to attract new customers, it can serve as a new channel to communicate to existing shoppers. Still, though: "Stores walk a fine line between relevant content and being labeled lame by picky teens." Isn't that the truth.

My advice to retailers or anyone else jumping on the mobile marketing bandwagon: Outline your goals and intiatives. What do you hope to gain from your mobile marketing efforts? Craft your messages around some sort of campaign that's relevant to teens. Know your audience. Or hire someone who does.

The "learning gap" opportunity

2008-08-10T21:18:00.000-07:00

I'm obsessed with today's AP article, U.S.-British "learning gap" a real education for mom. A reporter plans a move to London only to discover that her 5 year-old daughter is nowhere close to being "school ready."An e-mail from the school they hoped to send their daughter to "politely spelled out exactly what the kids in that school were expected to master: telling time; fractions — whole, half, quarter and thirds; counting in 5's up to 50; reading books and starting to write "news" independently."

Wow. Those British kids sure are smart. Now, the article goes on to explain that "It's not an open-and-shut case as to whether one country's approach is better than another. On a recent international reading test, U.S. fourth-graders and their peers from England had the same results. They weren't all that impressive. Students from the two countries posted lower average scores than students in Russia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Luxembourg, Hungary, Italy and Sweden, along with several Canadian provinces."

Still, does anybody besides me see a huge opportunity here for products and services aimed at the U.S. preschool market? For most kids in the United States, going to preschool is more about fun and games than focused academic learning. Reading, writing and telling time are not prerequisites for entering Kindergarten. And I'm not saying they should be-- but as a mom and a marketer I think, why not? Take a look at the success of LeapFrog and Baby Einstein and Bob Books and any number of other educational products directed to preschoolers. The market is still ripe.

Disney targets dudes

2008-08-07T08:29:00.000-07:00

The LA Times reports today Disney to target boys with rebranded cable channel. Brilliant idea. My only question is: what took them so long? Disney bought out my alma matter Fox Family Worldwide in 2002, the former home of the hugely successful Fox Kids Network, home to the Power Rangers and Digimon franchises. Jetix was launched in 2004 on Toon Disney in hopes of capturing the minds of younger boys, but with limited success, especially compared to the likes of Hannah Montana and High School Musical. The Times reports
"Toon Disney pulls only 10% to 15% of the viewers of Disney Channel, despite the cable network's reach into nearly 70 million U.S. households. The Nielsen ratings reflect its hodgepodge lineup of geriatric kids shows, such as as "Power Rangers Jungle Fury" and recycled animated offerings such as "Batman: The Animated Series," and "Jackie Chan Adventures," and movies."

The new cable channel will be called "Disney XD," which I suppose sounds a lot more male than "Toon Disney" or "ABC Family." I think it's a great strategy actually. Disney has built up such a strong brand with girls of all ages. Any attempts to piggyback on those efforts to attract more boys would just dilute the brands they already have.

"You're fighting the brand perception, the very, very strong brand equity that's been in the marketplace for many, many years," says Greg Kahn, senior vice president of strategic insights for media buying firm Optimedia International USA Inc. "It would almost require a completely separate effort to reach tween boys, with a completely different name somehow associated with the Disney property, to reach these tween males."

Nick Jr jumps the shark

2008-08-05T17:12:00.000-07:00

I'm sorry to report that Nick Jr has officially jumped the shark. Dora and Diego are about to embark on a new adventure: Media Life reports that Nick Jr cartoons are being adapted for the big screen. Feature length films? More action? More in-depth story lines? Sorry... it appears that the films will be "reformatted TV cartoons, " including “Dora,” “Diego, ” “The Backyardigans” and “The Wonder Pets,” as large-screen projection movies along with sing-along videos and other little extras. " The 10am shows in 12 states will include roughly 50 minutes of entertainment and the cost will be a bit more than a matinee. Now, I realize that not everyone has cable and that Nickelodeon might be trying to make a bit of money back after they decided to stop licensing their characters to junk food companies last year, but this strategy seems like it misses the mark. Mothers who already have cable will not want to pay to watch more TV in a movie theater. And those that don't have cable generally do so for a good reason (either cost or out of principle). Nick Jr has some really great properties so it's surprising to see them go this route. Perhaps they should um, explore some other opportunities.

PBKids= Perfectly Branded to Moms (and Kids)

2008-07-27T13:46:00.000-07:00

Just got the new Pottery Barn Kids catalog in the mail. All I have to say is... wow, good job. The photography, art direction and copy is excellent. I wanted to buy everything. Why? The colors are vibrant and fun, the designs embody just the right mix of classic-meets-kid-friendly, the quality appears to be high, and, perhaps most importantly--as a parent, the brand appeals to me on a emotional, subconcious level. After a long day, I found it soothing to sit down, relax and peruse the catalog in a dreamlike state, much as I would a travel magazine. What if my child's room looked like this? Or what about this? Oh, wait, how cute, look at this. Seeing pictures of perfectly groomed children doing homework on perfectly painted desks--color coordinated with their room decor-- only served to enhance my fantasy. If only I had some Pottery Barn Kids furniture, my life would be more perfect, my kids would certainly be more perfect and of course my home would be clutter free!

This is the power of a strong brand - the ability to tap into emotional issues (or in my case, neurotic tendencies to be a "perfect parent") and connect on a deeper level. And I'm not the only one who found the catalog appealing by the way. My daughter came up to me while I was on the couch and said "Hey, what is that? I want some things out of that catalog!" She went to the kitchen, grabbed a felt-tipped marker and proceeded to flip through the pages, circling everything she wanted. I asked her what it was about the brand that she liked so much and she just shrugged. "I don't know mommy, I just do."

Back to School Retail Report

2008-07-23T15:42:00.000-07:00

Youth Trends just released their 2008 Back to School Retail & Shopping Report. No real big surprises here... gas prices are up and the economy is down and therefore retailers such as WalMart and Target can expect to do well, while higher-end retailers won't. But wait - the summary goes on to explain how "the new iPhone 3G is without a doubt the most coveted mobile phone followed by LG's enV, the BlackBerry Curve and the BlackBerry Pearl. Based on the current growth rate, we expect that 32% to 35% of all teens and college students will own a smartphone or multimedia phone by year's end." Wow. At least teens and college students can still afford nice phones. And apparently, fashion as well: "The preppie retailer du jour is J. Crew, which over the past year and half has made a strong comeback with the college audience in particular and we now expect them to do well with teen consumers as well. If Mom and Dad are throwing down the plastic, female shoppers would snap up as many pairs of Tory Burch flats as they can."

Since when did J. Crew and Tory Burch start targeting teens? Never mind. My 15 year-old babysitter currently has 3 Coach bags, wears a lot of Juicy Couture accessories and sends me texts from her Razr. I'm just the one paying to fill up the tank so I can drive her to the mall.

Getting started

2008-07-23T14:40:00.000-07:00

It's taken awhile, but I've finally decided to start a blogging. My hesitancy hasn't been so much about what to say, but how to focus. I'm not interested in blogging about my kids, although they do fuel my business on many levels and are a constant source of entertainment. I'm not going to be a news service on what's going on in the kids industry at any given second; I have better things to do with my time. I won't write product reviews or book reviews although I may mention them as part of a larger trend I see in the industry. I'll blast the companies and ad agencies that are harming kids with obnoxious campaigns and inappropriate messages but I'll be kinder to those who miss the mark in targeting kids but whose underlying mission is well-intentioned. So here's what I will do: I'll compile, I'll focus on what's creative and cool, and I'll be critical every step of the way.