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

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The ads poke fun at advertising, market research, out-of-date marketing concepts-- and prudishness.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

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

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

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

"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?