How Can an Ad Claim That Donald Trump ‘Couldn’t Be Hired at a Local Mall’?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Jim Swift’s Overtime newsletter from The Bulwark, when I came across this item about a new ad campaign from Republican Voters Against Trump.

No mall would hire Trump… So why would we make him President again? A new ad from our friends at RVAT airing on TV and online in battleground states.

I dunno, Doc – does that sound right to you? Donald Trump does have an awful lot of experience in sales.

– Mall Rat

Dear MR,

Yeah, the thing with Trump is, so much of what he’s sold during his career has been irregular.

Beyond that, the rest of his resumé is even more problematic, as this RVAT press release explains.

WASHINGTON – April 22, 2024 – Today Republican Voters Against Trump launched a new six-figure ad campaign as part of an ongoing $50 million campaign, highlighting Donald Trump’s 88 felony charges.

The ad uses first-person hidden-camera footage of a job applicant going to several stores and repeatedly being rejected after sharing that he has been indicted for stealing classified documents, paying hush money to porn stars, and attempting to overturn an election.

Here’s how that worked out.

The ad is scheduled to run nationally on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” and digitally in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Republican Voters Against Trump is yet another effort from the irrepressible Sarah Longwell, publisher of The Bulwark, impresario of The Focus Group Podcast, and founder of Republican Voters Against Trump/Republican Accountability Project.

Sarah Longwell is the undisputed Queen of Never Trumpers.

Ask for her by name.

Do the New McDonald’s Billboards in the Netherlands Pass the Smell Test?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around MediaPost, when I came across Tanya Gazdik’s Marketing Daily piece about a new ad gimmick debuting in Europe.

Remember Smell-O-Vision? It’s coming to billboards!

McDonald’s is trying it out in the Dutch cities of Utrecht and Leiden.

“The plain red and yellow billboards don’t use a single word or image to advertise McDonald’s offerings—and they don’t need to,” according to Fast Company. “Instead, the billboards pump out the aroma of warm french fries to passersby, who seem to instinctively know the scent of a McDonald’s french fry compared to any other form of fried potato.”

I dunno, Doc – kind of reeks of desperation, don’t you think?

– Odor Eater

Dear OE,

First off, this is shaping up to be the Year of the Billboard, no? It started with smackable billboards that dispense Heinz ketchup packets, as the Doc noted last month. Now it’s smellable billboards, which McDonald’s is promoting with this YouTube video.

The Mickey D billboards represent the olfactory extension of audio spotlight technology employed in supermarket advertising, which Evan I. Schwartz detailed in a 2004 MIT Technology Review piece: “Known as directional sound, it uses an ultrasound emitter to shoot a laserlike beam of audible sound so focused that only people inside a narrow path can hear it.”

Now we have directional smell. Ain’t progress grand. Then again, when someone comes up with Chanel N°Fry, you’ll know they’ve gone too far.

Could This Half-Page New York Times Ad Be Any More Illegible?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and plowing through the Sunday New York Times, when I came across this on page 7.

Honest to God, Doc – I had to take out a magnifying glass to read the body copy, and even then it was blurry. Who in her right mind (lookin’ at you, Nita Mukesh Ambani) would sign off on a mess like that?

– Read ‘n’ Weep

Dear RW,

First off, just to be, um, clear: The ad that appears in the Replica Edition of the Times is marginally sharper than the print version.

Even so, it’s still ridiculously hard to read. That’s because it violates every tenet of legendary adman David Ogilvy’s rules for effective ad copy.

Use eye-easy typography. Text set in all-caps is extremely difficult to read… sans-serif fonts are particularly difficult to read…reverse type is almost impossible to read.

Reverse type on a rose background is even more impossible to read.

The Doc’s diagnosis: The Nita Mukesh Ambani Cultural Centre in Mumbai seems like a happening place. It just needs a new art director.

Did Joe Biden in His New Ad Just Make the Understatement of the Century?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around the web, when I came across this headline at MSNBC’s site.

‘Trump doesn’t trust women; I do’: Biden ad hits Trump’s attacks on reproductive freedom

Really, Doc – that’s the best he’s got? Doesn’t trust women? That’s his indictment of the Grabber in Chief?

– Trusty Reader

Dear TR,

The TV spot was triggered by the state of Florida’s new six-week abortion ban, and according to this piece by Weija Jiang at CBS Mornings, “[Biden’s] campaign says it has a ‘seven-figure buy’ for this ad as part of a $30 million advertising effort in the major battleground states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada.”

“In 2016, Donald Trump ran to overturn Roe v. Wade. Now, in 2024, he’s running to pass a national ban on a woman’s right to choose,” Biden says in the ad. He pointedly avoids mentioning either Florida’s new law or Trump’s stated opposition to a six-week abortion ban, letting viewers draw their own conclusions, accurate or not.

(Then again, Trump was America’s first Cubist President – on every side of every issue – so previous statements are no guarantee of future policy.)

The Doc’s diagnosis: There’s no question Biden’s assertion that “Trump doesn’t trust women” soft-pedals Trump’s reprehensible history of misogyny, misconduct, and more – see Mariel Padilla’s piece at The 19th for further details – but there are plenty of people out there excoriating Trump in far harsher terms (lookin’ at you, George Conway).

Over all, it’s sensible for Biden to leave the heavy lifting to others on this front.

What’s Up With Those Heinz Billboards That Dispense Ketchup Packets?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and checking out MediaPost’s Marketing Daily, when I came across Erik Oster’s piece about a new hands-on approach to outdoor advertising.

Heinz Gets Confrontational With ‘Smack For Heinz’ Campaign

At Louis’ Lunch, in New Haven Connecticut, designated by the Library of Congress as the Birthplace of the Hamburger Sandwich itself (although the claim is, at best, unsubstantiated) “no ketchup” is a cardinal rule. Prominently placed signs near the register make the policy abundantly clear, and patrons who have attempted to bring their own bottle into the restaurant have been known to be unceremoniously tossed out of the establishment.

The historic hamburger hangout is just one of the places targeted as part of a “Smack For Heinz” campaign running across film, OOH, digital and social media elements on Instagram and TikTok. The brand installed “smackable billboards” that dispense ketchup packets outside restaurants known for their rules against the condiment.

I dunno, Doc. Is that how you want your condiments delivered? What’s next – a block of salt, a hammer, and a chisel?

– Talkin’ Smack

Dear TS,

Just to establish a baseline, that’s the sugar pourer in use at the Doc’s house. So we’re not exactly new-fangled in matters such as this one. Or slap-happy.

Regardless, here’s the Heinz spot, which begins outside Louis’ Lunch. According to MediaPost, “it appears the restaurant may have been closed during filming — and the billboards appearing in the initial launch video weren’t around for  long.  According to the New Haven Register, the billboard briefly appeared outside the restaurant on March 7, but was quickly removed.”

The ad also features several ketchup-scorning Chicago hot dog joints. According to Carolyn’s Cooking, a true Chicago-style hot dog is “topped with yellow mustard, bright green sweet pickle relish, chopped white onion, tomato wedges, a dill pickle spear, sport peppers and celery salt.” Not a ketchup bottle in sight.

As for Louis’ Lunch, here’s what the burger place says about its ketchup-busting policy.

Louis’ Lunch is committed to serving a classic hamburger that is made with a proprietary blend of five cuts of meat, ground fresh daily. We want you to experience the meat’s true flavor, so we serve it on white toast and only offer cheese, onion, and tomato as garnishes.

One person on Reddit said, “we were told that there was no ketchup in the 1800s so we couldn’t have it now.”

As Layla Schlack reports at the New Haven Register, “people will be able to use the website smackforheinz.com . . . to report restaurants that don’t serve Heinz ketchup. The company will set up the pop-up signs that dispense packets at a select number.” (That website is currently a placeholder, presumably until the official campaign’s debut on April 2nd.)

The Doc’s diagnosis: Smack For Heinz works on the billboards, but the website should really be snitchforheinz.com. Or would that leave a bad taste?

Can TikTok’s $2 Million Ad Blitz Buy Time For the Beleaguered Platform?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Oliver Darcy’s latest post at CNN’s Reliable Sources, when I came across this item about the video-sharing site TikTok.

TikTok has launched a $2.1 million television ad campaign as its fate is decided by the U.S. Senate, Brian Schwartz reports. (CNBC)

What’s the deal here, Doc – do U.S. Senators even watch TV? Wouldn’t TikTok be better off taking each one out to dinner at Cafe Milano? It is, after all, “Where the world’s most powerful people go,” according to the New York Times.

– TskTok

Dear TT,

Funny thing – TikTok’s ad buy is roughly the same amount as two anti-TikTok outfits (The American Parents Coalition and State Armor Action) are spending on national TV spots, which the Doc detailed the other day.

The difference is, TikTok is targeting U.S. senators who are just as beleaguered as the Chinese-owned platform is, as CNBC’s Brian Schwartz reports.

TikTok has launched a $2.1 million advertising campaign with a clear message for senators in tough reelection fights this year: Block the House bill that could effectively ban the app in the United States.

“Think about the 5 million small business owners that rely on TikTok to provide for their families,” one purported TikTok user says in the ad. “To see all of that disappear would be so sad,” says another apparent user.

The company has reserved television ad space in the battleground states of Nevada, Montana, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio, according to data from AdImpact.

Here’s a transcript of the spot, which for some reason is not on YouTube, but is posted at AdMo. It features a series of people talking up the platform.

“There is no doubt that I would not have found the success that I have today without TikTok.”

“TikTok has made me a better teacher. It’s helped me to connect with people far beyond my classroom.”

“Think about the 5 million small business owners that rely on TikTok to provide for their families.”

“The village is always there for the moms on TikTok.”

“To see all of that disappear would be so sad.”

“It’s gonna affect a lot of people’s livelihoods.”

“We have got to make enough noise about this so that they don’t take away our voice.”

The spot ends with #KeepTikTok on screen. Not everyone, though, is putting on the pom poms.

The Doc’s diagnosis: TikTok parent ByteDance has flooded social media with testimonials from its users, so voices like the one above are largely drowned out. Whether any U.S. senators are listening, of course,  is another matter entirely.

Could the New TV Spots Attacking TikTok Mean Its Time May Be Running Out?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and scrolling through Punchbowl New AM, when I came across this item about two new ad campaigns targeting TikTok for its ties to the Chinese government and its harmful effects on users.

The fight over banning TikTok, long confined to congressional committees, federal boards and online screeds, has now moved to television screens across the country.

Two entities are running ads about the perceived danger of the popular social media app, which is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese company.

One spot accuses the platform of promoting eating disorders and “glorifying self-harm.” The other ad says that the Zhang Fuping, the vice president of ByteDance and a member of the Chinese Communist Party, “controls what 170 million Americans think.”

What do you think, Doc – those ads gonna work?

– TikToxic

Dear TT,

Let’s do the math, shall we?

National Review’s James Lynch reports that the two groups – The American Parents Coalition and State Armor Action – will spend roughly $2 million between them on their TikTok knock.

Meanwhile, according to this piece by the Washington Post’s Cristiano Lima-Strong, Jacob Bogage and Aaron Schaffer, “TikTok and ByteDance’s spending on federal lobbying has risen dramatically as scrutiny over their ties to China has grown in Washington. They spent less than $300,000 in 2019 but more than $20 million in the years since, according to a review of federal lobbying disclosure forms.”

Kind of a mismatch, yeah?

Then again, public opinion still counts for something, so maybe these spots will actually break through.

Then again again, the public opinion that matters most might come from the teen and tween children of Congressional members, as Natalie Andrews details in the Wall Street Journal.

WASHINGTON—As members of Congress consider a crackdown on TikTok, many have faced lobbying from some of their most vocal constituents: their own children.

“She was initially up in arms about the whole thing, ‘you can’t do that,’” says Rep. Josh Gottheimer, (D., N.J.) of his daughter.

The 14-year-old was worried her friends would be mad about her dad’s actions. He voted with the majority of the House earlier this month to force TikTok to divest from its Chinese-controlled parent Bytedance or be banned in the U.S.

Now the matter has moved over to the Senate—where lawmakers also have to contend with their in-house critics . . .

Democratic Sen. John Fetterman was headed back to Pennsylvania after the House voted on the legislation when his tween daughter lobbied him.

“I’m driving home and she sent me some texts, and it was ‘please don’t destroy TikTok, I’m going to get bullied,’” he recalls.

The Doc’s diagnosis: We’ll find out soon who’s going to ByteDance to whose tune. And who’s just going to bite.

Stay tuned.

Why Does a Snoopy Watch Get a Full-Page Teaser Ad in the New York Times?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and leafing through the New York Times, when I came across this full-page ad on A5.

What’s going on here, Doc? Is there a moon landing scheduled for later this month? Is Elon Musk planning to SpaceX his Shiba Inu Floki up there? What am I missing?

– Moon Stuck

Dear MS,

What you missed was the small © 2024 Peanuts Worldwide LLC in the lower right-hand corner of the ad. Plug that into the Googletron and you get this piece from MGB Watches, which notes that the ad also ran in The Guardian newspaper.

SNOOPY MOONSWATCH RELEASE DATE CONFIRMED – 26.03.24

The much awaited buzz surrounding the Snoopy MoonSwatch has reached its peak, as another official teaser graces The Guardian newspaper today. Capturing attention with an intriguing image of a paw print imprinted on the Moon’s surface, it unmistakably announces the release date of a Snoopy MoonSwatch: 26.03.24! . . .

26th March is such a significant date for the MoonSwatch as it marks the two year anniversary: On March 26th, 2022, Swatch unveiled the incredibly successful collection, consisting of the much loved 11x planet themed Omega x Swatch Speedmaster Watches.

For those of you keeping score at home, not everyone loved the Omega x Swatch collection, as this letter to the Doc two years ago detailed.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Jonathan V. Last’s Triad newsletter at The Bulwark, when I came across this item.

3. Watch Talk

It’s been a while since and I know that this if [sic] frivolous, but this just happened:

I have no words.

Taking the iconic Speedmaster Professional—the watch that went to the frickin’ moon—and turning it into a candy-colored hunk of plastic quartz . . . this is an abomination. An offense against God and nature. It’s like the Louvre partnering with Oscar Mayer to sell a Bologna Lisa.

So here’s my question, Doc: Do you want to see the Bologna Lisa as badly as I do?

– Swatched at Birth

Fun fact to know and tell, via Bianca Bosker’s “Lost Basquiats” piece in The Atlantic: “Researchers at the City University of New York instructed study participants to imagine that the Mona Lisa had been destroyed in a fire and asked them whether they’d rather see its ashes or a copy that not even connoisseurs could distinguish from the original. Eighty percent picked the ashes.”

But back to MoonSwatches. Those Snoopy newspaper ads weren’t even the first teasers for the new timepiece, as Wired’s Jeremy White reported several months ago.

Considering the long-established connection between Snoopy and Omega, after the original MoonSwatch caused pandemonium around the globe in 2022 and reinvigorated Swatch’s previously flagging fortunes, it’s hardly surprising that the brand should mine this rich Schulz seam to tease a coming Snoopy MoonSwatch.

There’s only one thing that could stop this cartoon-collaboration MoonSwatch from being the most popular version of the series since the Omega X Swatch’s frenzied launch: if it’s as unimaginative and understated as the Moonshine Gold editions that followed the bright and bold original MoonSwatches.

The Doc’s diagnosis: There’s no guarantee watch nerds will be over the moon for the new Snoopy-on-a-strap when it finally lands, either.

Why Can’t Democrats Quit Canoodling With Trumpy GOP Candidates?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Zachary Basu’s post at Axios Sneak Peek, when I came across this item about “Ohio’s strange bedfellows.”

Former President Trump and meddling Democrats are both scrambling to get their preferred Republican candidate — businessman Bernie Moreno — over the finish line in Tuesday’s Senate GOP primary in Ohio, Axios’ Stephen Neukam reports.

Why it matters: Democrats view Moreno as the weakest general election opponent for vulnerable Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). Moreno is also the only Trump-backed Senate candidate at risk of losing in a GOP primary — a potentially embarrassing blow to the former president . . .

The intrigue: Duty and Country PAC, a group tied to Senate Democrats, is spending $2.5 million on a TV ad highlighting Moreno’s ties to Trump — seeking to boost him with the GOP’s conservative base.

What the hell, Doc – why do Democrats (lookin’ at you, Adam Schiff) keep pumping up Republican candidates they think will be easy pickings in a general election?

– GOPsmacked Voter

Dear GV,

As Democratic candidates and their allies keep demonstrating in political races nowadays, the only difference between an opponent and a proponent is a little pr.

The latest case in point: The new TV spot from Duty and Country PAC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Chuck Schumer’s Senate Majority PAC. The latter group,  according to this piece by the Washington Post’s Michael Scherer, has reserved $239 million in ads to defend seats in seven states.

Duty and Country’s mash note to Bernie Moreno in the Ohio GOP Senate primary, meanwhile, is more ham-handed than a  Hormel worker. The video has been pulled from YouTube for some reason, but you can view the spot at AdMo. Here’s the transcript.

MAGA Republican Bernie Moreno is too conservative for Ohio. In Washington, Moreno would do Donald Trump’s bidding. That’s why Trump endorsed Moreno, calling him exactly the type of MAGA fighter that we need in the United States Senate. Moreno would lead the charge to enact Trump’s MAGA agenda to repeal Obamacare and institute a national ban on abortion. Donald Trump needs Bernie Marino. Ohio doesn’t. Duty and Country is responsible for the content of this ad.

Of course, such bank-shot campaigns don’t always pay off. In the 2022 election cycle, according to this NPR piece by Bill Chappell, “not all of the far-right candidates supported by Democratic groups won their primary races — in fact, far from it. In September, an analysis by The Washington Post found that seven of 13 Democrat-backed Republican candidates lost their primaries after having more than a combined $12 million spent on their behalf.”

One campaign that might have worked too well, on the other hand, is Adam Schiff’s $11 million wet kiss to former pro baseball player Steve Garvey, the Republican candidate in California’s U.S. Senate primary. As Katy Grimes reports in California Globe, Garvey was leading Schiff in the jungle primary by 254,667 votes as of yesterday afternoon.

Live and let learn, that’s the Doc’s slogan.

Should Joe Biden Drop $30 Million on Ads Now or Just Set That Money on Fire?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and enjoying Bess Levin’s Vanity Fair newsletter, when I came across a link to this Politico piece by Elena Schneider about a new ad blitz for Joe Biden’s re-election campaign.

[The Biden campaign] will start a six-week, $30 million TV and digital ad buy on Saturday, aimed at drawing out the “full-throated” contrast between Biden’s vision for “where the country can go” against “Donald Trump’s dark, dangerous and chaotic vision for the country,” said campaign communications director Michael Tyler on a call with reporters Friday morning. The ads will target battleground states, as well as Black and Latino-focused outlets and channels.

I dunno, Doc – isn’t that like Macy’s running ads in March for a one-day sale in November?

– Ad Homonym

Dear AH,

The Doc has taken a dim view of presidential campaign advertising on multiple occasions, but this seems to be a special case for one particular reason.

Those numbers come from an AP-NORC poll conducted last month. But Biden’s problem goes beyond the mind-boggling fact that more Americans believe Donald Trump “has the mental capability to serve effectively as president” than he does. There’s also this from a new Wall Street Journal poll, as Aaron Zitner reports.

Some 73% say Biden is too old, at age 81, to stand for re-election, the same share as in an August Journal poll. By comparison, 52% see Trump, age 77, as too old to run for the White House, up 5 points from August.

Ouch.

Baked-in public opinion like that can’t be turned around overnight, so it makes sense for Biden to get crackin’ now. And his first TV spot goes right to the heart of the matter.

The ad hits many of  Biden’s high points: Covid response, infrastructure investment, climate change reform, job growth. It also hits several of Trump’s low points, including that “he took away women’s right to choose.”

The spot ends with an outtake, as Nicholas Nehamas notes in the New York Times.

After the standard announcement that Mr. Biden has approved the message, a voice off-camera asks him to do one more take.

“Look, I’m very young, energetic and handsome. What the hell am I doing this for?” Mr. Biden replies, flashing a mischievous grin before the screen goes black.

The Doc’s diagnosis: If Biden has any chance of defusing the time bomb underneath the Resolute Desk, this approach is probably his best bet for doing so. Given that pro-Biden forces will spend close to $1 billion on advertising in the next eight months, the current $30 million ad buy is a decent way to prime the pump.