What’s Up with All the Veterans Day Freebie Ads?

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

There’s a tradition of Veterans Day Sale ads that always struck me as kinda, well, cheap. But now there’s Veterans Day Ads 2.0, in which stuff gets given free to military vets.

Exhibit A: This full-page Starbucks ad from any number of newspapers.

Exhibit B: This Applebee’s full-page ad from ditto.

So is this good, Doc? Or just using vets to make money?

– Non Vet

Dear Non Vet:

That’s not the half of it. Check out this Vetapalooza of freebies.

Not to mention this full-page ad in yesterday’s New York Times.

Back in the early ’70s, the Doc drew #186 in the draft, so we narrowly avoided going to Vietnam.

That might make us a less-than-ideal judge of these offers.

But they still feel a little creepy.

Yo.

What’s Up with the Two Blank NYT Ad Pages?

Oct24 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

So I read this on MediaPost’s Out to Launch and, yeah, I was intrigued.

“If you have a physical copy of [Wednesday’s] New York Times close by, take a look at section A, the main news portion of the paper. Notice anything strange? Like two consecutive blank pages? Intentionally done, the pages are part of a 20th Century Fox ad campaign to promote its upcoming film The Book Thief.”

(Wait – isn’t it 21st Century Fox now? Not to get technical about it.)

Anyway, whaddaya think, Doc?

Good stuff?

Or empty-headed?

– Out to Lunch

Dear Lunch:

First off, here’s the two-page ad from Wednesday’s Times (via Poynter, because the Times Replica edition doesn’t seem to have it, although the Doc’s home-delivery edition did).

Second off, here’s wordsarelife.com.

This is a classic news ad – designed more to get media coverage than to function as advertising.

And it worked.

Yo.

What’s Up with ‘The Kims’ Ad For MailOnline?

Oct23 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

So I was reading Ad Age the other day and I came across this MailOnline.com ad:

And here’s the Times Square billboard, via In-A-Gist:

Kim Kardashian is hot! And Kim Jong-Un was named Sexiest Man Alive last year.

You think maybe they’ll get married?

– Kim Jong Uh-huh!

Dear Uh-huh:

Unh-unh.

What’s Up with the Hispanics Across America ‘Bad Selig’ NYT Ad?

Oct19 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

So I was watching the St. Louis Cardinals beat the stuffing out of the Los Angeles Dodgers last night.

At which point I started reading Friday’s New York Times sports section.

At which point I saw this full-page ad from Hispanics Across America.

Lede:

“A disgrace to the game, to the players and our children?”

Seriously?

And then there’s this: “That’s why we are fighting for justice for Alex Rodriguez.”

Are you kidding? Alex Rodriguez? That cancer not only on the Yankees but on all of baseball?

Apparently they aren’t.

Your prescription for a response, Doc?

– Your Bud

Dear Actually Not My Bud,

First of all, you’ve read the disclaimer at the top, right?

Second of all, Go Redbirds!

Yo.

What’s Up with SEIU’s NYT Ad?

Oct18 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

I was reading the New York Times during my union-sanctioned mental health break when I came across this full-page ad.

Text:

After reading that, I developed a severe case of SEI-(FL)U.

Any remedies in your medical bag?

-SueU

Dear SueU:

You read the disclaimer up top, right?

Anyway, here’s some background from the Healthcare Education Project website that promotes the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) campaign:

The Healthcare Education Project is a community-based advocacy organization committed to improving healthcare in New York State through education, grassroots organizing and coalition-building. Our mission is to protect and expand access to quality, affordable healthcare for all New Yorkers. Our efforts focus on building partnerships with individuals, local healthcare providers, and civic and religious leaders in neighborhoods across New York State.

You can also read about the successes they claim and get answers to FAQ.

What you can’t read is news coverage of this SEIU effort because there doesn’t seem to be any.

Which is why they bought the ad in the first place.

Yo.

What’s Up with the VMR Electronic Cigarettes Ad?

Oct16 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

Full disclosure: I’m a smoker, which in today’s society means I am 1) morally deficient, and 2) an endless source of revenue for any and all state expenses.

(Not-So-Fun Fact to know and tell: In 2007, state excise taxes on tobacco rose by $3 billion. State excise taxes on alcohol that year rose by $3 million.)

Whatever.

In Monday’s New York Times, there was this full-page ad.

So here’s my question.

What’s the deal with e-cigs? Safe nicotine harbor, or no?

– Vaporized

Dear Vaporized,

First off, check out the old Doc’s recent appearance on NPR’s Here & Now.

Then check out VMR Products LLC (which spent a six-figure bundle on the Times ad).

Then check out VaporTruth (the VMR e-cig mouthpiece).

Then decide for yourself.

What’s Up with the Starbucks Shutdown Ad?

Oct12 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

I was enjoying a latte at the Coolidge Corner Starbucks and reading the New York Times yesterday when I came across this ad:

You can imagine my surprise – why is a coffee chain jumping into the chain-gang affairs of Congress? Shouldn’t Starbucks just concentrate on getting my order right?

– Foaming in Beantown

Dear Foaming:

Depends. The more complicated your order is, the less sympathy I have for you.

As for the shutdown ad, the jury’s still out on exactly what the hell Starbucks is doing. An Associated Press report (via the Boston Globe) noted this:

The move is unusual for a company like Starbucks Corp. While big brands generally steer clear of politics to avoid alienating customers, Starbucks and its outspoken chief executive, Howard Schultz, have run toward the spotlight by trying to gain a voice in national political issues.

But because the company’s efforts are generally nonpartisan and unlikely to cause controversy, marketing and corporate image experts say they burnish Starbucks’ reputation as a socially conscious company.

‘‘It’s always risky when brands mix politics and business,’’ said Allen Adamson, managing director of the New York-based branding firm Landor Associates. ‘‘But the benefit for Starbucks likely outweighs the risk.’’

Not according to The Daily Beast’s Daniel Gross, though.

The Starbucks Shutdown Petition Is Baloney

For the record, I love Starbucks. I’ve got a Starbucks card in my wallet. I regularly wow bystanders by brandishing the Starbucks mobile payment app on my iPhone. At home, I start the day by scooping out a couple of heaping tablespoons of Starbucks espresso roast into my Breville machine.

But I was a bit dismayed by this morning’s news that Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz is spearheading a nonpartisan drive to jolt Washington into action. On the company’s home page there’s a plea to “our leaders in Washington, D.C.” to come together to reopen the government, pay our debts, and “pass a bipartisan and comprehensive long-term budget deal by the end of the year.”

That isn’t doppio. It’s dopey-yo.

Whatever that means. But here’s Gross’s point, doppio or not:

Why is this annoying? Look, it isn’t D.C. leaders who have shut down the government and refuse to open it. It isn’t Washington that is blithely threatening not to meet our collective financial obligations. And it isn’t D.C. leaders who are refusing to enter negotiations about a longer-term budget deal. Rather, it’s Republicans behind all three.

So, presumably, all the barista-beholden should be steaming about the GOP, not the Democrats.

Time for a coffee break, yeah?

Yo.

What’s Up with the NYC Girls Project?

Oct3 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

Did you see this story in the New York Times yesterday?

City Unveils a Campaign to Improve Girls’ Self-Esteem

The fashion industry and Madison Avenue are not anathema to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg in the same way that soda companies and big tobacco are. But they are, in a sense, the impetus for City Hall’s latest public health campaign.

Mr. Bloomberg is taking on the popular, unattainable notions of beauty promoted by professional image-makers with a campaign that tells girls that they are beautiful the way they are.

Mainly through bus and subway ads, the campaign aims to reach girls from about 7 to 12 years old, who are at risk of negative body images that can lead to eating disorders, drinking, acting out sexually, suicide and bullying. But unlike Mr. Bloomberg’s ads to combat teenage pregnancy, smoking and soda-drinking, which are often ugly, revolting or sad, these ads are uniformly upbeat and positive.

Whaddaya think, Doc – good idea?

– Bloom(berg) Off the Rose

Dear Bloom(berg),

First off, the Doc has never lacked for self-esteem, so he’s the ideal person to address this issue.

The $330,000 NYC Girls Project describes itself as “[a] public education campaign geared toward girls ages 7-12 appearing on buses, subways, and phone kiosks and featuring a diverse group of girls performing activities like reading, playing sports, and drawing with the words: “I’m a girl. I’m smart, a leader, adventurous, friendly, funny. I’m beautiful the way I am.”

Yes you are. (See PSA here.)

It reminds the Doc of Nike’s classic 1995 damage-control If You Let Me Play spot.

There are some NYC Girls Project spoilsports, though.

From Slate:

This initiative gets so many things right. But to pick a nit, what’s with the slogan? As Kat Stoeffel at the Cut notes, “There’s something slightly contradictory about the NYC Girls Project message—‘Don’t worry about how you look. You look beautiful!’ ” Isn’t the point of the program to encourage girls to disassociate their sense of worth from their physical appearance? Why couldn’t the slogan simply be, “I’m Awesome the Way I Am?”

From Time:

The NYC Girl’s Project may have employed all the right tactics, but the long-term effectiveness of self-esteem programs is still in question. In a study published in 2013 on an Internet-based promotion of positive body image, young girls in the study reported a decrease in body dissatisfaction: they compared their bodies less to others and were more satisfied with their own appearance than girls who hadn’t seen the promotion. However, the positive effects had dissipated during a followup interview three months later.

Even so, it’s worth trying, yeah?

Yo.

Is the Diesel Brand Running on Fumes?

Jul12 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

I saw this full-page ad in Thursday’s New York Times:

You have the control?

What are you going to do with it?

#DieselReboot?

What’s going on here, Doc?

– Low Octane

Dear Low Octane,

What’s going on is a reinvention of Diesel’s brand image with a social-media twist. As blogger Nik Thakkar writes on Karl Is My Uncle:

Diesel Reboot, or aptly tagged #DIESELREBOOT is being described as the inception stage in the full blown reinvention of the Diesel brand. It’s essentially a digitally based community (on Tumblr) where [new artistic director Nicola] Formichetti is enlisting a new generation of brand ambassadors to submit imagery, inspiration, ideas and art to help create a new set of iconography for the brand. It feels fresh, for the brand at least, but the concept itself is basically a simple crowd-sourcing and idea generation campaign.

(It says something about the state of the media that a mainstream vehicle like the Times is used to promote a digitally based community.)

A profile of Diesel mogul Renzo Rosso in Forbes magazine noted several months ago, “Rosso has spent the last decade snapping up majority stakes in small, prestigious fashion houses all across Europe: Paris-based Maison Martin Margiela, Amsterdam’s Viktor & Rolf and, this past December, Milanese label Marni.” But he lost out on a bid for Italian couture house Valentino “to an investment vehicle backed by Qatar’s royal family, who reportedly paid around $860 million.”

Money graf:

He’s aware that to compete with Qatari money, not to mention fashion’s two French kingpins–LVMH and PPR –he may have to consider a public offering to fuel further acquisitions. He’s just not sure if that’s what he wants. “The size of the group is quite nice,” he says, before pausing. “Never say never.”

So it’s very likely that the New York Times ad is not just a call for imagery, inspiration, ideas, and art. It’s also a shoutout to Wall Street.

Yo.

What’s Up with the ‘Heroic Media’ Anti-Abortion Ad?

Jul11 by Campaign Outsider

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

Dear Dr. Ads,

I recently saw this Wall Street Journal ad from an outfit called Heroic Media.

The website’s Frequently Asked Questions section says this about the group’s funding:

Our primary source of income is from individual donors. We also receive support from churches, organizations and foundations. We do not receive income from government sources.

No kidding.

What’s the scoop on this campaign?

– 19 Weeks

Dear 19 Weeks,

Funny you should ask, because the Wall Street Journal is one of the only mainstream media outlets to run the ad.

From the Christian Broadcast Network:

Media Outlets Reject Controversial Pro-life Ad

Three major U.S. newspapers are refusing to run a pro-life ad, calling it too controversial.

The ad by Heroic Media features a hand holding a 20 to 24-week-old pre-born baby.

Above the baby is a quote saying, “This child has no voice, which is why it depends on yours, speak up.”

Lifenews.com reported that The Chicago Tribune , USA Today, and Los Angeles Timessaid they feel the image of the baby is “controversial.”

The controversy stems from the ad not specifying “whether the child was alive or dead,” according to World Magazine.

Here’s a Heroic Media spokeswoman discussing the controversy:

The Chicago Tribune subsequently accepted an alternative ad with a different image (via Jill Stanek at LifeSiteNews):

Okay then, yeah?

Yo.

Ask Doctor Ads

Warning: Dr. Ads Is Not a Licensed Physician

Author Archives: Campaign Outsider

What’s Up with All the Veterans Day Freebie Ads?

What’s Up with the Two Blank NYT Ad Pages?

What’s Up with ‘The Kims’ Ad For MailOnline?

What’s Up with the Hispanics Across America ‘Bad Selig’ NYT Ad?

What’s Up with SEIU’s NYT Ad?

What’s Up with the VMR Electronic Cigarettes Ad?

What’s Up with the Starbucks Shutdown Ad?

The Starbucks Shutdown Petition Is Baloney

What’s Up with the NYC Girls Project?

City Unveils a Campaign to Improve Girls’ Self-Esteem

Is the Diesel Brand Running on Fumes?

What’s Up with the ‘Heroic Media’ Anti-Abortion Ad?

Media Outlets Reject Controversial Pro-life Ad