Advertising has always been an industry susceptible to change, with one of the most significant changes occurring in the 1960s. Often the source of change is a strong creative force that casts others aside, and Bill Bernbach was that creative force.
On behalf of the Agency DDB, Bernbach created the revolutionary Volkswagen ad campaign—featuring such headlines as "Think Small" and "Lemon" (which were used to describe the appearance of the car) which ushered in the era of modern advertising.
Claude Hopkins, David Ogilvy, Rosser Reeves and others helped define the style and philosophy of advertising in the 1960s, which rejected the idea of research and believed in the art of persuasion and promoting a “unique selling proposition”. This new philosophy had become the industry standard for the next two decades until the 1980s when advertising changed, yet again.
The Era of Testing
By the late seventies and early eighties the focus of advertising shifted to television. What was once a challenge to create the perfect page now became a challenge to create the perfect commercial. But the bigger problems facing the next generation of copywriters and graphic designers were that what was being sold had changed. The goods had now become products of parity. Every category there was four to five major companies producing essentially the same thing. Five detergents looked, smelled, cost and washed the same way. As Rosser Reeves said “Our problem is-a client comes into my office and throws two newly minted half dollars onto my desk and says, “Mine is the one on the left. You prove it’s better.”
From this challenge came the elaborating of “segmenting” the idea that you can’t sell to everybody. Agencies began to examine what they were promoting and asked who was really going to by this product? Then they placed the ad where the particular audience would see it. The ads were designed to look like, talk like and do things that the identified audience did.
With the need to refine the message and focus on its audience, precision drove research to new heights. Focus groups were born, brain waves were studied, copy testing was done and computers became an important device to the business landscape. What was once considered an art was quickly becoming a science. Before decisions were made based on judgment and trust, now they were made based on how they tested.
When DDB dramatically changed the surface of advertising, a lot of emulators followed. Unfortunately, part of what happened is that not everyone could do the work that DDB did. A lot of clients trusted their agency to do work like DDB, and they failed. They wanted some assurance for it, so they tested. It was a crutch that clients felt they needed.
From this challenge came the elaborating of “segmenting” the idea that you can’t sell to everybody. Agencies began to examine what they were promoting and asked who was really going to by this product? Then they placed the ad where the particular audience would see it. The ads were designed to look like, talk like and do things that the identified audience did.
With the need to refine the message and focus on its audience, precision drove research to new heights. Focus groups were born, brain waves were studied, copy testing was done and computers became an important device to the business landscape. What was once considered an art was quickly becoming a science. Before decisions were made based on judgment and trust, now they were made based on how they tested.
When DDB dramatically changed the surface of advertising, a lot of emulators followed. Unfortunately, part of what happened is that not everyone could do the work that DDB did. A lot of clients trusted their agency to do work like DDB, and they failed. They wanted some assurance for it, so they tested. It was a crutch that clients felt they needed.
The Product is Not the Hero
Bill Bernbach once said “stay within the product, stay within the product”. But Dan Weiden and account manager Jim Riswold had a different take on this logic. Through Nike, They showed that you could supercharge the endorsement process by hyping the athlete and not the product.
In the spring of 1985 millions of prime-time viewers witnessed their first sight of Michael Jordan in a commercial. They watched the young basketball star move across the blacktop, leap into the air towards the basket and slam the ball. In an elongated and slow motion frame Michael Jordan stayed in the air with his legs apart for the last ten seconds of the commercial. This created the illusion to spectators that he could not only fly like a bird, but that his wings were the two rubber sneakers wrapped around his feet.
The Nike commercial, “Jordan Flight”, was replayed so often that Michael Jordan became known as Air Jordan. Over and over they showed different commercials of Jordan taking flight towards the basket, dubbing him as the man who could fly.
With its Nike campaigns, Weiden and Kennedy rewrote two of the most revered advertising adages: if you have nothing to say, have a celebrity say it; and the product should always be the hero.
Weiden helped shape athletes into articulate, coherent, personae. They weren’t saying that Michael Jordan wears Nike shoes; they were saying that Michael Jordan is a superior athlete. The commercial never states that Jordan knows the sneakers; we simply draw the inference that since he knows sports, he must know sneakers.
Michael Jordan went on to become one of the most recognizable ad spokesman and athletes in the world and helped Nike skyrocket form an 18 percent share of the sneaker market to 43 percent in just a decade. As of June 22, 1998 Fortune figures his worth to Nike alone to be $5.2 billion dollars, a number that continues to soar today.
While Weiden and Kennedy were using athletes to hype their products, Chiat/Day created one of the most memorable ads to date without ever showing the product or explaining what it’s used for.
Aired during Super Bowl XVIII, Apple ran their now famous “1984” commercial which featured a hammer-wielding heroine to represent the coming of the Macintosh as a means to save humanity from “Big Brother”.
Alluding to the George Orwell novel “1984” the spot concluded with text which reads: "On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won't be like 1984. "
The commercial turned Apple into a household name and with a single airing set a new commercial standard for production values and cinematic style. '1984' also raised the financial stakes: Apple spent a then-outlandish sum of $400,000 to produce the ad and $500,000 to air it.
In the spring of 1985 millions of prime-time viewers witnessed their first sight of Michael Jordan in a commercial. They watched the young basketball star move across the blacktop, leap into the air towards the basket and slam the ball. In an elongated and slow motion frame Michael Jordan stayed in the air with his legs apart for the last ten seconds of the commercial. This created the illusion to spectators that he could not only fly like a bird, but that his wings were the two rubber sneakers wrapped around his feet.
The Nike commercial, “Jordan Flight”, was replayed so often that Michael Jordan became known as Air Jordan. Over and over they showed different commercials of Jordan taking flight towards the basket, dubbing him as the man who could fly.
With its Nike campaigns, Weiden and Kennedy rewrote two of the most revered advertising adages: if you have nothing to say, have a celebrity say it; and the product should always be the hero.
Weiden helped shape athletes into articulate, coherent, personae. They weren’t saying that Michael Jordan wears Nike shoes; they were saying that Michael Jordan is a superior athlete. The commercial never states that Jordan knows the sneakers; we simply draw the inference that since he knows sports, he must know sneakers.
Michael Jordan went on to become one of the most recognizable ad spokesman and athletes in the world and helped Nike skyrocket form an 18 percent share of the sneaker market to 43 percent in just a decade. As of June 22, 1998 Fortune figures his worth to Nike alone to be $5.2 billion dollars, a number that continues to soar today.
While Weiden and Kennedy were using athletes to hype their products, Chiat/Day created one of the most memorable ads to date without ever showing the product or explaining what it’s used for.
Aired during Super Bowl XVIII, Apple ran their now famous “1984” commercial which featured a hammer-wielding heroine to represent the coming of the Macintosh as a means to save humanity from “Big Brother”.
Alluding to the George Orwell novel “1984” the spot concluded with text which reads: "On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won't be like 1984. "
The commercial turned Apple into a household name and with a single airing set a new commercial standard for production values and cinematic style. '1984' also raised the financial stakes: Apple spent a then-outlandish sum of $400,000 to produce the ad and $500,000 to air it.
Mergers and Takeovers
From 1975-1984 the advertising industry experienced the greatest boom it has ever known. Expenditures on advertising rose on average of 13 percent a year.
Conglomeration began during this time and most of the larger agencies continued to increase their market share at the expense of medium-sized agencies. The majority of large budgets came from multination clients, who sought multinational agencies. As a result, agencies continued to expand across the globe with offices popping up in Europe, Asia and all over.
The advertising industry became accustomed to double-digit growth, but from 1985-1990 industry growth fell to around 8 percent. As a result of these shaky times, agencies were set up as targets for a plethora of mergers and takeovers.
In 1987, the WPP Group purchased J. Walter Thompson for $566 million dollars. Two years later they acquired the Ogilvy group for $864 million. The holding company Omnicom was formed in 1987, which combined DDB and BBDO among other notable agencies. By the end of the decade, Omicron, WPP, or Interpublic owned many of the
Conglomeration began during this time and most of the larger agencies continued to increase their market share at the expense of medium-sized agencies. The majority of large budgets came from multination clients, who sought multinational agencies. As a result, agencies continued to expand across the globe with offices popping up in Europe, Asia and all over.
The advertising industry became accustomed to double-digit growth, but from 1985-1990 industry growth fell to around 8 percent. As a result of these shaky times, agencies were set up as targets for a plethora of mergers and takeovers.
In 1987, the WPP Group purchased J. Walter Thompson for $566 million dollars. Two years later they acquired the Ogilvy group for $864 million. The holding company Omnicom was formed in 1987, which combined DDB and BBDO among other notable agencies. By the end of the decade, Omicron, WPP, or Interpublic owned many of the
Cable TV & the 15-second spot
Throughout the 1980s television commercials became more and more expensive so they cut the sales story to be told in seconds rather than minutes. In the 1970s, thirty-second commercials replaced one-minute commercials and in the 1980s the fifteen-second spot became common. In the later part of the decade, networks were broadcasting more than six thousand commercials a week, with more than a third of them being fifteen-second spots. Which produced a whole era of short, snappy taglines. M&Ms began to melt in your mouth and not in your hands, and Fairfax Cone asked the question “Aren’t you glad you use Dial?” Sayings like “ring around the collar” and “where’s the beef?” reached cultural status in America.
As cable channels grew in unbelievable numbers throughout the decade, network television lost almost a third of its share of the national audience and the effectiveness of the medium began to plunge.
Heading into the 1990s, advertising agencies were faced with a growing feeling among advertisers that advertising was no longer the central element in the marketing of branded products.
As cable channels grew in unbelievable numbers throughout the decade, network television lost almost a third of its share of the national audience and the effectiveness of the medium began to plunge.
Heading into the 1990s, advertising agencies were faced with a growing feeling among advertisers that advertising was no longer the central element in the marketing of branded products.
Generation X
In 1980, advertising absorbed roughly two-thirds of all marketing expenditures by manufactures; by 1990, advertising’s share was no more than one-third. Part of the decline was due to the fact that advertising had lost some of its thrill for consumers.
A study performed in 1992 showed that consumers considered advertising less in decision-making. Of the cross section of Americans studied, fewer than 15 percent of people relied on advertising in buying appliances, 10 percent or fewer in buying furniture, 7 percent or fewer in making banking decisions, 9 percent fewer in buying automotive supplies and 17 percent fewer in purchasing clothing. Was this because there were too many messages being shoved into the pipeline or because an entire generation had become immune to advertising?
Douglas Coupland’s 1991 novel, Generation X defined some forty-seven million 17- to 28- year-old Americans as a generation that was lost to advertising. Madison avenue latched on to this proclamation and soon advertisers began trying different ways to reach this generation.
X-ers soon were appearing in ads everywhere. Subaru ran a campaign in which an X’er compares the car to hard-core music, a converse ad featured an X’er yelling “We don’t want to be in a beer commercial” Sprite ran an ad featuring a young man saying “he is sick of some celebrity trying to sell him something,” gap ran a counterculture icon series featuring Anthony Kiedes (of the Red Hot Chili Peppers).
This audience had been advertised to so many times, that they were no longer taking the sales pitch. They were essentially saying “ok, the jig is up, at least if you’re going to try and sell me something, do it well and don’t take yourself too seriously.” This spawned commercials like the energizer rabbit marching through fake commercials of other products, Subaru ads that mock the zero to sixty acceleration, parodies of bimbo beer commercials and Pepsi ads that mock taste tests by showing chimpanzees as subjects.
Another approach advertisers took to get noticed was to sell so softly that the product is almost overlooked. In the 80s the product was deemed to no longer be the hero, and in the 90s the product was not even a participant.
DDB Needham Worldwide created a series of Ads for Bugle Boy jeans that showed busty bikini-clad women frolicking across the screen for thirty seconds. Calvin Klein ads showed images of young women in jeans fondling themselves or young people making love on the beach.
Agencies continued creating ads like this because their targeted audience was responding. Perhaps the audience wasn’t immune; they were just tired of hearing the same boring things for too long.
A study performed in 1992 showed that consumers considered advertising less in decision-making. Of the cross section of Americans studied, fewer than 15 percent of people relied on advertising in buying appliances, 10 percent or fewer in buying furniture, 7 percent or fewer in making banking decisions, 9 percent fewer in buying automotive supplies and 17 percent fewer in purchasing clothing. Was this because there were too many messages being shoved into the pipeline or because an entire generation had become immune to advertising?
Douglas Coupland’s 1991 novel, Generation X defined some forty-seven million 17- to 28- year-old Americans as a generation that was lost to advertising. Madison avenue latched on to this proclamation and soon advertisers began trying different ways to reach this generation.
X-ers soon were appearing in ads everywhere. Subaru ran a campaign in which an X’er compares the car to hard-core music, a converse ad featured an X’er yelling “We don’t want to be in a beer commercial” Sprite ran an ad featuring a young man saying “he is sick of some celebrity trying to sell him something,” gap ran a counterculture icon series featuring Anthony Kiedes (of the Red Hot Chili Peppers).
This audience had been advertised to so many times, that they were no longer taking the sales pitch. They were essentially saying “ok, the jig is up, at least if you’re going to try and sell me something, do it well and don’t take yourself too seriously.” This spawned commercials like the energizer rabbit marching through fake commercials of other products, Subaru ads that mock the zero to sixty acceleration, parodies of bimbo beer commercials and Pepsi ads that mock taste tests by showing chimpanzees as subjects.
Another approach advertisers took to get noticed was to sell so softly that the product is almost overlooked. In the 80s the product was deemed to no longer be the hero, and in the 90s the product was not even a participant.
DDB Needham Worldwide created a series of Ads for Bugle Boy jeans that showed busty bikini-clad women frolicking across the screen for thirty seconds. Calvin Klein ads showed images of young women in jeans fondling themselves or young people making love on the beach.
Agencies continued creating ads like this because their targeted audience was responding. Perhaps the audience wasn’t immune; they were just tired of hearing the same boring things for too long.
The Dot-Com Boom
By 1996 Internet usage had become commonplace with explosive growth occurring between 1996-97. As interest in this phenomenon continued to grow, so did the interest in Internet advertising. However, the Internet was very new its effectiveness was uncertain, so online advertising was relatively modest. The total advertising revenue in 1997 was estimated at $400-$699 million, 12 times more than that of 1995, but still only a small portion of all advertising spending.
Bob Schmetterer about creating some of the first banner ads in 1994: We wondered how big a deal the Internet would be. How many households would use it? It was still dial-up back then, with that funny noise, and slow to load. Would this become real media?
From 1997-1998 the valuation of dot-com stocks soared to record numbers and attracted venture-capital money while interest rates started to drop, increasing the pool of available start-up funds. Google was quietly created in September while a flurry of other e-brands burst upon the scene, backed by deep-pocketed investors: eToys, Flooz.com, Kozmo.com and Pets.com. Agencies were dealing with a grab bag of clients, the likes of which many had never seen before.
From February 1998 to October 2000, 413 dot-com marketers spent an estimated $6.5 billion in advertising; ironically much of it was spent via old-media vehicles like TV.
With the market now flooded with e-brands, clients were simply fighting for name recognition. Cliff Freeman & Partners’ commercial for Outpost.com may best sum up the creative ethos of the moment. Designed for no other reason than to generate attention and some angry mail—the ad featured an assistant loading live gerbils into a cannon and trying to fire them through the second “o” in Outpost -- but instead sending most of the creatures straight into a cement wall. (What this had to do with a site that sold electronic equipment was anyone’s guess.)
The dot-com marketing frenzy peaked with the airing of Super Bowl XXXIV in January 2000. 17 dot-com companies advertised, accounting for nearly half of all the event’s marketers -- paying an average $2.2 million for a 30-second spot.
By the end of 2000, skepticism about dot-coms’ market viability began to batter their once-stratospheric stock prices and many high-profile dot-com brands began to go belly up. By January 2001, just three dot-coms bought advertising spots during Super Bowl XXXV.
Bob Schmetterer about creating some of the first banner ads in 1994: We wondered how big a deal the Internet would be. How many households would use it? It was still dial-up back then, with that funny noise, and slow to load. Would this become real media?
From 1997-1998 the valuation of dot-com stocks soared to record numbers and attracted venture-capital money while interest rates started to drop, increasing the pool of available start-up funds. Google was quietly created in September while a flurry of other e-brands burst upon the scene, backed by deep-pocketed investors: eToys, Flooz.com, Kozmo.com and Pets.com. Agencies were dealing with a grab bag of clients, the likes of which many had never seen before.
From February 1998 to October 2000, 413 dot-com marketers spent an estimated $6.5 billion in advertising; ironically much of it was spent via old-media vehicles like TV.
With the market now flooded with e-brands, clients were simply fighting for name recognition. Cliff Freeman & Partners’ commercial for Outpost.com may best sum up the creative ethos of the moment. Designed for no other reason than to generate attention and some angry mail—the ad featured an assistant loading live gerbils into a cannon and trying to fire them through the second “o” in Outpost -- but instead sending most of the creatures straight into a cement wall. (What this had to do with a site that sold electronic equipment was anyone’s guess.)
The dot-com marketing frenzy peaked with the airing of Super Bowl XXXIV in January 2000. 17 dot-com companies advertised, accounting for nearly half of all the event’s marketers -- paying an average $2.2 million for a 30-second spot.
By the end of 2000, skepticism about dot-coms’ market viability began to batter their once-stratospheric stock prices and many high-profile dot-com brands began to go belly up. By January 2001, just three dot-coms bought advertising spots during Super Bowl XXXV.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)