Filed under: advertising | Tags: durham, friday morning, halloween, pumpkin, s+r medical communications
After nearly 2 weeks of feasting on Halloween candy, we still have few post-halloween treats to share with everyone.
Filed under: advertising | Tags: ad, advertising, Big Pharma, brand manager, brands, business week, client, creative, marketing
Every brand manager, marketing director, CMO, account person and creative wants to know - what makes the perfect ad? Is it the headline or the visual? What about that brilliant logo? Maybe it’s the call-to-action or the tagline that keeps them coming back for more? Or that one design element that caused you to stop in your tracks and stand at attention?
Whatever it may be, the folks at Business Week (Steve McKee) have created a simple list to tell you what it shouldn’t be:
1. Boring. Yep, boring. Why do we watch TV, listen to the radio, read the newspaper, or go online? Three reasons: information, entertainment, and engagement. Ads that fail to offer at least two of these three benefits flop.
2. Boorish. You shouldn’t think of your advertising as being about your brand, you should think of it as an extension of your brand (see “A Practical Guide to Branding”). If it’s loud, annoying, insulting, offensive, or self-centered, people will think the same of your products or services (see “The Cocktail Party Test for Advertising”).
3. Safe. If you worry too much about offending someone, you’re likely to not attract anyone.
4. Trying to do too much. The best an ad can do is communicate one single, compelling idea, and in the age of the Internet—when people know they can go online to get all the additional information they need—it’s crazy to ask an ad to do more than that.
5. Fixing a non-advertising problem. A common mistake many companies make is trying to use advertising to fix another problem. It may be faulty or outdated product design, an uncompetitive cost structure, customer service letdowns, or any number of other things. It’s not as if they do so intentionally; it’s just that it’s a whole lot easier to put on a new coat of paint than it is to fix the foundation that’s causing the drywall to crack.
Read Steve’s full list here.
Filed under: advertising | Tags: advertising, AdViews, marketing, pharma, pharmaceutical, television, youtube
Simple and effective. More classics can be found at AdViews.
Filed under: advertising | Tags: adweek, consumer opinion, government, healthcare, medicare, reform
A new report in Adweek tackles the hot topic of healthcare in America and states, “It’s a good thing Americans’ opinions about healthcare aren’t symptoms of an illness. If they were, we’d see a lot of perplexed professionals in white lab coats hovering over the body politic as they tried to wring a diagnosis out of all the mutually contradictory indications.”
The report, by Mark Dolliver, takes an in-depth look at healthcare-reform, consumer opinion, and how marketing may have a key effect on the outcome. Dolliver highlights that,
“The chief obstacle to reform is that large majorities are satisfied with their current care and coverage; most, albeit fewer, also call their costs tolerable. Dissatisfaction with the system overall, and worry about future costs, are countered by broad concerns that change could worsen the quality, choice and coverage most Americans enjoy now.”
Dolliver also notes how marketing has been strategically used to help sway opinions.
“If healthcare reform is funded in part by reductions in the payments the government provides to hospitals for care of people covered by Medicare and other governmental programs, this will put additional pressure on hospitals to bring in privately insured patients who’ll be paying full price. As such, expect to see more hospital advertising aimed at such paying customers.”
Check out Doliver’s full report here.
Filed under: advertising, pharmaceutical marketing | Tags: Big Pharma, brands, drugs, FDA, healthcare, patient education, physicians, products, relationship, safety, trust
What needs to be done? Start here.
Filed under: advertising | Tags: advertising, Big Pharma, brands, marketing, pharma, s&r communications group
In an earlier posting, I described the evolution of agencies and how clients expect and demand that agencies generate ideas, strategies and creative executions in essence, for no charge. That is, an issue or opportunity is identified and the agency creates an idea. Perhaps the client even invites other agencies to submit ideas, and/or may even bid the original provider’s idea out, yet no one gets compensated.
In a recent Medical Marketing & Media article by Mike Myers, Palio, Mr. Myers provides his own thoughts for a fair agency value/compensation strategy. While I agree in principle with what Mr. Myers writes, I am still confused as to how the agency sets the program costs upon a true basis of value and fair compensation. That being said, I totally agree that agencies should indeed be fairly compensated for the ideas they bring, especially if the client requests the agency to expend time, resources and effort.
To illustrate my point perhaps more humorously, if not poignantly, I recently came across the following video on YouTube. To use the old adage that a picture (video clip) says a thousand words, I think you will get it after watching. Enjoy!