Friday, July 29, 2005
MINORITY EDUCATION
Company: United Negro College Fund
Ad: "Schedule", "Neighborhood"
Market: USA
Product: Minority Education Support
Agency: Young and Rubicam
Year: N/A
Link: http://www.adcouncil.org/campaigns/United_Negro_College_Fund/
Verdict: 6 out of 10
=======================================
After a couple of months summer hiatus, I return with new executions of a classic campaign. In the last blog, I lamented US advertising; now it is only appropriate that I evaluate something more worthwhile from the land of opportunities.
The advertiser is the United Negro College Fund, an organisation that supports minority education in the US.
As per the linked website: "In the 33 years since the inception of this campaign, UNCF has continued to help more than 350,000 minority students graduate from college. The new spots for this campaign focus on the self-fulfilled benefits of those determined students who are able to attend college due to the generosity of others. They also remind us of the tragic reality of unrealized potential."
The classic selling line of this campaign has remained constant and profound:
"A mind is a terrible thing to waste".
The collection of these two new executions, approach the issue from two angles:
"Neighborhood" illustrates the problem. The untapped potential, the missed opportunity, the betrayed hope.
"Schedule" celebrates the benefit. The promising potential, the opportunity offered, the inherent hope.
Of course, over the history of this campaign, there have been many executions of varying quality. Undoubtedly, the campaign has benefited from message and selling line consistency. And this alone, is a great learning for marketers. Brand equity is enhanced with consistency. Refrain from the temptation to change frequently. Learn what elements of your communication are embedded in your equity, that is, transcend time, and ensure you maintain them. Then, feel free to modernise the rest to stay in touch with changing times. For clarity, brand equity is always determined by the consumers, never by the wishes of the marketers. Said differently, it does not matter what the marketer believes is communicated, but what the consumer understands and associates with the brand.
These two executions are in isolation incomplete, but together, like ying/yang constitute the full story. "Neighborhood" has more of the creative insight; hits more emotional overtones, dramatises the problem. But because it fails to reach the solution, it leaves tne viewer hanging. Rather sad, but moving to action? Unsure.
"Schedule" is upbeat, invites the viewer to appreciate the achievement. But because it fails to grab the issue, it leaves the viewer in a rosy world . Rather sugary, but moving to action? Unsure.
Unfortunately, unless the media schedule allowed each viewer to see both executions, we need to evaluate each execution on its own. Again, one more lesson for marketers. Perhaps a campaign of several executions communicates the complete story, but in reality, a viewer sees one spot at a time; so each execution needs to be sufficient to tell the whole story. In this case, they are incomplete.
Good ideas, leveraging well a historical campaign. But each execution could have been more robust, more complete representation of problem / solution. Fortunately, the historically built equity for the message allows for some average executions.
Evaluation:
In following our standard evaluation methodology:
The ads are understandable, relevant, credible and persuasive. Branding is moderate. The executions are somewhat engaging but hardly distinctive and memorable, given their historically consistent themes. I would suspect that they support the message but do not go as far as instigate immediate call to action given their frequently seen creative stories.
Detailed Score: 6 out of 10
1. Understandable: H
2. Relevant: H
3. Credible: H
4. Persuasive: H
5. Well-branded: M
6. Ownable: M
7. Distinctive: L
8. Memorable: L
9. Engaging: M
10. Makes Me Buy: M
Wonderful historical campaign, textbook equity consistency, strategically on the spot, but creatively nothing extraordinary. The strength of this campaign and the importance of the message deserve more creative risk. After all, the established equity allows it....
G. Evans
July 2005
Ad: "Schedule", "Neighborhood"
Market: USA
Product: Minority Education Support
Agency: Young and Rubicam
Year: N/A
Link: http://www.adcouncil.org/campaigns/United_Negro_College_Fund/
Verdict: 6 out of 10
=======================================
After a couple of months summer hiatus, I return with new executions of a classic campaign. In the last blog, I lamented US advertising; now it is only appropriate that I evaluate something more worthwhile from the land of opportunities.
The advertiser is the United Negro College Fund, an organisation that supports minority education in the US.
As per the linked website: "In the 33 years since the inception of this campaign, UNCF has continued to help more than 350,000 minority students graduate from college. The new spots for this campaign focus on the self-fulfilled benefits of those determined students who are able to attend college due to the generosity of others. They also remind us of the tragic reality of unrealized potential."
The classic selling line of this campaign has remained constant and profound:
"A mind is a terrible thing to waste".
The collection of these two new executions, approach the issue from two angles:
"Neighborhood" illustrates the problem. The untapped potential, the missed opportunity, the betrayed hope.
"Schedule" celebrates the benefit. The promising potential, the opportunity offered, the inherent hope.
Of course, over the history of this campaign, there have been many executions of varying quality. Undoubtedly, the campaign has benefited from message and selling line consistency. And this alone, is a great learning for marketers. Brand equity is enhanced with consistency. Refrain from the temptation to change frequently. Learn what elements of your communication are embedded in your equity, that is, transcend time, and ensure you maintain them. Then, feel free to modernise the rest to stay in touch with changing times. For clarity, brand equity is always determined by the consumers, never by the wishes of the marketers. Said differently, it does not matter what the marketer believes is communicated, but what the consumer understands and associates with the brand.
These two executions are in isolation incomplete, but together, like ying/yang constitute the full story. "Neighborhood" has more of the creative insight; hits more emotional overtones, dramatises the problem. But because it fails to reach the solution, it leaves tne viewer hanging. Rather sad, but moving to action? Unsure.
"Schedule" is upbeat, invites the viewer to appreciate the achievement. But because it fails to grab the issue, it leaves the viewer in a rosy world . Rather sugary, but moving to action? Unsure.
Unfortunately, unless the media schedule allowed each viewer to see both executions, we need to evaluate each execution on its own. Again, one more lesson for marketers. Perhaps a campaign of several executions communicates the complete story, but in reality, a viewer sees one spot at a time; so each execution needs to be sufficient to tell the whole story. In this case, they are incomplete.
Good ideas, leveraging well a historical campaign. But each execution could have been more robust, more complete representation of problem / solution. Fortunately, the historically built equity for the message allows for some average executions.
Evaluation:
In following our standard evaluation methodology:
The ads are understandable, relevant, credible and persuasive. Branding is moderate. The executions are somewhat engaging but hardly distinctive and memorable, given their historically consistent themes. I would suspect that they support the message but do not go as far as instigate immediate call to action given their frequently seen creative stories.
Detailed Score: 6 out of 10
1. Understandable: H
2. Relevant: H
3. Credible: H
4. Persuasive: H
5. Well-branded: M
6. Ownable: M
7. Distinctive: L
8. Memorable: L
9. Engaging: M
10. Makes Me Buy: M
Wonderful historical campaign, textbook equity consistency, strategically on the spot, but creatively nothing extraordinary. The strength of this campaign and the importance of the message deserve more creative risk. After all, the established equity allows it....
G. Evans
July 2005
