J O'B's first topic this morning - the Sainsbury ad. His view is the same as mine - all the books, films and TV programmes about WW1 are produced to make money, so why not an ad, so long as it's respectful?
Out of interest how many people will go to Sainsbury's because of the ad ? Likewise, John Lewis because of the penguins?
I don't think either would make me want to visit either store, based on the ads.
Disclaimer - I have visited both stores in the past week, but because they both had something I wanted and not because of the ads !
J O'B's first topic this morning - the Sainsbury ad. His view is the same as mine - all the books, films and TV programmes about WW1 produced to make money, so why not an ad, so long as it's respectful?
I agree. I really can't understand why some people are getting their knickers in a twist over what is a perfectly good advert. However, for both Mr Barkes and Mr O'Brien to discuss it in the space of a few hours, it clearly must be an issue for some people.
Out of interest how many people will go to Sainsbury's because of the ad ? Likewise, John Lewis because of the penguins?
I don't think either would make me want to visit either store, based on the ads.
Disclaimer - I have visited both stores in the past week, but because they both had something I wanted and not because of the ads !
Although I'm not too fond of chocolate, I like the look of the retro bar featured in the Sainsbury's ad so I might be tempted to drop into my local store to buy one, especially as all profits go to The Royal British Legion.
Did anyone else listen to the Radio Academy talk Tweeted by JO'Brien between himself and Iain Lee yesterday? I found it interesting. Curious though. Who was the 'tick skinned' 'Older presenter that they refer to in the part from 35 mins in?
I was there at the discussion some months ago. I remember posting about it after the event.
I don't think we did find out who this person was. I can only presume if it is someone that has done more years than both of them, must surely be someone at the BBC. However, I cannot think of anyone that has been doing phone-iins for that many years.
I was hoping the YT link was going to be a video of the event (and I would have looked for myself!) . I have had the audio on my PC for sometime.
Out of interest how many people will go to Sainsbury's because of the ad ? Likewise, John Lewis because of the penguins?
I don't think either would make me want to visit either store, based on the ads.
Disclaimer - I have visited both stores in the past week, but because they both had something I wanted and not because of the ads !
It's a mystery to me but I think, given the amount of advertising carried out over the years it *must* work in some way - even if only to raise the awareness of a brand name. But even this analysis begs the question of why advertising agencies create artistic or tiresome fluff when they could just have a voice-over repeating a name ad nauseam for the duration of the purchased airtime.
It's a mystery to me but I think, given the amount of advertising carried out over the years it *must* work in some way - even if only to raise the awareness of a brand name. But even this analysis begs the question of why advertising agencies create artistic or tiresome fluff when they could just have a voice-over repeating a name ad nauseam for the duration of the purchased airtime.
Because they want people to actually watch it, rather than switch to another channel.
Having said that, LBC come perilously close sometimes. Playing the same ad twice in one ad break is well beyond acceptable and smacks of desparate attempts to brainwash the audience.
It's a mystery to me but I think, given the amount of advertising carried out over the years it *must* work in some way - even if only to raise the awareness of a brand name. But even this analysis begs the question of why advertising agencies create artistic or tiresome fluff when they could just have a voice-over repeating a name ad nauseam for the duration of the purchased airtime.
Some countries in the world use the word 'propaganda' for 'advertising'. We don't, for obvious reasons of wartime references, Goebbels etc. But as you say, it's about (at a bare minimum) raising awareness of product - it can be somewhat subliminal or even subversive. Companies will pay a lot to have their brand associated with 'good', 'positive' connotations. Not on LBC, though, unfortunately!
It's a mystery to me but I think, given the amount of advertising carried out over the years it *must* work in some way - even if only to raise the awareness of a brand name. But even this analysis begs the question of why advertising agencies create artistic or tiresome fluff when they could just have a voice-over repeating a name ad nauseam for the duration of the purchased airtime.
It works on the gullible and impressionable and there's no shortage of them.. Eg kids are candy fodder for advertisers Britain hasn't become known as a rip-off society for nothing. Neither Sainsbury nor John Lewis would get me to put my shoes on to visit their stores just because of an advert. But clearly there are enough fools out there who will drop everything and make a bee-line for their stores after seeing one of their 'emotional' adverts. Needless to say I've not seen either of them thankfully.
fools out there who will drop everything and make a bee-line for their stores after seeing one of their 'emotional' adverts
Advertising does not work like that even remotely. It is not a newsflash expecting you to act immediately. It is designed to impress on your subconscious for later recall. It works for the same reason that Derren Brown appears to have supernatural psychic gifts.
Advertising does not work like that even remotely. It is not a newsflash expecting you to act immediately. It is designed to impress on your subconscious for later recall. It works for the same reason that Derren Brown appears to have supernatural psychic gifts.
I agree - even if you hate an advert, you'll still remember it. Ocean Finance still makes me shudder! Occasionally an advert might make me investigate further, but only if I actually wanted the product in the first place.
There's an interesting difference between adverts for Ocean Finance, Wonga and their ilk, and those for John Lewis and Sainsbury's. The people at whom the Wonga adverts are aimed are desperate and looking for a solution, so all the company has to do is to get that name in their heads and make it easy for them to call. Doesn't matter how bad or annoying the advert is, so long as the name sticks, because their audience NEEDS them. With John Lewis/Sainsbury's, the intention is to create a good feeling and a sense of belonging - you're the sort of person who really loves a cosy, old-fashioned Christmas, and John Lewis is there to provide it. So they have to produce something that pulls the heartstrings and makes you identify with them, because they have your values and they can provide your sort of Christmas. Less need, but much more emotional appeal.
Advertising does not work like that even remotely. It is not a newsflash expecting you to act immediately. It is designed to impress on your subconscious for later recall. It works for the same reason that Derren Brown appears to have supernatural psychic gifts.
Yes it does, which is precisely why you get adverts saying things like "Hurry while stocks last" or "Amazing offer only until the end of the month", aimed purely at getting people to panic buy.. There wouldn't be any point to those sort of adverts if they were purely for 'later recall' as you put it.
Yes it does, which is precisely why you get adverts saying things like "Hurry while stocks last" or "Amazing offer only until the end of the month", aimed purely at getting people to panic buy.. There wouldn't be any point to those sort of adverts if they were purely for 'later recall' as you put it.
Advertising is far more subtle these days and is less about directly promoting a particular product and more about creating a positive impression about an items, shop or service. If you look at this year's crop of Christmas TV adverts for the major retailers, it's noticeable how many of hardly feature items that they actually sell.
Eastern seaboard USA ....perfect for discerning LBC listeners .Stewie on at bedtime (11pm)...insomniacs get Ferrari and the increasingly woeful hero of the oppressed James O Volvo is on at who cares less O clock ,
Steve says he's got about 30 flannels in his bathroom.
So he won't throw flannels away, but he will throw once-worn socks and drawers away. He's as daft as a toothbrush, I'm afraid ladies and gentlemen, which is good.
I haven't noticed any festive ads on LBC yet, although they tend to advertise services rather than goods. I hated the 'Give a Garmin' one with every fibre of my being!! !!
I haven't noticed any festive ads on LBC yet, although they tend to advertise services rather than goods. I hated the 'Give a Garmin' one with every fibre of my being!! !!
I'm not easily lured by advertising. As much as I like the Warburtons crumpets ad: on LBC although not festive, I wouldn't necessarily go out and buy some.
Yes it does, which is precisely why you get adverts saying things like "Hurry while stocks last" or "Amazing offer only until the end of the month", aimed purely at getting people to panic buy.. There wouldn't be any point to those sort of adverts if they were purely for 'later recall' as you put it.
There seems to be some psychology at play and even though I shared a house with an advertising exec in the past such was never discussed.
It's revealing how the time imperative is mostly always present - "...but hurry ... offer closes on...". Sometimes it sounds like you could construct a functional advert entirely from clichés.
Advertising does not work like that even remotely. It is not a newsflash expecting you to act immediately. It is designed to impress on your subconscious for later recall. It works for the same reason that Derren Brown appears to have supernatural psychic gifts.
I recall an interview, still on YouTube I expect, between Derren and the philosopher Nigel Warburton. Derren made an interesting statement that apparently gullible people are not the most susceptible to hypnotic influence.
Advertising is far more subtle these days and is less about directly promoting a particular product and more about creating a positive impression about an items, shop or service. If you look at this year's crop of Christmas TV adverts for the major retailers, it's noticeable how many of hardly feature items that they actually sell.
Exactly. I lived in the US in the 1970s and I remember all these adverts of guys just standing there outside their garage/shop or whatever and telling everyone how good they were! Probably cost peanuts to produce, and there was no psychology at all. You might get someone to visit Joe Schmoo's tyre shop once, but probably no more.
If, on the other hand, you promote a whole positive lifestyle that appeals to the customer, and make them feel good about it, you've got them forever (or at least until a better advert comes along).
I recall an interview, still on YouTube I expect, between Derren and the philosopher Nigel Warburton. Derren made an interesting statement that apparently gullible people are not the most susceptible to hypnotic influence.
I was told by a hypnotist once that military people, for example would be the most susceptible because they are used to receiving orders.
I was also told that you cannot be made to do anything against your will - so if a domineering woman brought in a feeble man and told the hypnotist to stop him smoking, it would probably not work as that maybe his only pleasure in life!!
It would be great if a Forum Member in Advertising could explain how the use of a small number of actors, spread very thin over a range of LBC radio ads, could be anything other than extremely irritating.
For example....this guy:
"Dad: Do you ever stop being a radio voice over?" "I can't help it love!"
That guy is surely going to destroy his career, at any moment now, due to chronic over exposure.
The woman who "told you the boiler was on the blink" is also all over the place pretending to be young women and older women.
It would be great if a Forum Member in Advertising could explain how the use of a small number of actors, spread very thin over a range of LBC radio ads, could be anything other than extremely irritating.
For example....this guy:
"Dad: Do you ever stop being a radio voice over?" "I can't help it love!"
That guy is surely going to destroy his career, at any moment now, due to chronic over exposure.
The woman who "told you the boiler was on the blink" is also all over the place pretending to be young women and older women.
The one who does the 'broadband'.ad, as well as a few others, has the most hideous blustering voice ever. He's probably the boss of the ad company, saving money by using himself, because surely no-one else would employ such a horrid noise for voiceovers.
Maybe it is just me, but I don't listen with any great intent to the v/o on ads.
If I was an advertiser I would not have the presenter (normally NF) do a live read of my ad. They are read so expressionless. I wonder if they are cheaper because they don't have to be 'produced', or more expensive because they are 'hiring' the voice of a 'top radio personality' (?!) to almost endorse the product ?
I am available for reading ads - and I am not that expensive !!!!
Comments
Out of interest how many people will go to Sainsbury's because of the ad ? Likewise, John Lewis because of the penguins?
I don't think either would make me want to visit either store, based on the ads.
Disclaimer - I have visited both stores in the past week, but because they both had something I wanted and not because of the ads !
I agree. I really can't understand why some people are getting their knickers in a twist over what is a perfectly good advert. However, for both Mr Barkes and Mr O'Brien to discuss it in the space of a few hours, it clearly must be an issue for some people.
Although I'm not too fond of chocolate, I like the look of the retro bar featured in the Sainsbury's ad so I might be tempted to drop into my local store to buy one, especially as all profits go to The Royal British Legion.
I was there at the discussion some months ago. I remember posting about it after the event.
I don't think we did find out who this person was. I can only presume if it is someone that has done more years than both of them, must surely be someone at the BBC. However, I cannot think of anyone that has been doing phone-iins for that many years.
I was hoping the YT link was going to be a video of the event (and I would have looked for myself!) . I have had the audio on my PC for sometime.
It's a mystery to me but I think, given the amount of advertising carried out over the years it *must* work in some way - even if only to raise the awareness of a brand name. But even this analysis begs the question of why advertising agencies create artistic or tiresome fluff when they could just have a voice-over repeating a name ad nauseam for the duration of the purchased airtime.
Because they want people to actually watch it, rather than switch to another channel.
Having said that, LBC come perilously close sometimes. Playing the same ad twice in one ad break is well beyond acceptable and smacks of desparate attempts to brainwash the audience.
Thanks for that
Advertising does not work like that even remotely. It is not a newsflash expecting you to act immediately. It is designed to impress on your subconscious for later recall. It works for the same reason that Derren Brown appears to have supernatural psychic gifts.
He does live up to his name
I agree - even if you hate an advert, you'll still remember it. Ocean Finance still makes me shudder! Occasionally an advert might make me investigate further, but only if I actually wanted the product in the first place.
There's an interesting difference between adverts for Ocean Finance, Wonga and their ilk, and those for John Lewis and Sainsbury's. The people at whom the Wonga adverts are aimed are desperate and looking for a solution, so all the company has to do is to get that name in their heads and make it easy for them to call. Doesn't matter how bad or annoying the advert is, so long as the name sticks, because their audience NEEDS them. With John Lewis/Sainsbury's, the intention is to create a good feeling and a sense of belonging - you're the sort of person who really loves a cosy, old-fashioned Christmas, and John Lewis is there to provide it. So they have to produce something that pulls the heartstrings and makes you identify with them, because they have your values and they can provide your sort of Christmas. Less need, but much more emotional appeal.
Because he just loves being shouty, aggressive and rude, for any reason.
Advertising is far more subtle these days and is less about directly promoting a particular product and more about creating a positive impression about an items, shop or service. If you look at this year's crop of Christmas TV adverts for the major retailers, it's noticeable how many of hardly feature items that they actually sell.
Very good.
So he won't throw flannels away, but he will throw once-worn socks and drawers away. He's as daft as a toothbrush, I'm afraid ladies and gentlemen, which is good.
I'm not easily lured by advertising. As much as I like the Warburtons crumpets ad: on LBC although not festive, I wouldn't necessarily go out and buy some.
There seems to be some psychology at play and even though I shared a house with an advertising exec in the past such was never discussed.
It's revealing how the time imperative is mostly always present - "...but hurry ... offer closes on...". Sometimes it sounds like you could construct a functional advert entirely from clichés.
I recall an interview, still on YouTube I expect, between Derren and the philosopher Nigel Warburton. Derren made an interesting statement that apparently gullible people are not the most susceptible to hypnotic influence.
Exactly. I lived in the US in the 1970s and I remember all these adverts of guys just standing there outside their garage/shop or whatever and telling everyone how good they were! Probably cost peanuts to produce, and there was no psychology at all. You might get someone to visit Joe Schmoo's tyre shop once, but probably no more.
If, on the other hand, you promote a whole positive lifestyle that appeals to the customer, and make them feel good about it, you've got them forever (or at least until a better advert comes along).
I was told by a hypnotist once that military people, for example would be the most susceptible because they are used to receiving orders.
I was also told that you cannot be made to do anything against your will - so if a domineering woman brought in a feeble man and told the hypnotist to stop him smoking, it would probably not work as that maybe his only pleasure in life!!
Sorry this is really OT.
For example....this guy:
"Dad: Do you ever stop being a radio voice over?"
"I can't help it love!"
That guy is surely going to destroy his career, at any moment now, due to chronic over exposure.
The woman who "told you the boiler was on the blink" is also all over the place pretending to be young women and older women.
The one who does the 'broadband'.ad, as well as a few others, has the most hideous blustering voice ever. He's probably the boss of the ad company, saving money by using himself, because surely no-one else would employ such a horrid noise for voiceovers.
If I was an advertiser I would not have the presenter (normally NF) do a live read of my ad. They are read so expressionless. I wonder if they are cheaper because they don't have to be 'produced', or more expensive because they are 'hiring' the voice of a 'top radio personality' (?!) to almost endorse the product ?
I am available for reading ads - and I am not that expensive !!!!