Dear beer industry:
Why are you in such denial?
The reason people don’t buy as much of your beer ISN’T THE BOTTLE OR THE PACKAGING. It’s the fact that people have made a better (tasting) product. Just because people used to drink it doesn’t mean they are always going to. People also used to eat tuna casserole and Jell-O salads for dinner. Do you know why they don’t anymore? Hint: IT’S NOT THE PACKAGING IT’S BECAUSE THAT SHIT IS DISGUSTING.
To sum up:
Thanks for listening,
Because when moms around the world want info on cleaning products, it sure as fuck better be mobile-first.
Side note 1: What is a digital mom? A mom with a phone? Or like a fake computer-generated mom. SIRI, I SPILLED MY JUICE BOX!
Side note 2: -1 for not working in “disrupt.” Seems like wasted opportunity. How much better is a DISRUPTIVE, global, mobile-first site for digital moms.
Side note 3: So much better, obviously.
Hey everyone, sell yourself out on social media by tagging us and using a stupid hashtag and we’ll give you a sample of a candy bar! Because social media! And diabetes!
First, how little self-esteem do you have to have to do all of this crap for a candy bar that costs less than a dollar? Is your time really worth that little?
Second, a sample? Seriously Snickers? Make people do all this shit and then stick them with a fun size bar? Thanks for nothing.
Third, does Snickers think having people spam their friends with “Hungry Face” pictures will make make people buy more Snickers? Like “wow, I’m hungry—looks like my friend just posted something about Snickers makes yo not hungry. I should buy one!” THAT IS NOT HOW THE WORLD WORKS.
Here’s a hungry face for you. Enjoy!
Pro Tip: People aren’t stupid, brands. Don’t treat them like they are.
Who is in control of the way a brand is perceived? The brand or the people? In the pre-digital age it was obviously the brand, since people didn’t have an easy way to push out anything off-brand on a wide scale. (Besides, you know, creating and producing your own TV commercial, buying airtime across the country, and then getting the three big networks to actually run it …)
Obviously, social media has changed that—to the extent that some people say that brands are no longer in control of their own brand image. I don’t know if I would go that far, but it’s certainly a two-way conversation now.
Exhibit 1: This CoverGirl ad for the NFL, which someone Photoshopped a black eye onto after the NFL’s very public recent issues with domestic violence. (If you somehow haven’t heard about any of this, you can catch up here: http://mashable.com/2014/09/15/covergirl-ad-nfl-roger-goodell.)
Pretty good ad, right? (The “new” one—the original one was stupid.)
Apparently I’m not the only who thinks so—check out the current search results for “covergirl nfl”:
Oops. I’m sure this is what CoverGirl had in mind when it (presumably) paid millions to use the NFL logo …
Pro Tip: If you’re a brand, you’d better think twice about who you are associating with—if you hang out with the wrong crowd, the people will call you on it.
What is that different thing you are hungry for? That big meat-filled object you are shoving in your face? I AM NOT SURE WHAT THIS MEANS.
Does this logo for “Dirty Bird” restaurant look like a certain part of the male anatomy? Spoiler alert: YES. Double spoiler: the place is called DIRTY BIRD—what did you expect?
Pro Tip: When you make Twitter jokes about “filling your mouth with breasts” (chicken, natch) it’s harder to claim that any phallic resemblance is just a coincidence.
(Found via Fast Company)
This has been going around, but—surprise!—some random people made a better Coke commercial than Coke has made in years. I mean, I like Polar Bears and don’t want them to go extinct and all that, but I’m not sure how they are supposed to make me want to buy a soft drink that’s mostly just food coloring and corn syrup? IF GLOBAL WARMING DOESN’T KILL THE POLAR BEARS, COKE WILL! ENJOY!