25

Jan

by Jeff

I recently came across this fas­ci­nat­ing post about Apple Mar­ket­ing prin­ci­ples, as artic­u­lated by Apple circa 1977.  Here they are:

2012-01-04_1512

Now, as a mar­keter, the Empa­thy and Focus parts are sec­ond nature — at least in terms of under­stand­ing.  Putting them into prac­tice every day is harder stuff, but any copy­writer that doesn’t under­stand the impor­tance of empathiz­ing with the prospec­tive cus­tomer and focus­ing in on their pri­mary buy­ing moti­va­tions and con­cerns isn’t a copy­writer at all.

It’s the last ele­ment most mar­keters and copy­writ­ers screw up or over­look: the impor­tance of Imputed Qual­ity.  Not nuts and bolts, specification-driven build qual­ity or value for the dol­lar qual­ity.  But qual­ity cues that tap into buy­ers’ pre-existing men­tal imprint of lux­ury and vir­tu­ous man­u­fac­ture.  The telling detail that says everything.

Want to see an exam­ple of imputed qual­ity used in copy?  Here ya go:

ogilvy-rolls-royce-ad

Notice that the actual build qual­ity is detailed by the bul­let points of the body copy, while the imputed qual­ity — the telling detail — is given pride of place within the head­line of the ad itself.*

Of course, this sort of qual­ity cue or imputed qual­ity fac­tor has to be already exist­ing or freshly baked into the prod­uct or ser­vice itself before it can be adver­tised, but rec­og­niz­ing the need for it — and doing the patient research and dig­ging to find it — is one of the major keys to writ­ing copy that works.

Apple of course, is a mas­ter at this, which is one rea­son they are renowned design icons, because inspired design imputes high qual­ity. But it’s also why Apple never skimps on screen qual­ity, key­board feel, and the over­all pol­ish put on their user inter­faces: those are the sort of tan­gi­ble, expe­ri­en­tial things that impute quality.

Yes, of course, we expect real qual­ity from an Apple prod­uct in the sense of free­dom from typ­i­cal PC-like annoy­ances, annoy­ances bril­liantly dra­ma­tized and mocked by Apple’s “I’m a Mac” cam­paign.  But even if you knew noth­ing about Apple or PCs and just LOOKED at the com­pet­ing prod­ucts laid side by side, you’d intu­itively get that one set of prod­ucts were spe­cial and nicer than the rest.  Regard­less of how their inter­nal com­po­nents and specs stacked up.

So Here Are My 3 Take­aways from This:

1) Qual­ity is impor­tant, but qual­ity with­out imputed qual­ity will go unre­warded in the marketplace.

2) Busi­ness own­ers should never expect cus­tomers to rec­og­nize qual­ity and should “bake” imputed qual­ity into their offerings.

3) Copy­writ­ers who fail to use imputed qual­ity cues will end up with under­per­form­ing ad copy.

P.S. — Want to see an already-existing qual­ity cue in action? Check out these guys thud­ding the door closed on a Mercedes:

YouTube Preview Image

P.P.S. — How do I know that Ogilvy dili­gently searched for prod­uct facts that would help him find and rec­og­nize impor­tant qual­ity cues?  Because he listed research twice when explain­ing his copy­writ­ing method­ol­ogy!  Steps 3 and 5 both empha­size the impor­tance of research and facts.

* For a more detailed analy­sis of this famous Ogilvy Ad, check out my old GrokDot­com post.

2010-04-22-Insults1Kind­ness and Pro­fes­sion­al­ism — that’s what great cus­tomer ser­vice boils down to, accord­ing to my col­league Tim Miles.

And while Tim has drilled down to dis­cover the 7 ele­ments in small busi­ness Kind­ness and Pro­fes­sion­al­ism (which you should con­sider a must-read), for me the real genius is in his gen­eral for­mula of “Kind­ness and Pro­fes­sion­al­ism.” Why?

Because it’s the oppo­site of “Adding insult to injury.”

Believe it or not most med­ical mal­prac­tice suits, along with most “United Breaks Gui­tarsPR and word of mouth cat­a­stro­phes all promi­nently fea­ture both ele­ments — often with the “insult” tak­ing prece­dence over the injury.

Imag­ine what would typ­i­cally hap­pen with­out the “Insult.” If united broke the gui­tar and then apol­o­gized and even only par­tially com­pen­sated Dave Car­roll for the loss, do you still think he would have made that video. Think about that: even if the ordeal still cost Dave hun­dreds of dol­lars — even if the “injury” part of the equa­tion was still present — that ele­ment alone would never have sparked a viral YouTube revenge with­out the added injury of an uncar­ing and cal­loused bureau­cratic response.

But flip­ping the equa­tion goes beyond avoid­ing PR night­mares; adding kind­ness to pro­fes­sion­al­ism offers a pow­er­ful men­tal frame­work for cre­at­ing emo­tion­ally com­pelling cus­tomer ser­vice.  And these ele­ments are present in every “WOW” cus­tomer ser­vice story you’ll ever hear or expe­ri­ence, whether it’s the I Heart Zap­pos story, the var­i­ous Nordie sto­ries, and so on.

So, think about it: Kind­ness and Professionalism.

And then head on over to Tim’s blog to see every­thing that can go into each part of that dynamic duo.

Before the big iPhone unveil­ing today, if some­one told you that they had real pic­tures of what the next gen­er­a­tion of the iPhone looked like, and they just showed you some pho­tos, totally devoid of con­text, would you believe them?

Of course not. The claim lacks all credibility.

You can’t pos­si­bly look at pho­tos like that with­out wondering:

  • How could you pos­si­bly have got­ten these, given how pas­sion­ately Apple pro­tects their upcom­ing projects?
  • Even if you DID get legit­i­mate pho­tos, why aren’t Apple’s lawyers send­ing you a cease and desist letter?
  • What evi­dence do I pos­si­bly have that these are real, and weren’t sim­ply photoshopped?
  • And so on.

In short, the con­text is all wrong, so we just know the pho­tos are fakes (or “artists ren­di­tions,” at best). But what about this video?

YouTube Preview Image

Some­how, this video fooled a lot of peo­ple and cre­ated quite a stir before it was proven to be faked. But why? Why is this video so con­vinc­ing when the typ­i­cal “leaked” pho­tos aren’t?

Con­text.

The video pro­vides a con­text which pre­emp­tively answers all of these credibility-killing ques­tions and more.  Accord­ing to the non-verbal sto­ry­telling in the video, the guy who made the video acci­den­tally dis­cov­ered an “unre­leased” page to Apple’s Ger­man Web­site, and took a screen record­ing of it.  That’s how he got the pho­tos, that’s why Apple can’t stop him, because they’re the ones who put the con­tent on the Web, etc.

More impor­tantly, the very style of the Web pages cre­ated by this hoaxster con­vinces us.  When we look at these “acci­den­tally dis­cov­ered” Web pages, they look so faith­ful to Apple’s own design aes­thetic, and the pic­tures of the phone look so faith­ful to the rumors about the new iPhone (curved, metal back, larger screen, thin­ner, etc.) that we tend to believe that maybe the video is for real.

Mak­ing This Dynamic Work for You

The truth is that we ALL rely on con­text every day for almost every deci­sion we make.  Manip­u­late con­text and you manip­u­late people’s per­cep­tions and, ulti­mately, their deci­sions, too:

  • If you’re an ice cream par­lor and you sim­ply put can­is­ters of sam­ple spoons up on the counter, that con­text will cue peo­ple to ask for free tastes, with­out any other change required.
  • An HVAC guy who shows up in a corporate-branded truck and uni­form will look like he’s from a big com­pany, even if the com­pany con­sists entirely of him, his cell­phone, and that truck.
  • Tell me you have the best food in the city, and I’ll be a lot more likely to believe you if you serve that food on linen table cloths rather than plas­tic trays.

Good fic­tion writ­ers know the impor­tance of this instinc­tively, which is why they go to such lengths to estab­lish the right pre­text for their big moments — they “set you up” and then “pay it off” later. Though I am absolutely not advis­ing any­one to hoax their cus­tomers or to adopt a conman’s mind­set, I am ask­ing you to think about the believ­abil­ity of the claims you make, and how the right con­text can cre­ate cus­tomer con­fi­dence that you might not cre­ate any other way.

So what con­text cues are you using now, and what cues should you be using going forward?

7

Sep

by Jeff

selling-the-dream

When writ­ing copy for prod­ucts and ser­vices designed to help some­one do X, the best per­sua­sive tac­tic is to re-sell them on the dream.

In other words, when­ever prospects got into X in the first place, they did so because they had bought into a dream. For instance, most peo­ple take up blog­ging because they buy into the dream of blog­ging: be able to put their “voice” out into the world and find­ing an appre­cia­tive, recep­tive audi­ence that not only tweats, re-tweats, com­ments on, and for­wards their posts, but also find­ing finan­cial ben­e­fit through that same audi­ence buy­ing their books, come to their con­fer­ences, etc.  That’s the dream most peo­ple are chas­ing when they start up a blog.

Need­less to say, the real­ity fre­quently falls short of the dream.  And the frus­tra­tion at the gap is where the incen­tive to buy comes in.

So if you’re sell­ing a ser­vice to help peo­ple with their blog­ging, you not only want to sell the prospect on the ser­vice, but also re-sell them on the dream.  More specif­i­cally, you want to sell them on the abil­ity of your ser­vice to help them re-capture the dream.

Why?

Because they already bought into the dream once, and they haven’t yet given up on it (they’re still X–ing, aren’t they?), and noth­ing is eas­ier than sell­ing some­one on the dream they’ve already bought into.  Doesn’t mat­ter what the dream was, and it doesn’t mat­ter what indus­try you’re in; the eas­i­est sale you’ll ever make is sell­ing the prospect on the dream they’ve already dreamt.

Jonathan Morrow’s new prod­uct BoostBlogTraffic.com is a per­fect exam­ple of that. Check out the prod­uct announce­ment over at Copy­blog­ger and see for your­self.  What’s Jonathan doing for the first 2/3rds of the copy?  Invok­ing the frus­tra­tions and dream-reality gap involved in blog­ging, and then re-selling the blog­ging dream, baby!

Because Jonathan Mor­row knows what he’s doing.

  • So what dream where your prospects chas­ing when­ever they got into your market?
  • Are you mind­ing (and min­ing) the gap between the dream and the prospect’s cur­rent reality?
  • Does your copy re-kindle the dream?

Before any­thing else, watch this not-so-safe-for-work video (lots of cussing):

YouTube Preview Image

Now, here’s what the Alamo Draft­house has to say about the inci­dent:

We do not tol­er­ate peo­ple that talk or text in the the­ater. In fact, before every film, we have sev­eral warn­ings on screen to pre­vent such hap­pen­ings. Occa­sion­ally, some­one doesn’t fol­low the rules, and we do, in fact, kick their asses out of our the­ater. This video is an actual voice­mail from a woman that was kicked out of one of our Austin the­aters. Thanks, anony­mous woman, for being awesome.

Just one ques­tion: after watch­ing that video, do you have any doubt that the Alamo Draft­house is seri­ous about pro­tect­ing the customer’s movie-going experience?

Of course not. Why? Because you know that they not only are will­ing to kick peo­ple out for dis­tract­ing vio­la­tions, but that they’ve done it in the past and are not at all afraid to take some heat for it. This video serves as a mas­ter­ful dis­play of trans­parency in adver­tis­ing, a per­fect form of proof, and a strong sig­nal of intent to any prospec­tive customer.

alamo-drafthouseWhat’s the intent? To pro­vide the ulti­mate in seri­ous move-watching expe­ri­ence. The Alamo Draft­house is a movie the­atre with steep sta­dium seat­ing guar­an­teed to pro­vide an unob­structed view of the screen, and wait­ers and wait­resses that serve real food and beer, allow­ing cus­tomers to bet­ter enjoy the movie and to avoid any hunger or thirst-induced interruptions.

So while this video may indeed repel some customers,it’ll likely attract a lot more. In fact, it’ll be sure to attract the seri­ous movie-goer — which is exactly the kind of cus­tomer the Alamo Draft­house wants.

Not a bad way to turn a cranky, complaint-ridden phone call into a bril­liant piece of viral adver­tis­ing, no?

What about you? How could you take what might be con­sid­ered a down­side or “cost” or com­plaint and turn it into proof of your main UVP?

1

Jun

by Jeff

ben-jerry-smallerSongs with words are recalled more quickly (and with greater accu­racy) than music that has no words. Like­wise, pic­tures with peo­ple in them are viewed more often (and longer) than pic­tures that have no people.”

- Roy H. Williams, Secret For­mu­las of The Wiz­ard of Ads

I’ve always cringed at the men­tion of “per­sonal branding.”

Per­sonal brand­ing” grates on me because I believe that it’s far more prof­itable to under­stand cor­po­rate brand­ing through the lens of per­sonal rep­u­ta­tion than to cre­ate some kind of con­trived rep­u­ta­tion through use of cor­po­rate branding.

For exam­ple, if you under­stand brand as rep­u­ta­tion, you can’t help but under­stand that:

And yet, I do believe that the very best advo­cates for per­sonal brand­ing have a worth­while point or two, namely that:

1. Peo­ple want to do busi­ness with other peo­ple — peo­ple they know and trust

GeorgeZimmerThere’s magic to George Zim­mer promis­ing us that “You’ll like the way you look, I guar­an­tee it.” Or a Lee Iacocca chal­leng­ing us with “If you can find a bet­ter car, buy it.”

The magic lies in the human con­nec­tion, in the sense of doing busi­ness with a live human being invested with the mag­i­cal power of free will, instead of with some face­less orga­ni­za­tion, utterly with­out agency.

When given a choice, we pre­fer busi­nesses run by peo­ple whose pas­sion for what they do extends beyond mak­ing money. Peo­ple who’ll do the right thing; peo­ple that care.

We want to know that Mama Gert Boyle sim­ply won’t stand for her com­pany to pro­duce any­thing less than the best, even to the point of tor­ture test­ing Columbia’s cloth­ing on her own son. This hits us at a far deeper level than tech­ni­cal specifications.

Want to see what it looks like when a small busi­ness puts some of this magic into their advertising?

Check out Tim Mile’s brand­ing cam­paign for a local Heat­ing and Air Con­di­tion­ing Company

2. (most) Peo­ple can’t “know” the real you

011_iacoccatopsalesmanDo you think that any of us actu­ally knows the real Lee Iacocca? Other than his wife, kids, and close friends? Heck no. And yet most of us feel as if we know him. He has a pub­lic persona.

The rea­son most of us don’t have a crafted pub­lic per­sona is because most decent peo­ple shy away from self aggran­dize­ment. It goes against the grain and feels icky.

We’re far more com­fort­able with Jimmy Stewart’s “aw shucks” foot twist­ing than Don­ald Trump’s “I’m the great­est” chest thumping.

We all have to get over that.

We have to grow more com­fort­able both with the need for self-promotion and with the need to pro­vide the pub­lic with a nar­rower and more eas­ily grasped pro­jec­tion of our­selves than could pos­si­bly fit our own com­plex per­son­al­i­ties. We have to be OK with the pub­lic per­ceiv­ing us as some­thing approach­ing a car­i­ca­ture of our real selves.

I’m sure the owner of the HVAC Com­pany that Tim Miles renamed “Dr. Com­fort” prob­a­bly wouldn’t have thought to car­i­ca­tur­ize him­self as a method to brand his com­pany. Nor would he most likely have been too com­fort­able with what must have seemed a boast­ful and over-reaching title — that of “Dr. Comfort.”

And yet the strate­gic use of the Dr. Com­fort per­sona has con­vinced a lot of peo­ple to do busi­ness with him.

How Domino’s Could Have Made “Rate Our Chicken” Even Better

Want to see this at work in a national ad cam­paign?  Check out Tom Wanek’s analy­sis of Domino’s Rate Our Chicken Ad.

Just keep in mind that Tom approaches this analy­sis from a Credibility-based per­spec­tive.  He’s ana­lyz­ing how Domino’s use of trans­parency and sig­nal­ing lends cred­i­bil­ity to their claim of supe­rior chicken.

And from that per­spec­tive, Tom finds fault with how the “Rate Our Chicken” ad opens and closes its mes­sage. It opens with a weak, non-attention-bragging image and it closes with a show of hes­i­tancy and doubt on the part of Domino’s chicken expert. Tom rec­om­mends a more con­fi­dent clos­ing image — and he’s right!

But that’s com­ing from a logical/credibility perspective.

What actu­ally unites the two men­tal images has noth­ing to do with logic and every­thing to do with the magic of “Pic­tures with Peo­ple.”  Tate Dil­low is the thread run­ning through­out the com­mer­cial, and he is who com­mands both the open­ing and clos­ing images of the ad.

YouTube Preview Image

As much as Domino’s is look­ing to gain cred­i­bil­ity through trans­parency, they are also look­ing to gain an emo­tional involve­ment through Tate Dillow’s pub­lic per­sona as Mr. Domino’s Chicken. And for the most part it works.

But as Tom so rightly points out, it could be made bet­ter by strength­en­ing the open­ing and clos­ing images. Yet know­ing that Tate is the thread that holds the com­mer­cial together, we wouldn’t want to remove him from either the open­ing or clos­ing images. Nor would we want to do away with any image that helps to con­vey Tate’s human­ity to the audience.

So my sug­ges­tion would be to sim­ply switch the open­ing and clos­ing men­tal images.

Show me the trans­par­ently human and under­stand­ably nervous-about-the-box Tate Dil­low first. Make me curi­ous why the box has him so worked up. Hook me into his story.

Then, at the end of the com­mer­cial, show me the con­fi­dent, “My Name’s Tate Dil­lon and I am Domino’s Chicken” image, leav­ing me with the impres­sion that this guy’s hell-bent on giv­ing me great chicken.

The Bot­tom Line:

The best bet for your ads isn’t to be either purely log­i­cal or emo­tional, but to com­bine the two in the evi­dent pas­sion and ver­i­fi­able actions of a spokesper­son the pub­lic can trust.  And if you’re the owner of the com­pany, that spokesper­son should likely be you.

Are you up for it?

P.S. I couldn’t find an already-online ver­sion of Roy H. Williams’ essay, “Song’s with Words, Pic­tures with Peo­ple,” so I made a hasty scan of it and posted it here. Enjoy…

2011-05-31_1144

22

May

by Jeff

Por­tals and Why They Matter

portalTak­ing it to the next level” is cliché. So is the phrase “he/she/it opened a lot of doors for me.” But peo­ple still reach for these phrases regard­less. There’s a rea­son for that.

Both phrases reflect an intu­itive under­stand­ing of tran­si­tions: that there’s always a thresh­old to cross. Bound­aries define an area, envi­ron­ment, or world. Move­ment past bound­aries neces­si­tates move­ment through open­ings in those bound­aries — or though por­tals, if you will.

So where there is change, there are por­tals, or so our sub­con­scious minds expect. But all too often, busi­nesses fail to meet our sub­con­scious expec­ta­tion for portals.

Busi­nesses usu­ally want to tran­si­tion shop­pers from think­ing one way about a prod­uct or ser­vice (price sen­si­tive) to another way of think­ing, typ­i­cally one that ele­vates shared val­ues, big-picture per­for­mance, and total expe­ri­ence above price. The goal is to move shop­pers from an objec­tive, consumer-reports mind­set to an enthusiast’s mind­set.

And yet peo­ple don’t just snap from one state of mind into another; there has to be a tran­si­tion and a por­tal to mark that tran­si­tion. Put plainly: if you’re sell­ing pre­mium prod­ucts or expe­ri­ences, you need to under­stand the power of portals.

Fan­tasy Writ­ers Under­stand Portals

When it comes to por­tals, per­haps the best peo­ple to study are fan­tasy writ­ers, who have always intu­itively sensed the need for por­tals between worlds:

  • C.S. Lewis had his Wardrobe.
  • J.K. Rowl­ing had her Plat­form 9 3/4s,
  • L. Frank Baum had Dorothy ride her twister, and
  • The Wachowski Broth­ers gave Neo his red pill (among other portals).

Enter The Pic­ture Book Pow­er­house of Portals

0142404039But some of the most intense and eas­ily observed stack­ing of por­tals I’ve come across take place in a children’s pic­ture book: Skip­pyjon Jones, by Judy Schachner.

And what fol­lows is my break­down of Por­tal Stack­ing in Skip­pyjon Jones. And to start, let me give you a bit of set-up…

Skip­pyjon Jones is a young Siamese Cat who likes to pre­tend that he’s really some other ani­mal. The story starts with him pre­tend­ing to be a bird, much to his mother’s dis­may. So she sends him to his room for a lit­tle time out, and that’s when ol’ Skip­pyjon begins his trans­for­ma­tion into the great sword-fighting Chi­huahua, El Skip­pito Friskito.  A trans­for­ma­tion involv­ing por­tals galore.

First, Skip­pyjon starts bounc­ing on his bed, with the bounc­ing sym­bol­i­cally equiv­a­lent to flight. Then, dur­ing that flight, Skip­pyjon Jones encoun­ters his first portal:

2011-05-22_2032

Lit­er­a­ture is rife with the notion of mir­rors as por­tals. And Skippyjon’s mid­flight glimpse into his mir­ror reveals his hid­den chi­huahua nature. A nature which is ampli­fied through the don­ning of a Lone Ranger style mask by the lit­tle kitty. Skip­pyjon lit­er­ally becomes invested in the identity.

Then we flash down to Skippyjon’s mother and sis­ters watch­ing TV down­stairs, talk­ing about Skippyjon’s time out. But when the book cuts back to Skip­pyjon Jones, we’re not brought back up into the room, but forced to look into his room through — you guessed it — a portal:

2011-05-22_2039

We’re out­side see­ing Skip­pyjon objec­tively as a masked kitty rac­ing around his room like a freak. And the half-conscious expec­ta­tion is that when we move inside, we’ll tran­si­tion from out­side to inside in more ways than one, mov­ing from an objec­tive to a sub­jec­tive under­stand­ing, so that we will start to see what Skippyjon/El Skip­pito Friskito sees.

Still, the reader is fur­ther prompted to engage in Skippyjon’s whimsy by yet another por­tal tran­si­tion, this time from the room to the closet:

2011-05-22_2043

So we have a double-portal tran­si­tion, from out­side the room to inside, and from inside the well-lit room to inside the dark closet, wherein the mag­i­cal realm of imag­i­na­tion rules, and where Skip­pyjon Jones, the Siamese cat, fully becomes El Skip­pito Friskito, the great sword-fighting Chihuahua.

But still, if Skip­pyjon is to fight some­thing truly mon­strous, he might have to cross yet another por­tal within the imag­i­nary story, before he is to face the mon­ster.  And so it is, as Skip­pito and his band of Chi­huahua friends take a nap, using sleep as the ulti­mate por­tal to dreams…

2011-05-22_2051

And that’s when the adven­tures really begin. Until, at the con­clu­sion of Skippyjon’s imag­i­na­tive adven­ture, El Skip­pito is blown back through the portal/closet door, and back to the every­day real­ity of his mother and sis­ters. Por­tal cross­ing in; por­tal cross­ing out.

So why is this impor­tant for the book?

It makes the dif­fer­ence between watch­ing a kit­ten dream some­thing silly, and being emo­tion­ally pulled along with him into his dreams. All those por­tals really help read­ers (of all ages) “get into” the story. Yes the story itself is delight­ful, and yes, the author (Judy Schachner) does a won­der­ful job mak­ing the book a blast to read. But I can’t help but think the bril­liant use of por­tals has more than a lit­tle do with the books crit­i­cal praise and wide­spread pop­u­lar­ity.

And in case you think I’m read­ing too much into this, take a look at the Offi­cial Skip­pyjon Jones Website’s entrance page:

2011-05-22_1231Any­one want to guess what hap­pens when you click to enter?  Go ahead and try it!

So, that’s cool and all, but how can you use it for your busi­ness?  We’ll get into that next week…

But for now, let me just give Judy Schachner’s book a hardy plug for all those with young kids out there.  It won the E.B. White Read Aloud Award because it’s both a blast for the par­ents to read and a delight for kids to lis­ten to. Highly recommended.

And who knows, you might learn some­thing too…

P.S. My men­tor and busi­ness part­ner, Roy H. Williams, teaches an entire course on por­tals. If you’re inter­ested in this kind of stuff, you prob­a­bly ought to check out Wiz­ard Acad­emy at some point. And, yes, as adjunct fac­ulty, my opin­ion on Wiz­ard Acad­emy is heav­ily biased ; )

McDonalds-Oatmeal-Commercial-Girl-300x122Have you seen the recent McDonald’s Ad for their Fruit and Maple Oatmeal?

It fea­tures a woman who sits down next to her hus­band, bab­bling away about the deli­cious oat­meal she bought.  As she sits down, she remains focused on the oat­meal and never really looks at her hus­band until after she offers him a spoonful.

Then — sur­prise! — the man she’s offer­ing to spoon-feed isn’t her hus­band at all; he’s only dressed like her hus­band, and is, in fact, a socially awk­ward dweeb eat­ing break­fast alone. That’s when the icky part happens.

As the woman recov­ers from her shock, with her extended spoon still hov­er­ing in front of the stranger, the social mis­fit puts his mouth around her spoon and eats the oatmeal.

And we all feel vio­lated for her.

The woman, mor­ti­fied beyond belief, drops that spoon like it was poi­son and recoils from the stranger, retreat­ing to the safety of her hus­band. It’s meant to be funny, but comes off as deeply dis­turb­ing. Even after the husband’s “that’s actu­ally how we met” joke makes light of the sit­u­a­tion, most view­ers remain dis­turbed and left feel­ing more than a lit­tle icky.

[****A reader help­fully left a youtube link to the com­mer­cial in the com­ments — thanks, Susie! The video cap­tures has some weird over­tape in the first few sec­onds of the com­mer­cial, but you can see all the impor­tant parts.  Check it out:***]

YouTube Preview Image

But why?

Mag­i­cal Thinking

goldenboughWhether we admit it or not, we all believe in essences.  Sure, our con­scious minds might try to over-rule our emo­tional belief, but we still believe — we still have the same emo­tional reac­tions and make the same deci­sions as if we con­sciously believed in essences and cooties. This is why peo­ple shy away from cook­ies placed next to say, tam­pons or kitty lit­ter, even when both the cook­ies and the kitty lit­ter are safely wrapped in plas­tic and never actu­ally touch each other.  It’s also why the bil­lion dol­lar sports mem­o­ra­bilia indus­try even exists!

So when the woman in the ad started eat­ing the oat­meal and stuck that spoon in her mouth, she imbued it with some of her essence.  And by eat­ing from that same spoon the stranger not only exposed him­self to her germs, but on an emo­tional level, he enacted a vio­la­tion — a stolen inti­macy with the woman, made against her will. He took some of her essence, and in turn, inter­min­gled his essence with hers, con­t­a­m­i­nat­ing her spoon.

This is one rea­son why the woman imme­di­ately ditches the spoon — she doesn’t want his essence creep­ing up the spoon to her hand — and also why she recoils in dis­gust at the man’s actions.  For any man who fails to rec­og­nize that kind of trans­gres­sion is dan­ger­ous, almost sociopathic.

It all makes per­fect emo­tional sense. And if you think I’m spin­ning off into Eng­lish Major la la land, just ask your­self:

  • Would you buy fur­ni­ture from a con­victed child moles­ter, even if it was sold for pen­nies on the dol­lar? Why not?
  • Would you be upset if you knew that an old bed you had sold in a yard sale was bought by a child molester?
  • Would you give spe­cial treat­ment to some item (aka relic) that had belonged to one of your heroes?

If you answer, no, to the first two ques­tions or, yes, to the third, then at least a part of you believe in essences.

Mag­i­cal Advertising

So what does this have to do with advertising?

The Laws of MagicBecause the decision-making part of our brains work accord­ing to the laws of Mag­i­cal Think­ing. Mean­ing that your adver­tis­ing ought to at least be in har­mony with those same laws, if not actively lever­ag­ing them to your benefit.

And, just so you know, the Law of Contagion/Essences is just one of about two dozen “Laws of Magic” that you’d prob­a­bly want to keep in mind.

So does your adver­tis­ing weave magic? Or are you vio­lat­ing these laws and inad­ver­tently leav­ing your audi­ence feel­ing icky all over?

P.S. One might say that McDonad’s oat­meal itself is a sign of mag­i­cal think­ing, wherein the mere con­tact with oats some­how imbues health­ful qual­i­ties onto a snick­ers bar’s worth of sugar, chem­i­cals, and sat­u­rated fat.