Time Warner Cable: You Call That PR?

Time Warner is having some negotiation issues with channel providers. It's not new; it happens because everyone wants more for less. This round of cooperation turned into much less and led to a few channel blackouts. Okay, we understand.

But then I got this email from Time Warner. See if you can spot the terrible copywriting that stinks of an angst-ridden, petulant tween blogger:

On July 9, 2012 Hearst Television chose to black out their signals from Time Warner Cable customers rather than continue negotiations, and despite their CEO saying just two weeks earlier that broadcaster blackouts are unfair to consumers.

...

Q: Why is this happening again? It seems like this happens all the time.
A: Unfortunately, these kinds of disputes have become more common over the past few years. Cable TV prices are rising and one cause is higher fees being demanded by greedy broadcasters – as their advertising dollars decline, they want cable customers to make up the difference. And if we don't agree to their outrageous demands, they take away their programming. We don't think it's fair for TV stations to hold programming hostage for our customers, and we are working hard to keep the programming on our lineup while also trying to hold down the cost of TV.

Q: Why shouldn't I just go ahead and switch to DirecTV/Dish/FIOS/AT&T now?
A: Switching makes no sense; most of these contract blackouts are over within a matter of days. But switching isn't really the answer — any provider you switch to may eventually face the same kind of blackout threats. In fact, the American Television Alliance reports that broadcasters have blacked out signals in nearly 100 different cities since January 2011, with customers of DirecTV, Dish Network, AT&T U-Verse, Verizon FIOS and other major cable companies suffering actual or threatened blackouts. We think blackouts are unfair to viewers, which is why we continue to negotiate hard on your behalf to try to keep prices down.

Q: Will you be crediting me for the channel(s) that go dark?
A: Remember that customers do not pay for channels on an individual basis — they pay for a package of channels plus the technology and service required to deliver those channels. So we do not typically offer a credit for channels that have been blacked out.

This is considered Public Relations? This isn't even high-school level persuasive writing. "Greedy broadcasters?" "Outrageous demands?" So, being the gadfly I am, I went to Time Warner Cable's website and submitted a query along those lines: Was it really a good idea to take a serious issue with many facets and turn it childish and churlish in an open letter to all of your customers?

I even received a timely response. Tell me if this sounds familiar (emphasis mine):

On July 9, 2012 Hearst Television, the owner of several stations in our Midwest Market and one station in Hawaii, chose to black out their signals from our customers rather than continue negotiations - despite their CEO saying just two weeks earlier that broadcasters? blackouts are unfair to consumers.

Time Warner Cable is always negotiating new contracts with TV stations and networks. We've reached hundreds of agreements with other broadcasters without public dispute, and what Hearst is demanding is out of line.

We think it's wrong to put viewers in the middle of business negotiations. We know our customers are tired of these public contract disputes-and so are we.

Unfortunately, instead of continuing negotiations Hearst TV has chosen to black out there signals from our customers. They are demanding a 250% fee increase for the exact same programming, most of which is available for free over the air or online. We don't think that's fair.

There is more, but I think a rehash with spelling errors is enough to get the point across.

Time Warner has its issues (with cable and internet and customer service), but I've never seen both an angry PR letter and a customer service response that was so obviously ignorant of the original communication. They literally responded to a concerned message about an unprofessional communication with another unprofessional communication. When I posed this question to their Facebook page, my post was quickly deleted.

I'm not interested in an apology or creating a mess for them when they're already dealing with one. More than anything, this is a teaching moment:

1. If you're sending out a mass email to your customers that deals with a topic you are no happy with, argue your point with the facts, not name-calling invective. You will appear the petty fool and nothing more; you've already lost.
2. If you are offering to receive emails from customers and respond to their concerns, read their emails. Respond appropriately. And check your grammar.

Badvertising: Dr. Pepper

I like Dr. Pepper; I have since I was a kid. And Diet Dr. Pepper? Really, it tastes darn close to its regular, HFCS-laden brother. But in the last couple weeks I've seen both of the following advertisements for Dr. Pepper and thought #FAIL. Let's take a look.

Always One of a Kind



Here we begin our journey with the greyed corporate masses, the herd, and the single break-away man stripping down (revealing his true self) to the iconic maroon Dr. Pepper shirt. He's a pepper!

But then everyone gets in on it. Suddenly, people are popping up in pepper tees like Sneeches pumping through the belly star-stamper machine. NO!

Yes. By the end of the commercial, the message that flowed through the first fifteen seconds of the spot or so has completely lost its weight; everyone is wearing the shirt. Everyone is One of a Kind. Except for fat people; I suppose no overweight people were harmed in the making of this commercial - but they also cannot be peppers :(

You too can be unique...just like everyone else.


Dr. Pepper TEN: It's Not for Women

(Action Movie)


(Man Shed)


Somehow, the marketing folks here managed to insult both women and men. And miss the point.

The desire, clearly, is to take something you would not normally associate with diet soda - men and "manliness" - and suffocate it with testosterone tropes until it taps out in the target consumer's head as "must be manly." The problem is they're attempting to rent a room in the house that beer - and sometimes whiskey - owns, and has ...forever.

It doesn't work, even on an underlying psychological level. I would argue that the absurd juxtaposition of forcing diet soda into these masculinized shop/action movie/bar/potato gun situations is actually working in reverse. "Diet soda at the bar? Why not just carry a purse. Wait, where are those guys' purses?" And suddenly the men are feminized and the message by the end is that Dr. Pepper TEN will make you more lady-like.

Misogyny

Sidenote here: you can do all those man things without the endcap comments. Okay, "Keep your romantic comedies" is quaint because haha women like romcoms. But "Keep your gardening"? That rides a little too close to the edge of domestic stereotypes for good taste. "Yeah, keep your gardening, as soon as you make me that sammich! You have that baby yet? Shutup! I'm in my shed!"

Yes you are, manly-man. Drinking Diet Dr. Pepper out of your purse.

Marketing of Pixar's Brave

After taking a bit of an "I'm just busy" hiatus, we're back to bring inspiration along with a hefty dose of SEO, SEM, marketing, social media, and all things geek and tech. This falls into a couple different categeories.

I saw yesterday that Pixar released a new, more expanded version of their upcoming movie Brave. Here it is:



Looks pretty amazing - which is what I say every time a new Pixar movie comes out (exception: Cars2 *shudder*). But then I saw someone else posted Pixar's Japanese version of the trailer (with subtitles):



The difference in content, focus, and tone is remarkable. Obviously the American version is pandering to what the brand of Pixar itself means to the American public, its family-focus, bring the kids, not scary at all, ha-ha funny. It appears the Japanese version focuses more on developing the story and culture and leaving us with a serious linger on mystery and potential danger. And while I think their branding/marketing is spot on for the masses, the Japanese version makes me want to see it more.

What do you think? Are they spot-on with their marketing? Should they have done something different? Which one do you like better?

Wendy's Fried Linguistics

You may have noticed that since November, Wendy's has been offering slimmer, skin-on fries called -- well, let the branding speak for itself:



At first glance, you notice the rustic/artisan patina print, "Natural" and "Sea Salt!?" OMG - Wendy's is going all natural, must be organic or something. Must have!

They did an amazing job on their branding for this because that was my first, subconscious reaction as well: Yay! Wendy's goes natural, go green! Ah, but it is not to be so.


Quick review of the language

Natural-Cut: This is not "Natural, cut" but natural-cut, literally meaning cut naturally. Now I can imagine a few horrific scenarios where you might see potatoes being cut and exclaim "Oh, how unnatural!" but seriously: how do you cut things unnaturally. That's like advertising "Coherent-Reality Chips." When wouldn't they be? And if they went through such extensive pains NOT to call their fries natural, what are they exactly?

Fries: Lest you forget amongst all the magical potato language and graphics, these are french fries. They are fried taters. And while fried taters may be delicious and varied in taste and preparation, they are NEVER good for you.

Sea Salt: Yes, sea salt is different than table salt, especially the micron-powdered stuff they used to coat the fries with, but it's still salt. You ever hear a doctor tell his/her heart patient "The table salt is killing you, but if you can switch to sea salt, I think you'll be just fine."?


The Truth

Based on some preliminary articles, Wendy's missed the boat on this one. Despite appearing more appealing to foodies or naturalists, "the new fries will pack more sodium - a medium size fry goes from 350 milligrams to 500 milligrams ... and calories jumps 10 to 420."

Caveat emptor, my friends. If something looks too good to be true, ...well, you know.


(And on a personal note, I do think the new fries are pretty tasty.)

Unfortunate Ad: HISCOX

I saw this ad over at The Oatmeal, a site full of witty and insightful web comics, seated amongst similarly-sized comic links like "How to Pet a Kitty" and the like.



Then I clicked it 'cause I was all like "OMG - thorough, well-thought-out joke site by which I may waste my time!" But I looked and I looked. And I couldn't find the funny fake-ness I anticipated it to be. And then I saw the figurative, tall, angry HR lady in a pant-suit looking down upon me with the disappointment of a sister in a habit, making that sad clicking noise out of the side of her mouth before barely audibly sighing "And what did you think would be so funny?" *

Did I mention I grew up with Cox Cable in the house?


* While I made a point of dramatizing it a bit, I am a professional when it comes to usability; the ad size tip-off, pre-click, to a quick scan and click-through of the target site lasted less than six seconds.

Some Inspiration From LOST: Define Yourself!

(No, no spoilers folks)

It's been a few weeks since the finale of LOST and I'm still stewing in the philosophical and metaphysical implications of how it all ended, but something came to me today about the overall character plot of the show that gave me inspiration to write this post.

As the plot went, a plane crashes and the survivors of that mess must survive on a mysterious island. For 6 years, we're shepherded (no pun intended) through the lives of these characters. And one of the more subtle themes that emerges is that many of these characters have allowed others and their surroundings in the "normal" world to define them; they have not worked to write that script themselves.

This goes for politics to branding to you and me in our personal lives: Are you writing the story of your life or are you letting everyone else do it as you passively float through? Are you driving your own bus?

If you are, chances are some focus and push and you could be doing it more efficiently. If you're not? Well, get on the stick! It only takes a little introspection to see who's in charge here. Take that charge. Take it seriously. Define yourself!

And if you've got a brand you want to control then work on that too - write that story too. But step one is self. Just like you can't truly love others without loving yourself, you will have little luck putting a business in order if your house is a mess.

Now get out there and have a great week!

Wired: Weird

I subscribe to Wired, the manic magazine full of all things web, tech, gadget, and everything else that is on the cool cutting edge. It's sometimes even referred to as elitist.

So when it was time to renew, I got an email asking me to pay online with links that sent me here:



How exactly does a magazine that lives at the ever-changing pinnacle of technology send me to a page, not on their server, that looks like a 13-year-old's phishing experiment?

Boo, Wired. We expect better.

I'll be renewing over the phone. Maybe tomorrow.

Why Quick Template Websites Are a Bad Idea

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

I Bet You Think This Song is About You...

As many of you already know, facebook finally went with vanity URLs. That means that as opposed to linking with and attempting to remember http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1234567890, you can now do something simple. For example, my new URL is http://www.facebook.com/eric.marschall.

First, if you haven't done this yet, it's quite easy to do. When you log in to facebook for the first time, there is a gray box at the top that prompts you to claim your URL. Click the link. It gives you some suggestions and the "more" option that opens a text field so you can choose your own.

They will warn you, but allow me to as well: Once you do this, once you claim your URL, that URL will be forever tied to that account. You cannot change it. So please, choose wisely. I'm sure Facebook is already dealing with thousands of emails with text to the effect of: "I meant to put HuttFace as a Star Wars fan, but...." Choose carefully. Take your time.

Second, if you haven't done this yet - Do it now!

It's not every day a land grab comes up like this. This is Branding 101 for your name and your business. This is search engine results oriented. Reports were that 500,000 names were snagged in the first 30 minutes. Go get yours now.

And after you do, check out this Wired post about some of those that must have proud mothers. Although it looks like facebook nixed www.facebook.com/haywood.jablome, and it doesn't include one I spotted and found rather clever: www.facebook.com/default.aspx

For those of you wondering about your facebook Pages (extension or promotional pages, as I have for EJM Designs Limited), if you have under 1000 fans, vanity URLs will be available for those pages in 2 weeks.

So how'd you fair? Did you get your URL? Are you waiting? Has someone squatted on it? Do you really just not care all that much? Comments want to hear from you.

Avatar Rebranding and Facial Recognition

Up until yesterday, my Twitter, blogging, and LinkedIn profile avatar looked like this:



And that's fine enough. It's conducive to my logo, works towards branding in that vein, and is distinctive.

Unfortunately, whenever you are building a brand, while a solid, staid logo or logo-related avatar may be appropriate, when you're talking about the service industry, you're talking about a provider/client relationship. And that is built on trust. And you can't have trust in a digital, "small world" market if you don't have your face out there.

I'm as traditional as I can be when it comes to business relationships on the interwebs. LinkedIn and Twitter and Facebook are wonderful tools, but I prefer a smile and a handshake and view social networks as tools to be used to get to that point on the local and regional level. But because that can't always happen with a client in Florida as efficiently as it can in the Tri-State area, a face - that is: the face of the person who is posting/tweeting/potentially selling to you - is hugely important. And I finally got on the boat.

In order to maintain the work I've already done to build a blog and Twitter following, I didn't want anyone to freak out or pause more than 3 seconds when looking at my avatar (except, of course, to admire such a face), so I did something more transitional as opposed to a complete revamp:



And this is not just important in my instance, in my avatar. This should be a consideration for every person working on branding and working on social media on two levels:

A Face Is Important
If you are selling a service or product or ...anything, then you need to put yourself out there as a token of trust, give people the literal face of your business. If a smile and a handshake cannot work right now for a Miami-Cincinnati relationship, working with a face and a phone call can be very beneficial.

Transition is Important
I never wanted to transition from a logo-esque avatar to just my face. That would be confusing and disrupt the basic branding I'd already accomplished with Twitter followers (now quickly nearing 500) being able to identify the "big e" as something valuable. I added my image for the "face" aspect of social media, but maintained the logo bit in the upper right corner.

Never make a sudden break when you are dealing with branding or avatars. If it is a switch from one pic of you to another, then you're probably fine. But if you've been dealing with something non-headshot and want to switch, know that you should transition with grace and preserve your identity.


So are there any other stories out there, any other people who needed to switch avatars or felt the (necessary) need to put a face out there?

Love, thoughts, and suggestions always accepted in the comments.

Branding, Um...am...pm.... BP: huh?

A month or two ago, I noticed that BP, known for its green/yellow flower "Connect" rebranding a couple years ago, had done something strange. They'd rebranded their stores and stores website with the following look:



Hrmm?

As a designer, this struck a sour chord with me. Why would BP, pushing the clean, airy green/yellow/white trio switch up their primary identity? And if they were switching up their primary identity, why in this direction?

The change strayed from their attempt at environmental and pushed oddly into already-established convenience. The orange-red of "am" pulls in Sunoco, Clark, and Speedway. The blue of "pm" also hits Clark, Sunoco, and Speedway. WTF?

I guess it wouldn't as bad if BP just wanted to melt into the mainstream of gas station convenience stores, but juxtaposed with the rest of their branding effort, the orange/blue design sticks out like an embarrassing stain, a desire to be the same in the middle of an effort to be different.

What are your thoughts on BP's convenience store branding decision?