Advertising during the COVID-19 lockdown

Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve had a number of conversations around the ongoing pandemic and the reoccurring subject seems to be about ways to cope with life in self-isolation.

I noticed that there had been an immense amount of advertising around COVID-19 from different sources with different messages – no surprises there.

The most prominent one is from the government about staying home – which makes perfect sense to me. Then there are supermarkets who advertise to remind people not to panic buy and purchase their groceries normally. And perhaps the most entertaining ones, in my opinion, are the ads from retailers such as JB Hi-Fi with headlines saying “Keep the kids entertained with JB!”. Moreover, the countless email blasts from businesses I’ve engaged with in, what seems to be, my lifetime – since they come from companies I engage with often, every once in a while, and even the ones I’ve purchased items from just once.

COVID-19 seems to be the most trending word of the year so far. But have companies capitalised on the pandemic? What about non-essential businesses? How has this virus affected advertising as of late, and how will it affect the future?

There are very strong advertising messages around prevention, hygiene, and health. Do I think businesses are going to continue advertising about their health and safety measures after the lockdown? Perhaps not, unless the pandemic miraculously disappears overnight – but that doesn’t seem like it’s going to happen. Realistically speaking, this is our new normal. Whether it be for now or forever, all I know is the world will never be the same.

In saying that, I think advertising will change and adapt if and when this pandemic is over – it simply has to. With meat, flour, yeast, and even seedlings flying off the shelves – people have reverted back to making their own food and growing their own fruits and vegetables. This could mean that there will be people who’d realise that we can make our own food without needing takeaways or deliveries, we can exercise without needing a gym, and we are perfectly capable of having our own means of entertainment at home instead of going out.

Another probable scenario is that non-essential businesses would have a sales increase after the lockdown is over. I imagine advertising messages such as “we’re back in business”, “reopening sale”, and post-quarantine discounts might be something that non-essential businesses are already looking into now. With convenience at the forefront, people can simply go back to exchanging money for ready-made goods and services that make people’s lives easier.

Whether the change is from the first post-lockdown scenario I’ve depicted or the latter, I can see advertising still playing a huge role in affecting how the future, post-coronavirus, will be. My hope is that advertising messages don’t forget the efforts and sacrifice of today’s front liners – especially the ones whose jobs we tend to overlook and perhaps even undermine at times. The likes of truck drivers, delivery people, grocery attendants, and custodians. We sit, working from home, considered as non-essential business workers, while they constantly risk their health just so that we can still live comfortably amidst the pandemic.

A smart advertiser would realise and remember that the economy is built on the efforts of the workforce. A wise advertiser would recognise and thank the aforementioned essential business workers (amongst others such as healthcare workers, police and military, food services, and bank workers – to name a few). Telling a story around how your company appreciates the people who are most at risk to contract a major disease just so you can stay home so you can eventually go back to business, (because most of us have the luxury to stay home) is not only good advertising, but it’s also a way to build our world back up again.

My hope is perhaps after this pandemic, if and when we all get through this – the world will be more human again. Not numbers, figures, and statistics – but human. Optimistically speaking, advertisers should find a way to make sure that good news are told through storytelling where companies seek relationship over revenue. After all of this blows over, whether people choose to make their own stuff again or go back to exchanging money for convenience – I hope that advertisers have a mind shift where the word “reach” is not a mere figure, but an actual act to “reach out” and create a genuine and good influence in people’s behaviour.

When the honeymoon is over

Finding an advertising client is often a lesser challenge; keeping them is the greater.

When you are in a service industry such as advertising, you can usually keep a client by consistently delivering good work that presents an agreed message to that client’s target market in a compelling and cost-effective manner.

Of course, personal empathy comes into it, as well.

But, what happens when all that is not enough? What happens when the client has a view contrary to that of the agency? Maybe the client is rejecting work that the agency is passionate about and, more importantly, can be supported by solid commercial and creative arguments.

In short, what happens when the agency believes it is right and the client is wrong? It is, unfortunately, a common dilemma in an advertising world where subjective judgement is unavoidable.

So, when it does occur, what is an agency to do? In one notable case in which I was present, the art director punched the client. But that is not recommended.

My view is that in the end, it is the client who is paying the bill and also has the ultimate responsibility for his company’s success or failure. So, the agency has a simple choice—either give the client what he wants or walk.

But there are ways to avoid getting to that point, particularly if the agency and client have a long, and thus far, positive relationship.

First, let’s examine the degree of disagreement. If the client just wants to tinker around the peripherals, there is probably no great harm in that. Suck it up, don’t be precious. If it is a complete rejection, the first question to ask yourself is how strongly do you believe in what you are presenting and be honest. The second question is; does what the client is saying has merit—and, again, be honest.

First suggestion I would make is, if you can, give yourself time to think about those questions. An outright and immediate rejection or acceptance of a client’s demands are rarely warranted and almost never required.

Give yourself time to think.

If having done that and you still want to hold your ground, do so. It is after all your reputation that could be at stake—and don’t mistake that for personal ego.

There are ways to say no to a client, without saying no. First is to give the client and his views the consideration of consideration. That’s why you should give yourself time to go away and, as you can tell the client, think about what they are saying.

Then, even if you are coming back with a no, make it a pacifying no. You don’t have to compromise your creativity, but it is rare to have anything that can’t be tweaked or modified to hopefully mollify the concerns a client may have. Usually, it works best when you can preface it with, “Thinking about what you said, I think…”.

It can work. If it doesn’t, well—there are some hard decisions to make.

But here is the thing—the greater thing—it is the relationship that needs constant work—not the work itself. It is more important to maintain a positive, productive, and collegial relationship with your client in which hopefully, you can work as a team, meeting agreed objectives, and even having a bit of fun along the way.

If that kind of relationship exists, any disagreements along the way (and they are inevitable), can be short-lived with no residual ill-will.

If on the other hand, the relationship is persistently confrontational and deteriorating, then it is probably in everyone’s interest to make a clean separation.

However, the real work to be put in, and put in from the start, is to stop it ever getting to that point. Bit like any marriage, really.

Henry Ford didn't invent the car.

Henry Ford didn’t invent the car; he just perfected the idea of mass production.

By doing this he was able to broadcast his idea to almost every person in America. Wherever Americans saw a Model T driving down the streets, they saw Ford’s idea in action.

And on top of this, he created a massive publicity machine that ensured every newspaper carried stories about how successful his idea was. The problem for Ford was that the success of his idea not only publicised his own cars but the very concept of owning an automobile.

So when his competitors wanted a piece of the action, their only option was to out-broadcast Ford. They didn’t have a better idea so all they could do was spend more on ads and publicity and the noise of cars got louder and louder and louder. And now, 104 years since the first Model T rolled off the production lines, we’re stuck with the same problem: dozens of car manufacturers broadcasting their messages in a crowded market in the hope that their brand will be the one chosen by consumers.

Henry Ford’s legacy was a mass-produced product for the mass market. One hundred years ago the car was amazing and it changed almost everything, but today the majority of cars on our roads are unremarkable. And the car manufacturers know this; they know that they are smack bang in the middle where all the broadcasting is happening and where all the noise is. So they try to stand out with their so-called “glam” divisions: BMW has its M series, Mercedes has its AMG range, Mini has John Cooper Works, Fiat has the Abarth and even Range Rover went as far as getting Posh Spice to help design their special edition Evoque. All of these brands are hoping these cars will inject a sense of difference into their models and that the “idea” of their special edition will spread into the mainstream market. The thing with ideas is that there are millions of them, and nobody cares about them until they like them.

Otto Rohwedder invented sliced bread. Without Otto, no one would say “that’s the best thing since sliced bread”. He started work on the concept in 1912 but no one cared about it. Bakeries weren’t interested; there were problems with how the bread stayed together and, more importantly, how it stayed fresh. By 1929, when the great depression hit, Otto’s idea of sliced bread hadn’t taken off in the same way that Henry Ford had, and he had to sell his patent. It was only in 1930 when Wonder Bread began marketing and promoting sliced bread that sales started to skyrocket. Wonder Bread managed to broadcast the idea of sliced bread effectively.

But today broadcasting doesn’t have as much effect. We all know about the success of Apple, Google and Facebook. They all started from nothing until their ideas spread. But they’re really a glitch in the system. They filled a void that was never there, and just like Henry Ford, as they became successful their idea helped their competitors get off the ground too. Facebook publicised social networking and Web 2.0 and Apple publicised the home computer and every one of their competitors rode on their tails. And then the broadcasting began, and the noise started. 

Advertising: The good, the bad, the ugly.

Two years ago, I wrote “Advertising: A source of insecurity”. I talked about deceit and manipulation in the advertising world, and how they had a negative influence on my well-being. At the time, I still felt like I was an outsider, looking in. Now, having been in the wonderful world of advertising for a couple of years, I continuously get an insider’s perspective on how advertising can be used to create change in a positive way.

Thanks to my career in advertising, I get to have a better sense of what’s real and what isn’t. I think more logically, even whilst being the millennial that I am. Stereotypical millennials are known to be impulsive, naïve, and “believe” everything they see on the Internet. We, as a generation, are seen as individuals who tend to make decisions based on how we feel instead of using logic; but does this really only apply to millennials?

My generation isn’t well represented practically everywhere. I’ve seen many-a-video, and many-a-meme about how we’re the laziest, most selfish, and most entitled generation thus far; and for good reasons too. But whether or not you agree, there are still a lot of millennials who want to change the advertising world for good. Given that perhaps, most of us millennials caused this chaos in the first place, individuals such as author, former Cosmo editor, and feminist: Amy Odell, (as we millennials say it) “shook” the industry with her unapologetic take on content advertising. Her book “Tales from the Back Row”, has given its readers an insight on the dark side of fashion, self-promotion, and the always-have-been unrealistic ideals and beauty standards in the fashion industry.

Perhaps something snapped within Odell, or maybe it’s something she’s wanted to do all along, but at one point, she said “this is too much” and should be exposed. Those of us who are “woke” (yes, I know I’m peppering millennial terms here) know how nasty advertising can be–especially fashion advertising. It affects women, men, and non-binary individuals in more ways than one.

 But even as a rookie in the advertising game, it didn’t take me long to realise what the good, the bad, the ugly, and the truth really are in our industry.

The good thing about advertising in 2018 is that advertisers have (more than ever) access to almost every advertising platform there is. #convenientAF

The bad thing about advertising in 2018 is that, again, advertisers have (more than ever) access to almost every advertising platform there is. This access gives manipulative and deceitful companies and individuals a voice. One with which, if they pay enough, can be the loudest voice we hear on a daily basis.

The ugliest thing about access to advertising is that the human brain is programmed to see mistakes, first and foremost. We tend to spot minor mistakes instead of appreciating major successes. That’s just how our brains work. This is why the ads that appeal to us most often project the message “this is what you’re missing” or “this is what’s wrong with you”.

The truth is, you always have a choice. A choice to see advertising as a mere suggestion for products and services you might like. A choice to say no to the kind of advertising that tells you what you should be, who you should look like, and how you should respond to certain things.

The absolute truth is, that we can always change our perception. Exposing this truth, as Odell and many before her have, can create enough change that empowers, promotes positivity, and affects people’s well-being for good.