Where Will Advertising Be In Five Years Time? Right Here.

A couple of years ago I wrote my dissertation on what I thought the state of the advertising world would be like in five years time. The piece was entitled “What Will The World Of Advertising Be Like In Five Years?”. Catchy right? It actually did me well, and I managed to write myself all the way to a first.

I’m telling you this, because it’s now two and half years later, and I’m going to take a look back and see if I was right. As much as I want to, I won’t edit the text. I try to be a perfectionist with writing, so I’d probably try to rewrite the entire thing if given a second chance. Not this time though, so you’ll have to excuse me for sounding vague, any spelling or grammatical errors, and of course, if it’s really really boring or not. Here’s past me dropping a sick introduction for all of you folks out there.

The question [What will the advertising world be like in five years?] I have presented myself with is vastly open-ended. It has an infinite amount of answers, none of which could end up being true. After all, no one can predict the future. However, if we can look at advertising as it was, and as it is now, we can formulate a coherent vision for its future.

It is possible to do this by exploring how monumental inventions throughout time affected the way we look at advertisements, and then we can apply this knowledge to the invention of new products and media that can expand advertising as a form of communication, persuasion, and as an art form.

Wowsers, what an intro! An ‘art form’ though? Sounds a bit wankery if you ask me. Anyway, there is a point to all of this I promise! Through out the essay I looked at inventions that changed advertising; the television, mobile phones, computer games, the internet, and I also looked at a few case studies; Cadbury’s Gorilla, The Subservient Chicken, Honda’s Cog, The Natural Confectionery Company, Sony’s Bravia collection, and Guinness’ hands. These all led me to this particular (and heavily shortened) conclusion.

The notion of oblique advertising will become more prevalent within the advertising industry, mainly through the method of television advertising. Oblique advertising is refreshing to watch as noted during the case studies of Cadbury’s Gorilla, Honda’s Cog, Barclay’s Water Slide and to some extent the Sony Bravia collection. The idea of an audience being entertained in return of being sold a product is an idea that seems to be flowing through the industry at the moment. As already noted earlier;

“Advertising can be effective without a traditional ‘message’, ‘proposition’ or ‘benefit’.”

“The secret to many of the smash hits lately is to succeed in entertaining people with something new and clever.”

Advertisers should not try to focus on one key area of media. Television, print, radio, billboard, digital, mobile phone and in-computer-game-advertising are all methods in which the advertiser can hook an audience, but as the audience becomes more aware to their surrounding, it’s going to take some entertaining to keep the audience watching and talking.

The next five years are going to be a rough time for the advertising industry with the recession on the horizon, and advertising budgets being cut by most companies . However, new technologies and ways to engross audiences are being made readily available [digital, IGA, mobile phone] and it is the advertiser’s job to talk to their audiences, and now more than ever, keep the audiences entertained.

Five years from now, advertising will still be a multi-billion dollar business, and the likes of print, digital and television adverts will still be prevalent; it’s just that they might take on an entirely different format to the oblique, viral, entertainment route they are taking now. There will always be advertising, no matter what shape or form it decides to take in the future, because as David Ogilvy himself said all those years ago;

“We Sell – Or Else”

Ending on Ogilvy, I’m a sucker for a good quote. I’ve edited a lot out of my conclusion, but it was basically a three thousand word rant about how oblique, viral and the new digital sectors (mobile, e-book, iPad, online) are going to be the biggest ‘sellers’ in the industry. Again, the reason I’m telling you this, and why I’m dragging up an essay that’s almost three years old is because I saw an advert the other day. An advert that after I watched it at the halfway point in the timescale used by my ‘what if’ essay, I sat back in my chair, let out a little smile, and felt like I had managed to hit the nail right on the head of ‘what if’. Here is that advert.

I’d only gone and got it right, even if only for one campaign (I could actually point you to hundreds of examples of how I was technically correct, but that’s not fun is it). There I was, watching an advert for a well-known brand, that had forsaken it’s old approach, and rolled out the oblique styling. Why am I considering my self right? You have to read my definition of oblique advertising to understand that;

This is a style of advertising that’s becoming more and more prevalent within the global market. In a sense, advertisers are keeping the audiences entertained while references to any sort of product are kept to a very minimal status. Alex Benady explains it perfectly when he wrote; “The traditional commercial was a scientifically modulated piece of communication in which consumer behaviour was scrutinised, product use closely studied and desired responses deliberated upon at length. In the new approach [oblique advertising], almost anything can be inserted into the branded space as long as it is entertaining and brings joy”.

That’s exactly the approach the new KFC advert takes. The brand isn’t actually mentioned by name at all! Sure, you can see small parts of the KFC logo on the boxes throughout, but at the end we’re presented with the Colonel’s face, a recognised logo yes, but absolutely no brand name. One point to me!

Secondly, the entire advert is entertaining to a point. It’s not exactly a fast paced ‘ride of your life’ experience, but it should bring joy to most people. I’m sure the idea behind the ad is to make viewers remember family get togethers, and the amazing times they had at them. After watching the advert, I sat and thought about the huge family party we had for the last birthday party we held for my Granddad before he passed away. The entire family was there, and we all had a belting time. We sure as hell didn’t eat KFC, but I don’t think that was the idea. It’s a moment I’ll never forget in life, and it’s nice that a fast food chain managed to bring that thought to the front of my brain via an advertisement. That’ll be point two for me as well.

It’s strange really, apart from me gloating, what I think I’m trying to say is that advertising isn’t inherently evil, and can be a legitimate form of entertainment. This advert by KFC, while it tries to sell you chicken under the promise of a great family meal, doesn’t actually say “hey you, you there, buy this food”, instead it adopts an approach of joy-giving. Someone who doesn’t eat KFC isn’t going to rush out and buy an entire bucket for themselves after watching this ad, but they very well might remember the last time they sat down as a family and ate, drank, talked, and laughed their evening away. If anything it’s promoting family values, and I can only support that.

Advertising, with all it’s flaws, is still a form of communication, and it’s up to agencies world-wide to make sure they’re communicating in the correct manner. Oblique advertising is the perfect way to engage a potential customer. It’s a way showing them an idea, something funny, something cool, or something genuinely entertaining and letting them decide for themselves if they want to pass it on, buy into it, or just ignore it all together. The hard sell is a thing of the past (take Carcraft and Dreams as the most recent examples), and surely brands and companies who haven’t already realised that entertaining their customers is the way forward, will soon follow suit.

That’s exactly what I tried to convey two and a half years ago in my dissertation, and it’s exactly what was proven by a one minute Kentucky Fried Chicken advert at the beginning of this month. The way to a customer’s wallet is through them as a person. Engage them, communicate with them, and entertain them. Who knows, they might very well talk back.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 thoughts on “Where Will Advertising Be In Five Years Time? Right Here.

  1. Tom says:

    Hmm, you wrote this about a Starbucks ad not too long ago:

    “It’s strange really, I was content on writing an entry about how much I enjoyed this advertisement when I first saw it, but upon a quick review, I have realised it’s doing something I promised myself never to do. It’s advertising nothing! Sure, the line is great, and the art direction is lovely, but what are we actually being sold? We’re being sold a lifestyle by a coffee shop. We’re being sold the premise, that if we drink in their chain of coffee shops over others, we’re going to be happy, have lots of friends, and buy popular products that will make us popular with popular people.”

    I’m struggling to see how this KFC advert is any different?

    • I did indeed write that! I think while the difference is quite a subtle one, it’s a difference none the less. The Starbucks ad, while looking absolutely fantastic, didn’t really do anything. It was a group of people sitting around in a coffee shop, trying to sell a particular lifestyle and brand. There was no emotion, and no entertainment value. It was a nice picture to look at sure, but it did nothing on my behalf. I think the reason it did nothing was answered here;

      “But then again, I suppose I’m not the target audience am I? This ad isn’t aimed at me, and it only made me stop and look because I have trained myself to look at adverts, and then pick them apart to find out if they work or not…. The whole idea behind this ad is to re-engage with existing customers who may have fled the nest for a cheaper (and maybe less tasty) cup of coffee. Starbucks are selling us a lifestyle, and a popular lifestyle at that. Everyone wants to be able to buy expensive coffee, sit with friends, bitch, and chat about nothing. Friends are awesome, and apparently Starbucks can make you even closer. It’s a clever position taken by Starbucks, and one that will do quite well. ”

      The position taken by KFC in this ad isn’t that of ‘friends’, but more of ‘family’. It certainly helps that the ad is moving image, rather than static, because it’s the combination of family imagery and the rather cleverly chosen soundtrack in ‘We Got Family’ that makes it stand out in relation to the Starbucks ad. Sure, the slow music and the brilliantly happy families are a cheap ploy to tug at heart strings, but it all works together. Not everyone has a group of friends that they might sit around drinking coffee with, but everyone everywhere has a family.

      While the KFC ad is selling a lifestyle, and I in no way refute that, it’s displaying a much easier lifestyle to obtain (poor choice of words yes, but I can’t think of another way to rephrase it), and it’s one that doesn’t feel particularly forced. As stated, I’m not exactly in the target audience for either brand, but the KFC advert managed to grab my attention and remind me of great times with family, where as the Starbucks ad didn’t do anything for me at all. That’s the difference. One ad managed to hook me in, and the other push me further away.

      Of course, this is all open to debate as it’s a completely personal viewpoint. Every ad, like any other medium, is looked at differently by everyone. I’m sure someone somewhere likes the Go Compare ads.

  2. Tom says:

    Well I can see why you might think that one works better and I can certainly see why one might appeal to you more on a personal level. It just struck me that you criticised the Starbucks ad for ‘selling nothing’ but then now you appear to be praising KFC for doing pretty much the same thing.

    • I think I should have removed the ‘selling us nothing’ line from the original Starbucks post. I was referring to the lack of a product being sold rather than the brand lifestyle, which I still believe was the major selling point of the original ad.

      I suppose it probably comes down to the fact that I actually like the KFC advert, and don’t really like the Starbucks one! In that respect, I buy into the lifestyle that KFC is trying to sell too me (closeness and family) over the one that Starbucks is trying to sell to me (hip alternative coolness).

      Do you like either of the ads? Which one do you prefer, if any!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: