And in addy news...

It's been a busy week...not as much updating on the world of advertising, but here's some stuff that might not be new, but is interesting- at least to me. ;)

Out-law.com has the low down on an advertising campaign by Lastminute.com which received complaints. The Advertising Standards Authority dismissed the complaints as the posters were "deemed not to be offensive or mocking the Christian faith."

The posters for the on-line travel specialist depicted bright sunlight streaming through the clouds. In the bottom right-hand corner was the lastminute.com logo and the caption "Keep weekends sacred".
One of them read:
"And on the sixth day Mary didst flee the office for a humbly priced trip to New York. And she shopp'd til she didst hobble in her kitten heels. From the book of lastminute.com, 14:59 ? 62."
Another read:
"And as David returned on the eighth day from Ibiza he told of how little he had paid. And his work colleagues didst have dark and beastly thoughts. From the book of lastminute.com, 9:58 - 59."

It's nice to see that the ASA didn't uphold the complaints. I like the copy in the first one best. (hat tip to Tracy)

Al Ries goes on a rant about slogans. His points on "fuzzy" taglines are somewhat valid. Although there are some that do work. It just depends on the brand and their relationship to the consumer. The fact that many taglines say absolutely nothing about the product/service/brand is something that I've noticed to be more prominent lately. Sometimes it makes me wonder what happened to all the lessons the ad folk learned back in school? Did they go in one ear and out another? Or is it the client choosing the wrong lines? Although if that's the case, the agencies shouldn't even be presenting them with those options. It does seem like there has been a lack of solid taglines recently. I'm not sure if that has to do with the fact that brands seem to be changing them constantly. Is it a new trend? If so, you can't expect to have a good recall of them by the public. And isn't that the point? Sure, capturing the essence of a brand in a few words/phrase/sentence isn't easy. But it's one of the more important things for a brand...it ends up on every piece of advertising, on press releases, and even sometimes on the packaging. So it makes sense take the time to create something that is powerful, and meaningful to the brand.

Great FoxTrot comic about advertising. And one about spam and Monty Python. And one refering to the iPod campaign. Yeay to Bill Amend :D

Clay found Vitamin Q- a temple of trivia and lists which could come in handy. From slang words ending in "-ggy or -ggie" to various terms for being drunk to three things you didn't want to know about your eyes. Definitely can see myself wasting plenty of time going through these. But also could be inspirational for adgrunts with conceptual blockage.

Ambush Ads Hitch a Ride On Super Bowl from the Wall Street Journal (subscription only) discusses the way marketers who don't have deep enough pockets to advertise during the big Super Bowl game are getting in on the action. From the article:

A handful of marketers, unable to join the ranks of elite and deep-pocketed sponsors advertising in the Super Bowl, are trying it the other way around: They're putting the Super Bowl in their advertising.
In most cases, though, they can't call it the Super Bowl. Marketers that don't have a deal with the National Football League are barred from using the "Super Bowl" name and other NFL elements, notes Brian McCarthy, an NFL spokesman.
"It's ambush marketing," he says of companies that try to latch onto the Super Bowl anyway. The NFL has legal experts scanning radio, print, TV and other ad platforms for promotions that might use trademarks without permission.

Companies that are alluding to the Super Bowl in their ads include Gateway, the pizza chain Papa John's, U.S. milk processors and dairy farmers (with milk mustache campaign), and The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. A 30-second spot during this year's Super Bowl XXXVIII costs an average of $2.3 million. Reuters also reports that "AOL will also sponsor the Super Bowl's half-time show and keep viewers plugged in to its Internet site with special game-related entertainment, including footage of posh celebrity parties. AOL.com will replay the commercials after the game and allow users to vote for their favorite ads."

AOL is spending $10million on a new campaign set to break during the Super Bowl, touting their new web accelerator.

Wieden & Kennedy in Portland, Ore., is creating a campaign using three members of the Teutul family - the cast of the "American Chopper" reality series, the top-rated show on the Discovery Channel cable network - to promote a feature of the new AOL 9.0 service being branded as AOL Top Speed.
The Teutuls, who customize motorcycles at a shop named Orange County Choppers, are meant to serve as a metaphor for the benefits of AOL Top Speed. The commercials, to appear during the Super Bowl as well as the halftime show, for which AOL is the sole sponsor, will show Paul Teutul Sr. and his sons Mikey and Paul Jr. souping up motorcycles to hyperbolic levels to humorously demonstrate what AOL Top Speed can do."

Wonder if they fight in the ads too ;)

CBS denies MoveOn.org and PETA from airing ads during the Super Bowl. From Adage.com:

CBS today rejected a request from liberal group MoveOn to air a 30-second anti-President Bush ad during the Super Bowl, saying the spot violated the Network policy. A CBS spokesman said the decision against broadcasting the spot had nothing to do with either the Super Bowl or the ad's specific issue but was because the network has had a long-term policy not to air issue ads anywhere on the network.

But that's not all folks. Reuters reports that PETA will also not be allowed to air their commericals either. Here's some exerpts from the article:

"We just want to be able to present our jiggly women," said Lisa Lange, spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, asking to join advertisers like beer brewers who has boosted sales with images of scantily-clad women.
Liberal group Moveon.org, known for its Internet funding power, told members this week that it hoped to have the first political Super Bowl ad. But its hopes were dashed when CBS said the spot, which asks "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion deficit?" was an issue piece and could not run.
In a letter, CBS told PETA that it would not run advertisements on "controversial issues of public importance." CBS spokesman Dana McClintock said the policy had been in place for years. "We have a policy against accepting advocacy advertising," he added. CBS, a unit of Viacom Inc., does run political advertising for and against candidates.
PETA spokeswoman Lange said that CBS's broadcast of anti-smoking advertisements and even hamburger chain spots were controversial, advocacy pieces, as well. "In essence, CBS is saying we will air an advocacy ad if we agree with the viewpoint," she said.
The PETA ad shows two scantily clad women snuggling up to a meat-eating pizza delivery man. "Meat can cause impotence," the screen reads after the rendezvous fails.

I'm personally not upset that I won't have to see PETA's impotence ad...but overall it's just a weird policy. They do show political ads and well as other "issues of public importance" like anti-smoking ads and the like. I can understand the PETA ad being a problem, but the anti-Bush ad? I think that's stupidity from CBS, being afraid to air it. It'd be nice to see a media outlet that isn't afraid to air controversial opinions. I'd expect this from FOX but not from CBS. I wonder if it's a Viacom-wide policy...although I doubt so, since they also own MTV, MTV2, Nickelodeon, BET, Nick at Nite, TV Land, VH1, Spike TV, Comedy Central and others.

Wonder who owns what? Find out at the Columbia Journalism Review website.