|
Volcott posted:Steakums used to be a thing you ate when you wanted some garbage and also grease all over your shirt, but now it's a guy, just like you and me. I always assumed they were for like, dogs
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 14:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 20:33 |
|
|
Fuuuuuuuuck youuuuuuuuuuuuu
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 08:23
|
|
|
Come get your Star Wars 6 movie set, containing the theatrical cut, the original movie premier audio version, the Special Edition, the DVD version, the Blu-ray version, and The Force Awakens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 08:43
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Come get your Star Wars 6 movie set, containing the theatrical cut, the original movie premier audio version, the Special Edition, the DVD version, the Blu-ray version, and Phineas and Ferb: Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 11:21
|
|
|
That 2049...banner? looks off somehow. Like really cheap, like it's the Asylum film version, Knife Jogger 2048.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 11:28
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:That 2049...banner? looks off somehow. Like really cheap, like it's the Asylum film version, Knife Jogger 2048. I think it's because it's almost a forced lack of variety. Everyone's positioned to be on the same level, but the poses actively conflict against that; there's no physical way for it to make sense that Ryan Gosling is behind Harrison Ford, but because they're photos and not stylized art (which the original movie has) you're forced to try and fail to parse that, and it ends up looking really sloppy. Also, putting the 'one shade one color' logo on full photographic background makes it look really flat and cheap compared to the original's plan to just put it on black.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 11:36
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Come get your Star Wars 6 movie set, containing the theatrical cut, the original movie premier audio version, the Special Edition, the DVD version, the Blu-ray version, and The Force Awakens. Actually the smartest marketing move because a trillion nerds including me would buy a six movie set if it had a competent version of the theatrical cut.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
So during the Super Bowl a few years ago, the lights in the stadium went out, and Oreos tweeted this: https://twitter.com/Oreo/status/298246571718483968 This tweet is apparently worth an entire back-patting circlejerk of an article. quote:It was the tweet heard around the world, with over 15,000 retweets, breathless proclamations about the future of marketing and, of course, awards for 360i, the creative agencies, Kraft and MediaVest, the media agency. All in all, about 15 people worked on the tweet. quote:Michael Nuzzo, creative director, 360i: The whole way of working like this had not been anything new. The war room thing was not new. We’d been working like this since 2012. quote:Griner: As it dragged on and became clear everyone was OK, you saw this uptick in brand conversation about the blackout. Suddenly my entire feed turned into this fire hose of Oreo retweets and people congratulating them on an epic tweet. Our article the next morning called it “one of the most successful and brilliant acts of branding” of that year’s Super Bowl.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Tbf that is a drat good tweet for such a trash cookie
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Tbf that is a drat good tweet for such a trash cookie More like oldmilkless. No other cookie absorbs as much milk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
ghost emoji posted:So during the Super Bowl a few years ago, the lights in the stadium went out, and Oreos tweeted this: If it happened today it'd absolutely be ho-him, but in 2013 that was the bleeding edge of internet marketing. Nowadays advertisers keep a large stock of brand images they can throw words on and slam onto social media in seconds, and that exact tweet is a great example of why.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
#VBStrong #Oreos
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Tbf that is a drat good tweet for such a trash cookie
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
Hirayuki posted:I feel like the "dunk" connection is better suited to the NCAA or NBA finals and wasted on the Super Bowl. Yeah, but you don't touchdown, concuss, or get convicted of murder with Oreos.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
buddhist nudist posted:Yeah, but you don't touchdown, concuss, or get convicted of murder with Oreos. Well not with that attitude.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
hosed they missed the perfect chance to edit the elevator clip to show Ray Rice slamming an oreo into a glass of milk E: Oreo Rice
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/carteeair_/status/1128880460095008768?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 02:18
|
|
|
Big Grunty Secret posted:hosed they missed the perfect chance to edit the elevator clip to show Ray Rice slamming an oreo into a glass of milk 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:00
|
|
|
ghost emoji posted:So during the Super Bowl a few years ago, the lights in the stadium went out, and Oreos tweeted this: Its like a sketch from collegehumor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 10:17
|
|
|
boar guy posted:
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
Plastik posted:If it happened today it'd absolutely be ho-him, but in 2013 that was the bleeding edge of internet marketing. Nowadays advertisers keep a large stock of brand images they can throw words on and slam onto social media in seconds, and that exact tweet is a great example of why. This book is from that era, but still very relevant.  These days, you tend to get two types of brands. Ones that are large enough to support teams or those that just hand it off the entire thing to a rando in one of their departments. Steakum always feels like the latter. For the larger brands, even though there's one account per platform, responses are typically handled by two teams. You'll often have a customer service side that handles the "your employee upset me" posts. This team is sometimes run by a sub-division of your company's customer care team that would otherwise handle those same concerns by phone or email. In other cases, that side may be outsourced to one of the larger customer care "call centers" that work several brands at once. The other side of the same account are both messaging (the actual public brand adverts) as well as engagement (responses to positive posts like, "I love your products!"). Again, this may be handled by a dedicated internal marketing sub-team, or it could be outsourced to one of those multi-brand handlers. It's funny because when people thing of @Wendys, they think of the clapback responses. But if you look at their full twitter responses page you can see both the marketing side and the customer service side working from the account.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mightygodking/status/1137472091261980672?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 03:40
|
|
|
I mean JFC that’s a reach
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 03:52
|
|
|
1redflag posted:I mean JFC that’s a reach "Have you tried the new white pride skittles?" asks every edgy high-schooler.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 04:25
|
|
|
Doomsayer posted:"Have you tried the new white pride skittles?" asks every edgy high-schooler. The same kid who asks if you’ve Seen Kyle? He’s about this tall.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 04:45
|
|
|
That’s so bad I can’t believe it’s real.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 04:46
|
|
|
Yeah, whilst I think we all know what they were "trying" to say, but it can also be read 2 very bad ways. 1)all white skittles =YAY white people. 2)We took the rainbow off our product, because the rainbow means gay people, and we don't want to be associated with gay people. Both are kind of stretches, but the Chuds are bandits to making stretches to prove how SJW's are ruining anything, so will also make the same stretches to claim that company supports their hate/pissbaby agenda. And as a related aside, and possible hot take: I personally don't mind ham-fisted attempts to appear performatively woke to market to minorities like this. What it shows to me is, (particularly in regards to LGBTQ people), is that the soulless companies see us the same as they see straight people. As dollar signs to be exploited/marketed to, as opposed to a nebulous 'other' that is to be ignored and margianalized. I completely understand the opposition to it though. These companies don't give a poo poo about LGBTQ issues, nor is a special bag of sugary lollies going to do anything to address the real discriminations, and actual physical hardships that LGBTQ people endure, (a lot of time at the hands of some of these mega-corporations). And, as said above, it is merely performative, and at best positive PR for them. But still, at worst it means that Skittles, (to use the example here) looks at me and says "Hey meatbag, we don't give a poo poo about your sexuality or identity. Give us your money please." As opposed to Chick-Fil-A, who say "gently caress you fag, you aren't good enough to give us your money." So as little as that is, and as much as there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, so long as fuckwadded regressives like the aforementioned Chick-Fil-A, and Chuds exist, it is something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 06:02
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:That’s so bad I can’t believe it’s real. That's so bad I can't believe it's fake.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 06:30
|
|
|
I don’t eat skittles and I am not familiar with their packaging, so I looked at the bag with the rainbow around it and thought the message was “who cares about pride and lgbt issues, the only rainbow that matters is the one on our candy bags.”
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 08:21
|
|
|
HerStuddMuffin posted:I don’t eat skittles and I am not familiar with their packaging, so I looked at the bag with the rainbow around it and thought the message was “who cares about pride and lgbt issues, the only rainbow that matters is the one on our candy bags.” How are you not familiar with Skittles whose slogan has been "taste the rainbow" for what's probably been at least 20 years
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 08:53
|
|
|
i swear i remember this exact same product/internet backlash happened already a few years back, am i crazy?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 09:02
|
|
|
One of the perversely enjoyable parts of my job is being involved for a meeting where some person has to explain how some B2B product is gonna connect with the youth on twitter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 09:05
|
|
|
BrigadierSensible posted:But still, at worst it means that Skittles, (to use the example here) looks at me and says "Hey meatbag, we don't give a poo poo about your sexuality or identity. Give us your money please." As opposed to Chick-Fil-A, who say "gently caress you fag, you aren't good enough to give us your money." i get how you feel, and you're entitled to feel that way, but i'd honestly feel better if these companies just stopped commercializing pride even more then it already has, it honestly makes me madder to exploit something that is supposed to be about our sexuality and gender expression and all that stuff they give no actual fucks about then for chik-fil-a just to tell me to gently caress off. at least they're honest about how they feel
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 11:55
|
|
|
I'm fine if corporations pretend to care about a good cause if it means more donations or raising awareness or whatever. If a soulless corporation supports being gay then that means it's going mainstream.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 12:32
|
|
|
someone awful. posted:i swear i remember this exact same product/internet backlash happened already a few years back, am i crazy? These were definitely a thing last year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 12:38
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:I'm fine if corporations pretend to care about a good cause if it means more donations or raising awareness or whatever. If a soulless corporation supports being gay then that means it's going mainstream. There's a great hbomberguy video that's probably been posted in this thread before, but is worth a watch if you have 20 minutes. One of his points is that brands are only seeing net positives from these "controversial" causes because more people support LGBTQ/BLM/feminism than don't. Which makes me really happy. We're all dollar signs, but there are more dollar signs willing to support good causes than there were even a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
hyperhazard posted:There's a great hbomberguy video that's probably been posted in this thread before, but is worth a watch if you have 20 minutes. One of his points is that brands are only seeing net positives from these "controversial" causes because more people support LGBTQ/BLM/feminism than don't. Which makes me really happy. We're all dollar signs, but there are more dollar signs willing to support good causes than there were even a few years ago. Remember when there was a time that considering LGBT people in marketing at all was taken as a sign that you were secretly “one of them fags itchin’ to get beat.” It may have entirely selfish motives, but it means that kids are going to grow up seeing queerness associated with positivity and normalcy instead of pushed aside and hidden or punished.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
If nothing else it’s useful as a cultural indicator. Whether that’s good in and of itself is arguable but it’s a kind of information.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:I'm fine if corporations pretend to care about a good cause if it means more donations or raising awareness or whatever. If a soulless corporation supports being gay then that means it's going mainstream.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 20:33 |
|
|
I heard about Gillette's latest ad showing a dad teaching his trans son how to shave (love!), but couldn't find it on YouTube for all the reaction videos of people loudly swearing off Gillette for the rest of their lives, etc., etc. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 20:04
|
|