- “Has there ever been a cartoon character more sultry and sexy than Betty Boop? I mean, besides Donald Duck?” How can you not read the rest of this post at AdJab? How? (Because you screwed up the link, that’s how. Fixed.)
- “And on the Eighth Day, God Thought Very Hard Before Deciding to Create Reporters.” See, I told you He’s not infallible. Nice one from Media Orchard.
- Mentalfloss gives you a chance to release your inner art director. Try your eye on 10 well-known logos some of which have had their colors mixed up …
- Ever wonder which blogs I read? Well now you can find out for yourself: Just go here.
Category Archives: adjab
Aussie ad campaign continues on a roll
Man, those folks from Down Under sure know how to get the most for their ad dollar. Having previous reaped a whirlwind of free press from getting the “So where the bloody hell are you?” ad banned in the UK, they’re now doing it again — this time in Canada. The Canucks have banned the ad from TV and say there’s no point in the Aussie Tourism Minister coming to the Great White North to appeal the case as she did in the UK because they’re not going to change their minds. Well, I bet Ms. Bailey still makes the trip as the point of her trip won’t be to change the decision but to get publicity and I bet it will again work like a charm. Hmmmm, what mildly racey word can they put in the US version?
BREAKING NEWS!!! Turns out they didn’t have to ad anything to get free publicity in the US. Adjab points out that the ever looney American Family Association (motto: We Make PETA Look Rational) has gone on the offensive and found something offensive. According to a story in the Sydney Morning Herald:
AFA members are expected to bombard Tourism Australia with thousands of emails and phone calls in coming weeks to vent their feelings. Members are also expected to boycott Australia as a holiday destination. “I just feel pretty sure the typical American family who is watching TV with their children and they’re exposed to this ad are going to be upset,” AFA director of special projects, Randy Sharp, said. “I don’t want my children to hear that phrase. It’s a shocking phrase because we’re not familiar with it. I guess they use it all the time in Australia, but it’s a foreign language here so I think it’ll have a negative impact rather than positive.”
Nervous Aussie tourism officials said losses from the AFA’s decision could mount into the high single digits. They were actually more worried as to what would happen after the boycott ended. “Wasn’t ’til they stopped the ‘cott of Ford that Ford really started to lose money,” said one Australian stereotype.
Don’t Randy Sharp’s quotes sound so dumb as to be made up? Sadly, it’s in keeping with everything else I’ve read about him. Can we nominate the AFA for some sort of award for “PR Person’s Best Friend”?
Today’s news from Blogistan
Quote of the day goes to Adjab summarizing an article from AdAge: Time Inc. is being forced to crap a $4.5 million squirrel as part of a settlement with parties who alleged the company renewed magazines without actually receiving requests to do so and subsequently charging customers. The attorneys general from 23 states had gotten together to force the laxative down Time’s throat.
That’s a lot of squirrel.
Another one rides the bus: Ad-verse, a blog with a great name and attitude, has gone over to the light side of the force. The site closed because Eric Weaver decided to write something called Brand Dialogue (shudder). His final post: Ad-Verse, my ranty, negative-energy blog on the state of modern marketing, is closed. I felt myself getting all Grouchy Grampa on everyone, and who wants that?
ME! ME! ME!
An odd sort of spam war is being waged here at CD. Remember the item I wrote about Spam Cube, the company which is waiting for Hormel to send it a cease-and-desist letter for trademark infringement? Well someone from the Cube has been posting comments which I have to assume are some sort of a rebuttal of my argument. One comment reads: YOU DON’T EAT IT. YOU DELETE IT http://www.donteatitdeleteit.com
The other had a link to a defintion of spam that does not include spicey pork products. Thus I am refuted, I guess. My reply: Dude, your argument is with Hormel not me. Should they ever catch wind of your product they, with the support of the entire judicial system, will force you to invest in some new letterhead and a new URL. And, just FYI, when wondering about how to deal with blogs … this is the kind of thing that it’s better to ignore. Now you just look sillier. If that’s possible.