Pork-Barrel Advertising

It looks like a bailout program for Detroit's big three automakers is getting closer to being approved in Washington although it's no done deal yet. And we're all familiar with the many billions of taxpayer dollars that will be doled out to various financial services firms (what it's being spent on I can't tell you).

Not surprisingly, all of this money comes with government involvement in the way these business are actually run. Including, presumably, something of a say — or possibly a big say — in the marketing and marketing budget.

Think about the (potentially) imminent "car czar". According to AdAge, this car czar would control a media budget upwards of $7.3 billion. That's the biggest media budget of any advertiser in the US. Not to mention agency fees associated with all those (unnecessary?) GM, Ford and Chrysler brands (note: not to be insensitive, but you know all of these numbers will be shrinking).

All I can say to this is "Holy shit."

Can you imagine what special circle of hell it would be to have the "car czar", the Senate, Congress and White House as a collective client? Imagine trying to get a creative brief approved. Or getting any actual creative work developed, much less approved. Think about all of the special interest groups that would be lining up to get in on the action: film this on my state road; show my biggest campaign contributors in the ads; hell, put me in the ad...I'm a senator; only use the cars from the plants in my state. It could go on endlessly. It will go on endlessly.

I'm getting ahead of myself, though. Just think about what's going to happen with product development and design. With the approval ratings of our politicians at the lowest levels ever, it's obvious that they're completely out of touch with the general public and don't seem to have any idea what citizens want.

Arrogant, out-of-touch, self-serving people trying to run a business that needs fresh, innovative and compelling thinking.

Wait a minute...that's the way the car companies are today. Maybe I'm over reacting; looks like it might be status quo. Let's all sleep easier.

Poor Jerry Yang

According to pretty much everyone, troubled Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang is leaving troubled Yahoo. Hard to say whether he was a victim of poor timing (trying to do big deals in a deal-averse market), supremely arrogant or a little out of touch with what the rest of the world (read: board) wanted but, whatever the reason, things just weren't working out.

And compounding Mr. Yang's misfortune, his timing for departure was off by some matter of months so that, if there is any justice in the world, he won't receive a Bob Nardelli-esque payout on the way out the door.

Thinking in terms of time and money, it probably would have been a better deal for Yahoo investors had Mr. Yang departed a year or so earlier, received a big payout but left some value in the company in terms some sort of deal with a Google or Microsoft. It might have stung some but at least it would have been a lopsided swap of millions for billions.

Lastly, I have to say that I have only seen Jerry Yang on WSJ's website tonight and in the photo above from Wikipedia. That said, I am a huge fan of the comb-over/comb-back being sported in this photo; I'm putting money on white socks to round out the ensemble.

PS — please don't confuse this Jerry Yang for that Jerry Yang.

Please Notice Me

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've read in a while: Agencies slam branding of $700 billion bailout plan. Seriously? Better 'branding' would have made this plan more appealing to Americans who are watching their retirement accounts and home equity evaporate? Maybe a logo and tagline slapped on it would have made all of those Bear Stearns employees feel a little less stung as they carried their belongings out of their offices for the last time. Honestly, I think that Wall Street and Main Street are only separated by the absence of a clever positioning statement.

And who better than a bunch of advertising agency people to take care of it? Hopefully, the new president, who seems to be very bright and capable, will take some of these wizards and put them in some cabinet posts so they can bring their un-self-importance and wide vision to the issues. I brand them patriots. I brand myself a sarcastic ass.

Here's a crazy idea...

Why not start charging a premium for placement of shitty creative, whether online or offline, traditional or emerging? That way, really good stuff, stuff people enjoy and happily engage with is cheaper (even free?) and easier to place in front of people. And they'll see value in it being there.

On the flip side, lousy stuff — the kind that makes people change channels and leave web sites — would cost a ton and be more difficult to put in front of people. You know, put a little burden on the marketers and advertisers of the world to really think about the consumer (of media, and goods and services) as opposed to just themselves?

For instance, as the creator and owner of Office Space, I'm going to charge Swiffer extra money to show that stupid commercial with a broom sending flowers to a woman at home ...make them pay for the privilege of driving away my hard won viewers.

On the flip side, maybe I'll charge Apple less because their spots keep my viewers interested and actually make a little sense in terms of the content of my show. So, they help me keep my viewers engaged and entertained. How about that?

A Silver Lining

There's an upside to most everything and the current US economic crisis is no different. For instance, for the enterprising web guy, how about registering all the domain names for merged banks. According to this article, this practice is already underway but, given the new happenings every day, it looks like there is still a chance to get ahead of the curve.

Better Than The Tax Incentive?

Surprise, Wal-Mart is back to advertising low prices. It's good to clarify that because everyone was starting to think of the world's biggest retailer as a fashion house. Or some provider of high-end what-ever's. What I thought was interesting, though, was that by shopping and saving at Wal-Mart could save families (or individuals, too, I guess) up to $700 a year. For many, that's more money than they received as part of the governments economic stimulus package. I wonder how far a buck could be stretched if a person's economic stimulus check was spent only at Wal-Mart.

Back From The Dead

Not that anyone every really noticed that I posted to this site. Or that I had been on a nearly year long hiatus (except my friend Chad who actually read this stuff and said he missed it.True, Chad? Or just feeling sorry for me?). But I am going to give it another go and see if I can get a little more traction personally and, perhaps, with others in the wide world of the web.

Granted, this is some what of a shuffling step forward toward my grand ambitions of shouting into the wind and actually being heard but it's a step nonetheless. So off I go. I would welcome any company at all.