My problem with advertising (and chemical companies)

This happens all the time. I see a breathtaking, transporting ad like the one below and at the end of the darn spot I wonder what the heck I'm supposed to do with it.

Am I supposed to feel good about a chemical company because it's now introduced "the Human Element"? Umm, I'm not a rocket scientist or chemically savvy in the least but you aired it on broadcast TV--so I'm thinking I should readily get your message. And what message am I to understand by telling me how hydrogen and potassium bond?

Am I the only one who finds these ads unclear? Is DOW now going to help humans? Are they going to be more humanly minded? Perhaps it's an ad to make the DOW Board of Directors smile? Because it just makes me shake my head.

Yo, DOW: you're gonna have to do A LOT more than an exquisite series of ads to make me feel warm, fuzzy and all human about your chemicals. Your sustainability pledge smacks of being trendy, not responsible. Like, in addition to being more environmentally aware, don't spend millions on these ads but instead start some "human element" initiatives--perhaps college sponsorships, restoration projects and the like--that make good on your "human element" promise. Though, to be fair, this ad promised nothing.

Which is exactly my problem with so much advertising--and why I'm so adamant about correcting people when they assume I "work in advertising." (I know, as if marketing has a better rep.)

Oh, and if you want to be all human a blog is a really good idea. I don't think that all companies should blog (but all companies should listen). However, being that you've gone all human it's a good idea to use technologies that get you closer to those very humans. Yeah, you'll get a firestorm of haters but at least you can begin talking with them instead of talking how hydrogen and atoms and stuff bond. (If you have a blog, I'm sorry I missed it, but this human found that element too hard to find on your site.)

Net/net: Commit yourselves to humans, not human element ad campaigns. That's a decent mantra for your marketing efforts, actually (you're welcome ;-).

Btw, I caught this commercial while I was watching an amazing show on the History Channel about the end of the world. I do not think it was a coincidence since they talked about chemicals a good deal. But even though the show was talking "chemicals," I don't think that was necessarily good targeting for these ad spots. Why do I say this? Because when the show spoke of chemicals they did not talk highly of their effects upon the world. I wonder if the CMO of DOW knows where her/his human ads are running. If they're listening, now they do (you're welcome :-).

Anyhow, the ad below is nice (RSS readers go here). Also, here is a very hard to watch backlash to the commercial in case you're interested.

Comments

[Roger Anderson]

CK,
They are a chemical company run by scientists and engineers. You want them to be sensitive feeling people too? Boy, you get one nice feel-good comment and you think everyone should be mushy. I suppose next you'll say that they can hire nice if they don't know how to be nice. Oh wait, that's not a bad idea.

Happy Monday!

BTW - A) I am a recovering scientist B) I was kidding about your demands on society. :)

[CK]

@Roger: Love your feedback...but you're kidding me, right? They committed millions to this positioning and they create a hollow ad? All they had to do was start a foundation, few sponsorships and programs and PR would have taken care of the rest. Plus, having worked with many scientists (I work in hi-tech a lot) they've by now learned to hire marketers...well, a lot of them have learned. Apparently not Dow. Thanks again...love how you say "recovering" scientist!

[Mike]

You should send 'em a bill for that education.

Too bad they have old school PR and Marketing people who're out of touch.

Maybe if the read "The New Rules of Marketing & PR", they'd do a little better.

Or they could hire you and do WAY better.

Then they'd have an ad that had a purpose other than having an ad.

[Lewis Green]

CK,

Geez, I am about to be contrary. I like the ad and have seen it dozens of times, as it is a regular on the Sunday morning news shows. I think that we have to recognize who the ad is directed toward: people who watch news shows and the History channel (I bet it runs on the Discovery Channel, as well.)

We are talking well-educated, successful, upwardly mobile, and entrepreneurs and executives at every level in every business. It is a B2B ad not a B2C one. It isn't about getting folks to rush to the hardware store and look for the Dow brand on their next can of pesticide. It is about sharing the idea that the new Dow is different from the one that killed so many in India. It is a different brand today than it was yesterday. It is a brand-building message not a marketing and sales one. The message resonates with me.

[ann michael]

Lewis -

Contrary is good! It's how we expand our minds. (Sometimes I think we all don't challenge each other's views enough!)

I don't think DOW can come out of nowhere with this. If they really want to show they're different - then show it. Don't show me "hydrogen bonding with oxygen" - they can't take credit for water!

What can they take credit for?

We all derive benefits from chemicals every day - let them show me some that they've contributed - then make the case that the new way of creating that benefit is different from the old way.

Otherwise I'm sitting out here with nothing to perceive but apparent hypocrisy!

(PS - they might not be asking us to run out and get chemicals, but they're trying to tell us - everyone that watches the programming on which the ad is run - that they've changed. If they want us to buy it - they need to do a little better than that)

[CK]

@Mike: can you imagine me working at Dow? Ha! Actually, it would do them some good to engage humans like us. And they'd save gazillions not running hollow ads...but actually implementing some programs that make good on that human promise (though, again, this ad promised nothing--and a brand is nothing more than a promise...so that's why this "branding ad" is hollow).

@Lew: You know I love your view, but I could never call you contrary my pal (you're too positive a person). I agree that I "like" the ad--in fact it's breathtaking as I said. But it's unclear and comes off as insincere (to me, anyhow). In vocalizing the "Human Element" it needs much more to support it (like programs that support the human element). Now, you raise a good point that this is for B2B. But it runs on broadcast TV and, being a businesswoman I think I should readily get what they're trying to get across.

For example, Ann raises a GREAT point. Show us how we derive benefits from chemicals everyday and don't even realize it. Show us how their advancements have advanced we humans. I see people swimming in waterfalls and hiking through canyons...that happens without Dow and their chemicals.

Show us how you've changed. Look at what BP did with their ads: they posed a question to their audience in the ads and had various people (altho' they were likely actors) weigh in. I loved that campaign and that was about chemicals (petroleum!). See what I'm saying? I'm sure they're likely scared with activist groups but if you're gonna say something like "We've introduced the HUMAN element," then you gotta make good on it. Otherwise this mouthy marketer will blog that she sees through the veiled attempt--and their failed attempts to be all socially trendy.

Hope that made sense and love the discussion. Let's hope Dow is listening to these humans.

@Ann: Couldn't agree more. I will say that in saying that they've now gone all human, they are saying that they used to not be. Wild, how they've just inadvertantly owned their past, eh? I'm all about saying you're sorry but I highly doubt that's what Dow wanted to do.

[Lewis Green]

Ann and CK:

Actually, Dow has an ad that runs on the same media buy telling us how chemicals may our lives better and easier. This one is a follow-up to that, and it's claim is that it isn't about the chemicals, it's about the people who use them to create things that make our lives better. The message is that people are more important than the chemicals, and that chemicals exist to serve people.

Maybe I'm too immersed in marketing, but I suspect that their target audience, which isn't you or me, gets this, as that audience also is looking for ways to communicate the same kinds of messages about their businesses.

The key message: It's about people. Sticks with me, but I guess it's doesn't with others.

Oh, well, the perfect example of why most advertising fails. Messaging when there is no product promotion or an offer requires an attentive and accepting audience. When we target for reach, as all television advertising does, no such audience exists. The hope is that the target audience gets it and the others don't blog negatively about it. So much for hope.

[CK]

@Lew: I'll try to find the follow-up ad. Thing is, it's gonna be a stretch to hope that all viewers see both ads. All they needed was more thinking and less budget waste - make good on your human promise (through programs that benefit us); make all ads resonate a clear message (not just be pretty) and open the lines of communications since you went all human and broadcast it large and wide (I don't advocate all companies blog, but ones who say they're human most definitely should).

And you know what? I advocate by voicing our dislikes for the positioning and ad that we've done them a HUGE favor (assuming they're listening). Why? Because people are saying these things anyhow. At least we're polite enough to say it to their face (and we gave them a goldmine of free advice--they owe us a thank you). And on that note, thank you for the time and thought you give me, Lew. I value it so much ;-).

[Lewis Green]

CK,

You always get me to think, and that is invaluable. Have a great week!

[CK]

@Lew: We get each other to think and learn...it's gonna be a busy week with Book Club and congrats (!) on BrandingWire.

[David Reich]

I'm with Lewis on this one. It's a B2B, or actually, a B2I (investment community) ad. It's not at all about selling product. It's a feel-good ad to make investors think of Dow. If it also convinces a few people that Doiw is about more than pollutants, then it's just a bonus.

They can't come out and blatantly say "We're a good investment; buy Dow stock." The SEC would require so much disclosure information that it would make the disclosure at the end of pharma ads look like nothing.

[CK]

@David: Thanks for the chime-in. Then I guess it was a million-dollar ad to make the directors smile after all. But why run the risk of broadcasting a hollow ad? (well, I still think it's hollow). Have you seen the rebuttal on YouTube?

At least I now understand the human element means humans who can afford to buy boatloads of stock (forget the people who've been hurt, they can't afford Dow so they're not the target...but they are "human").

[Ryan Turner]

Wouldn't exposure to the chemicals make you feel warm and fuzzy anyway?

Seriously, it's ironic that the emphasize on technology (i.e. blog) to make something seem more, well, "human" tends to come up so frequently with respect to corporate PR activity.

Is it that you're trying to emphasize credibility, legitimacy, and connection more than "human"-- or "humanity" in terms of things like sensitivity, thoughtfulness, and vulnerability.

Because no matter how "effective" the technology, it's still "relevant" at best for certain segments-- and can actually be offputting, distancing , superficial to other segments of the population the more it gains traction for others.

Nothing wrong with "old school" PR *and* marketing as there's nothing so inherently right with the "new"-- it's the mindset and the practioners, not the practices, that creak, squeak, and reek as much as they groove, move, and prove. Much learning to be had from new ideas and old wisdom constantly. Delicate balance, wot?

[CK]

Ryan: Good to hear from you. There is a delicate balance between old and new, agreed. In DOW's case since they unveiled being all human...yet the ad speaks of nothing besides saying they are human...implementing ways to connect with people would be a fine idea. It would also be a fine idea if they were to communicate what this whole human positioning means to us (besides pretty pictures), because, as said above in the comments, it just comes off as a play to their investors to feel good about their stock in chemicals (or I guess feel less guilty about their stock in chemicals). A wasted opp by DOW to not only increase stock value and keep shareholders, but to actually make good on their human claim.

[Ryan Turner]

Agreed. From that sense, then, one thing to always keep in mind is *precisely* that the shareholders (and regulators) are generally the unstated primary audience of such efforts, even when they're marketed to the "general" public. I'd simply ask does it ring "true" for them, not us-- is it effective and does it punch all of/enough of the right buttons for *them*. If so, then, eh, I guess it works...

Problem with these things is twofold. Viewers make the mistake of flinging ye olde charges of "spin", "propaganda", etc. without knowing what critical analysis actually entails on their part. Corporate citizens, meanwhile, overlook or undercook the power of public responsiveness just as much basic corporate responsibility in their follow-through.

Politics and issues aside, Marketing is never distanced from PR in this arena. If you're getting played, make sure you're getting paid for it. Interested parties would find this stuff the most interesting of all.

IOW: this could be the most "insincere" piece of drek, but as long as it rings "humanly true" or "humane" for a chemical company (!) to its folks that *really count the most, it works-- other opportunities be danged.

It's only when the really toxic stuff flies that generally noting better be wasted, lest they risk being dumped upon in a major way. For the fluffy proactive stuff, maybe less of a concern to them compared to [ahem] some others I could name [cough]

http://multinationalmonitor.org

http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com

[CK]

@Ryan: Yep, I'm calling-out DOW's hollowness and I need to remember they care not about most of the (human)viewership watching their ads. Agree with Lew, David and you there completely. On that note, if they really want to reposition they should have rebranded completely (seriously). Knock-off the old baggage entirely and just migrate it over so that enough of the older investors know "It's still DOW, just better and more human now".

You give me the best links, thanks for the two above.

[Tangerine Toad]

Sorry CK- I'm squarely with Lewis and David on this one. It's a brilliant campaign for a company that's long been in need of one.

See again, you forget that YOU ARE NOT THE TARGET AUDIENCE. (Sorry for the caps, but it's an important point for you and many of your posters.) Frankly, Dow could give a flying f**k if it pisses you off or not. You're not getting your hedge fund to buy their stock and you're probably not that committed that you look on the back of every bottle of roach spray or oven cleaner to determine that it's Dow-free.

Dow doesn't need to talk to consumers. Consumers don't buy Dow's products. Other business people do. And they have plenty of HUMAN opportunities to talk to those people. As in one-on-one sales calls, targeted seminars and the like.

Finally, while you, Ryan and Ann are bright and informed enough to know that Dow has a pretty nasty backstory, I can guarantee you that 90% of the non-target audience people who see that spot have no idea about Bhopal and the like.

[CK]

@Toad: Target audience or not, these ads don't "say" anything besides 'we forgot the human element but, no longer'. Sorry, I just fail to see the brilliance in these pieces (tho' they are pretty). For a chemical co. that is working to reposition I do find the BP ads brilliant (just as a somewhat point of comparison on chemical spots).

They would have done better--and saved a boatload--by investing in PR showing how they're committed to humans...especially if this is a "feel good about buying DOW stock" play. Another thing that I've noticed about this piece is that the voice-over sounds so much like the MasterCard guy. Btw, I'm not sure that 90% of the non-targets don't know the backstory.

[CK]

At least Amnesty is working for people not to forget:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGUSA20061201001

Clean up your act and take care of the 'human' lives that your chemical 'elements' continue to hurt...then do your "brilliant" campaign. ugh.