
"Since the crocodile is the symbol of Lacoste, we thought they might be interested in sponsoring our crocodiles." - Silvino Gomes, Commercial Director of the Lisbon Zoo
The discussion of brand relevance in the ad world had been going on for a quite some time yet it became most relevant on Marlboro Friday in 1993. (The first time that Marlboro cut it's price in spite of it's massive branding.) It was considered the death of the brand until the recession ended. When people had extra capital they spent the extra money by going back to the high brands they loved. A formula seemed to arise from that.
With the growth of interactive, came the rise of marketing over advertising. Instead of promising people happiness, simplicity, youth by using a brand. They turned to creating contests and child-like prizes for giving out your user information. The book, "Married to the Brand", points out that when "courting" your consumer giving them deals and price cuts only shortens the potential life of that consumer shopping your store. Instead of creating a lasting relationship through seeing themselves in you, the brand is saying, "Sorry we aren't awesome, here's a dollar for your email information."
The questions isn't wether or not interactive is here to stay or not. The question is when will we figure out how to integrate brand advertising successfully into interactive advertising?
Here's an example of one place I think it did work:
Agency: Big Spaceship
Client: HBO
Campaign: Voyeur