If you’ve been in the business long enough, you come to understand there are some basic rules to follow when running an ad on the Super Bowl.  Humor works best.  Use animals or big-breasted women – or both.  Wow people with extraordinary settings and production values.

Many of the advertisers on last night’s big game followed the Super Bowl advertising playbook to a tee (view all of the spots here).  And, yet, they violated some fundamental rules of advertising in general.

know thy customer

Last night there were at least three spots (I lost count after awhile) that tried to tap a certain manly spirit but failed.

Dockers called on all men to “Wear the Pants” and rebel against the growing movement of proud, but pants-less men.  In Dove’s spot for its Men+Care line, men were bolstered with the upbeat charge: “You can take on anything, of course you can — becaaaauuuse you’re a man!” The ad implied to men that although you previously felt inadequate or overwhelmed by others’ expectations, you can now “be comfortable in your own skin.” Chrysler’s manthem threw subtlety out the window with its defiant declarations of “I will drive the car I want to drive” and “man’s last stand.”

In each case, the message came through loud and clear:  Men have been oppressed and suppressed for too long.  Men, it’s time to stand up, take a stand, stand up for your rights, stand tall…in other words, be a Man!

Problem is, there is no problem.  Or at least, there’s not a problem men are willing to admit.

Such calls to arms fell flat with men because the consumer insight upon which they’re founded is inaccurate.

The movement in American culture of recent years toward Alpha Females, more matriarchal families, and Girl Power gave rise to the “I am woman, hear me roar” advertising anthems.  Ads which have resonated with women demonstrated that marketers understood their female targets and had something relevant to offer them.  Spots like Nike’s “I Feel Pretty” featuring Maria Sharapova proving that’s she’s more than a pretty face, and ESPN’s “Running Away” in which a woman goes running and leaves the burdens of her life in the dust, were inspired by years of women actually being oppressed and suppressed.

Men are in a different place.  They haven’t spent years trying to shed stereotypes and live up to impossible expectations.  They don’t feel misunderstood and misrepresented by advertisers.  There’s no widespread pent-up disappointment or resentment.  Perhaps there should be – and maybe there is, but it’s hidden.  And so rallying-cry ads don’t resonate with them.

Men don’t need to be inspired to embrace who they are.  In fact, I suspect men found such suggestions embarrassing, if not offensive.  They don’t need ads to tell them what to do – they’re men, after all.

These ads demonstrate that their creators don’t really understand their target. Instead of finding a message that resonates with men in a socially acceptable way, they simply took a formula that had previously worked on women and applied it to their male target.  Ironic, don’t you think?

know thyself

Second to knowing your customer, knowing yourself is the most critical rule for advertisers. A few of Hyundai’s spots make this point.

In one ad, beauty shots of a car getting a paint job and a voiceover talking about classical music sonatas are followed by the title card, “Better paint quality than Mercedes CLS550.”  Another spot suggests that Hyundai is the new definition of luxury.

With both of these ads, Hyundai is trying to position itself as a luxury brand — but it’s just not credible.  Comparisons to Mercedes and caviar are too far-fetched.  Given that the Sonata’s highest list price is still under $30K, it isn’t a luxury car.  Hyundai may be a very fine automotive brand, but it’s not a luxury one. It shouldn’t try to be something it’s not.

Instead it should embrace what it is – and right now, that is a superior choice to Toyota.  With all of Toyota’s recall troubles, this is Hyundai’s moment to shine.  And shine it did in its Body Pass spot.

In this ad, a Sonata is shown moving through “one of the most technologically advanced factories in the world” — but instead of machines and conveyor belts, Hyundai employees are shown passing the car above their heads like a rock star at a concert.   The spot closes with the title, “Assembled by 3,300 quality experts.”  This spot used a strong, visually-interesting way to make a credible and compelling point about the brand – it’s high quality.

I’m sure the spot was conceived and shot before Toyota’s troubles arose, but it is a brilliant execution – and, most importantly, one that is true to the Hyundai brand.

unsavory associations

The third fundamental rule broken by some of last nights’ spots relates to subliminal messaging.  Effective marketers use the power of suggestion in advertising to create associations to exist in people’s subconscious.  One might argue whether or not sexually-shaped ice-cubes and flashing images are used (and effective), but every advertising person knows to employ subtle tactics to create associations — like choosing to shoot an ad in an upscale setting in order to evoke a more premium image.

While these approaches are usually intended to create positive associations for the brand, occasionally unintended negative ones are made.  For this reason last year I criticized Cheetos for using pigeons in its Super Bowl ad – this year I have the same beef with Denny’s use of chickens.

Denny’s two spots featured lots of screaming chickens, panicked over the amount eggs they’d have to produce for the chain’s Free Grand Slam breakfast offer.  However, no one wants to think about live chickens when they think about eating eggs.  That’s why you don’t see cows in burger chain campaigns or pigs in bacon ads.

Denny’s not only made the association between their offer and the chickens their diners’ eggs will come from – they made it the core idea of their spots.  Most people might not have been turned off by the association when the ad ran, but the message was so powerful, some will likely experience a subconscious negative feeling if they recall the ad when they sit down at the restaurant.

Fortunately for Denny’s, their offer is so compelling, most people will ignore the cognitive dissonance.  But that begs the question – the offer is so compelling, why let a drove of chickens spoil it?!

Doritos is also an offender.  I don’t know which is worse — the thought of Doritos as dog food (as depicted in the dog collar spot) or the image of the gross gym guy spitting out a Dorito in the Dorito ninja ad.  Both have created negative associations in my mind that I’m not likely to forget soon.

Marketers should know better – and be more careful.

Just as winning in football requires mastering the fundamentals, winning in Super Bowl ads begins with adherence to simple, generally-accepted rules for effective advertising.

P.S. Most Super Bowl ad critiques are a matter of personal taste.  I’m hoping the above comments reflect a little less subjectivity and a little more critical thinking about advertising in general.  Having said that, I do want to give a shout-out to two spots which stood out to me simply because I liked them:

• NFL – the drama created by the super slo-mo of the tremendous play by Reggie Bush followed by the emotion captured in the multiple shots of fans made this spot captivating.  It stirred my passion for football even though I’m not a really big follower of the sport.
• Google – the Googly simplicity of this ad drew me in and held my attention.  Beyond that, it was such a great product demo:  it didn’t “tell;” it “showed” – the product wasn’t integrated into the story; it was the story.

I’m eager to hear your take on the spots.  Comment away!

related posts:

• my superbowl was filled with guacamole
• if a brand has something to say, say it

My critique of Lucky Jeans‘ “Lucky Few” campaign was published in this week’s Brandweek.  For those of you who didn’t see it, here goes:

For decades, fashion advertising seems to have followed a formula that goes something like this: Gorgeous models + famous photographer = stunning print campaign. Perhaps models were switched out for celebrities or a gimmick was thrown in the mix but, overall, there really hasn’t been much in the way of innovation in apparel brands’ marketing. For the most part, the people wearing those clothes have been stunning, and chances are they don’t look anything like you do.

That’s why the recently launched “Lucky Few” campaign from Lucky Brand seemed to have so much potential. As the press release explained, the fashion label had selected a group of “artisans”—ranging from musicians to an aspiring actress—to model its fall 2008 collection. The idea of choosing real-life creative types as models was intended to underscore the brand’s “message of individualism and the belief that being original and creative should be celebrated.”

Sounds great, huh? I imagined an inclusive, celebratory campaign featuring actual people whose compelling-but-flawed selves would inspire us to carve our own creative paths through life. I think that’s the kind of fresh approach that apparel brands need. But it looks like we’re not going to luck out with the undifferentiated and unfocused campaign that Lucky’s delivered. Real as these folks may be, they still look like stars—just ones you haven’t heard of. They come off as contrived, unapproachable and, in some cases, irrelevant to the theme. Just how “ordinary” is an aspiring musician who’s already been to Juilliard? Sure, some of the winners of the national selection process came from humble beginnings and got, well, lucky. Maybe that’s the problem: “Lucky Few” smacks of elitism; these are not Average Joes like you and me.

They certainly don’t look like you and me, either. Remember the Dove “Real Beauty” campaign from 2004? That campaign featured everyday women, warts and all—and it worked. Granted, Lucky is selling fashion, not soap, and its core demo is cool and young. But instead of taking a creative risk, Lucky defaulted to the “beautiful people” shoot, courtesy of photographer/director Michael Bernard.

What’s so bad about that? Well, the stated goal is authenticity, and that’s been undermined by highly stylized images like these. Along the way, differentiation has been another casualty; these shots make Lucky look like all the other high-concept apparel brands littering the glossy mags.

Lucky also could have escaped the sea of sameness by communicating a distinctive POV, but the messaging is scrambled. The brand’s homepage claims the “Lucky Few” is an “amazing group of individuals who used their talent to make luck happen,” while its Facebook page says they’re “people that live for creative expression.” Is the campaign about luck? Creativity? Individuality? Dreams?

The campaign signage only muddles things further. The headline on one piece asks, “Who’s Your Joan?” in a somewhat esoteric reference to the inspiration one of the artists received after seeing a painting depicting Joan of Arc. Yet the same piece features the slogan, “Make Luck Happen.” I don’t know whether Lucky is trying to inspire me or cajole me. Either way, I’m confused.

Postings by the brand’s Facebook friends suggest that I’m not the only one, either. In answer to the invitation to submit their own “lucky stories,” people have posted everything from a recounting of how they met their girlfriend at a party to a promotion for their budding musical career. It’s an attempt to harness social media, but the lasso has clearly slipped. Lucky’s Facebook page is primarily comprised of images of the Lucky Few, and it looks as though the print campaign has just been peeled off and stuck there. It’s no wonder that three weeks after its launch, the page has garnered only 1,000 fans and wall posts by 30 people—many of whom are Lucky employees (Zara, which launched its page a month earlier, now has more than 160,000 fans and 500-plus wall posts).

At a time when brands have to take greater creative strides to get noticed, I wish that Lucky had done more than follow in the well-worn footprints. I guess that goes to show there’s a difference between wishing for something and making your own luck.