Archive for January, 2007|Monthly archive page

Not On The Money (Shot)

This viral for Panasonic Viera dropped into my in-box yesterday. At first I thought it had to be a spoof – I mean, bloke gets elephant money shot out of TV… But then I checked the website It’s legitimate. Which scares me for a number of reasons. Firstly, someone actually got paid for making this rubbish – mind you, it does serve as a great example of how easy it is to go wrong with a viral video, so perhaps it was worth it. Secondly – and more frighteningly – someone, somewhere fairly senior in Panasonic UK must have approved this, which means that they must have thought that this would actually add value to the brand – presumably by demonstrating their understanding of ‘Nuts’ humour. For me this really oversteps the line and is just plain crass. When Ford (sorry, Ogilvy) did it with the SportKa decapitating the cat it was sick, but it was funny – and completely in keeping with the image they were trying to project for the brand (the evil twin) – it was just a shame that Ford didn’t have the balls to follow it through. With this ad the gag is too forced – it has no relation to the product or the brand and is trying to make the brand relevant by being ‘one of the lads’ – and, as is so often the case, a miss is as good as a mile. Not only is it not funny, I think it devalues the Panasonic brand by trying too hard.

Nice Interactive Ad

Adverbox spotted this great anti-dandruff shampoo site – a clever way of grabbing attention and driving interaction. Thanks to Spencer for the link.


Gonzalez vs Nadal

Alex and I spotted this on the TV the other night and I’m afraid it made us snigger.

Collective Terms

Pretty much everything – well, anything of any consequence – has a collective noun. A pride of lions; an ostentation of peacocks, a murder of crows (someone really didn’t like crows).

A Planner far greater than I (Jane Newman, former Planning Director at Chiat Day and arguably the Godmother of US Planning) once opined that the correct collective noun for Planners is a ‘Gaggle.’ Whilst I love the word, for me it conjures up images of people chattering aimlessly and incessantly (like geese). Indeed – worse still – it is, apparently (well, according to the occasionally reliable wikipedia) a military slang term for ‘an unorganised group doing nothing’ – which is definitely not what planners are (most of the time anyway).

So what is an appropriate collective for Planners?

My opening shot is ‘An Enquiry’ because that is what planners do – or should do – all of the time – enquire. Like my 5-year-old son, we constantly question things – why? why? why? – not to mention the who? what? where? when? how? and so on. We’re always on the look-out for things that are interesting, exciting, stimulating, different. We’re always questioning how we can do things better – understand customers better, communicate more effectively, be more relevant, cut through the clutter. I flirted briefly with ‘An Inquisition of Planners’ but history (aided and abetted by Monty Python) has added a fairly hefty negative connotation to that one, along with ‘A Colombo…’ (“Uhhh…. Just one more question Mr. Suspect”) but ultimately I like ‘An Enquiry…’.

That is (at least in theory) what this blog will be – the random musings of An Enquiry Of Planners about planning, communications, advertising and marketing and some of the interesting stuff that we come across along the way.

And before you start, I’m English, so I prefer Enquiry (a request for information) to Inquiry (a formal investigation.

Another Nail In The Coffin

Much has been made in the blogosphere over the last few weeks about John Lowery’s suggestion that blogging is killing planning – Richard Huntington’s discussion of it over on Adliterate is an excellent and considered discussion.

Which makes it the perfect time to launch yet another Planners’ blog – if only to put another couple of nails in the e-coffin of our profession (if that’s what it is…).