Kellogg's are using an Olympic gold medallist to front a new campaign. The television spot (which I can't yet find online!) is topped and tailed with pack-shots and name-checks, but the underlying theme is the promotion of breakfast as a performance-enhancer in all walks of life.
A great philosophy with which to associate themeselves, but they had to contaminate it. Wouldn't it have been braver and smarter just to run spots that weren't product advertising? Infomercials, if you will, that focussed solely on the behaviour and made no reference to Kellogg's.
1) The absence of branding would differentiate the approach. It would label it as authentic information, rather than the latest creative execution. It would be less likely to be dismissed as just another ad.
2) The initiative could still be linked to Kellogg's at point of purchase via special packs and promotion and elsewhere by the myriad elements of a multimedia campaign (as, of course, they are doing).
3) While I don't think the tactic requires market strength to succeed, they're already market leader. That means they're most likely to garner the greatest share of the benefit of any resultant increase in breakfasting.
Promoting the brand is focussing on the competition.
Promoting the behaviour is focussing on the customers.
Promote the brand and you may pick up share of the existing market.
Promote the behaviour and who knows what you might achieve.
Post a Comment