Les anglonautes

About | Search | Grammar | Vocapedia | Learning | Docs | Stats | News podcasts | Videos | History | Arts | Science | Translate and listen

 Previous Home Up


Vocapedia > Media > Advertising, ads, marketing, graphic designer





Coronavirus Commercials Are Everywhere, Here's What Advertisers Want Us to Think        Video        NYT News        28 May 2020


Our critic Amanda Hess

looks at how brands are selling shopping as a noble act.





















Viktor Hachmang


The Cost of Paying Attention


MARCH 7, 2015


















Looking on the bright side …

A 1930s poster, produced for the London & North Eastern Railway,

paints an idyllic picture of the North Yorkshire coastline.


Photograph: SSPL via Getty Images


 The English and Their History by Robert Tombs review – unfashionably upbeat

This engaging and persuasive survey of 13 centuries

resists declinism and suggests England is a lucky country


Saturday 13 December 2014        08.59 GMT


















The Guardian        p. 28        1 December 2008














































brand        USA










target        USA










advertising        UK















tobacco > advertising, ads        UK










advertising        USA











advert        UK






ad    USA

Coronavirus Commercials Are Everywhere,

Here's What Advertisers Want Us to Think

Video    NYT News    28 May 2020







racially insensitive ad        USA






Racist, ​s​exist, ​r​ude​ and crude​:

the worst of 20th century advertising – in pictures        UK

racist-sexist-rude-crude-worst-20th-century-advertising-in-pictures v





marketing medium






























mass marketing        USA

















advertising > smartphones        USA






New York Times > declining advertising market        USA        2013






internet advertising        UK







Google > advertising revenue        USA






New York Times > ads > ad revenue        USA






Facebook mobile applications > mobile advertising        USA






advertiser        USA










commercials > TV junk food ads        UK






USA > Super Bowl commercials / ads        USA











informercial        USA










advert        UK










Christmas TV adverts        UK






ad        UK












ads > YouTube        USA






Internet ads        USA






online ads        USA








online sex ads        USA






political TV ads        USA






ad campaign        UK






hype        UK






Abram Games        UK        1914-1996


one of the most influential

British graphic designers

of the 20th century









advertise on TV / radio





viewer        USA






bombard        USA






Joy of six: Things that you no longer see in TV adverts        UK






TV junk food ads        UK






zap ads / ad-zapping        USA






small ad





advertising agency

















A 1966 ad

for Pillsbury featuring Mr. Perz's creation, Poppin' Fresh.


Leo Burnett


Rudolph Perz, Creator of Pillsbury’s Doughboy, Dies at 89

By SAM ROBERTS        NYT        APRIL 3, 2015
















Rudolph Robert Perz        1925-2015


advertising executive who pondered

a soulless, squishy, cylindrical mixture

of flour and water on his kitchen table 50 years ago

and conjured up the genial Pillsbury Doughboy



The pudgy Pillsbury mascot,

known as Poppin’ Fresh,

became instantly recognized

as the symbol of the company’s

line of refrigerated biscuit,

roll and cookie dough

that popped out of a cardboard tube.


He made his debut

in a 1965 commercial for crescent rolls.


Within three years the figure,

sporting a kerchief and toque

and always tickled

by a signature tummy poke,

claimed an 87 percent brand recognition

among American consumers.


That was enough to immortalize it

in the pantheon

of other anthropomorphic hucksters,

including the Jolly Green Giant,

Tony the Tiger and Morris the Cat.













ad giant        USA






Leo Greenland        USA        1920-2011


an advertising executive

known for a string of evocative campaigns

of the late 20th century

and for public advocacy of truthfulness

in his profession








copy writer        USA






adverts for Birds Eye fish fingers        UK











billboard        UK






billboard        USA










marketers        USA
















watchdog        UK










Advertising Standards Authority        ASA        UK
























Only 5% of TV ads feature ethnic minorities        2011


Commercials drastically

under-representing non-white people,

Clearcast survey finds


















The online ad attack        Apr 27th 2005

From The Economist print edition





The Ad*Access Project,

funded by the Duke Endowment "Library 2000" Fund,

presents images and database information

for over 7,000 advertisements printed

in U.S. and Canadian newspapers and magazines

between 1911 and 1955.



concentrates on five main subject areas:

Radio, Television, Transportation, Beauty and Hygiene,

and World War II, providing a coherent view

of a number of major campaigns and companies

through images preserved

in one particular advertising collection

available at Duke University.


The advertisements are from the

J. Walter Thompson Company

Competitive Advertisements Collection

of the John W. Hartman Center for Sales,

Advertising, and Marketing History

in Duke University's

Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections Library.






Fifty Years of Coca-Cola Television Advertisements:


Highlights from the Motion Picture Archives at the Library of Congress

presents a variety of television advertisements, never-broadcast outtakes,

and experimental footage reflecting the historical development

of television advertising for a major commercial product.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/ccmphtml/colahome.html - broken URL















public relations    PR        UK







public relations    PR        USA






public relations giant Burson-Marsteller





publicity        USA






negative publicity





corporate image










corpus of news articles


Media > Advertising, Ads, Marketing





The Cost of Paying Attention


MARCH 7, 2015

The New York Times





A FEW years ago, in a supermarket, I swiped my bank card to pay for groceries. I watched the little screen, waiting for its prompts. During the intervals between swiping my card, confirming the amount and entering my PIN, I was shown advertisements. Clearly some genius had realized that a person in this situation is a captive audience.

Attention is a resource; a person has only so much of it. And yet we’ve auctioned off more and more of our public space to private commercial interests, with their constant demands on us to look at the products on display or simply absorb some bit of corporate messaging. Lately, our self-appointed disrupters have opened up a new frontier of capitalism, complete with its own frontier ethic: to boldly dig up and monetize every bit of private head space by appropriating our collective attention. In the process, we’ve sacrificed silence — the condition of not being addressed. And just as clean air makes it possible to breathe, silence makes it possible to think.

What if we saw attention in the same way that we saw air or water, as a valuable resource that we hold in common? Perhaps, if we could envision an “attentional commons,” then we could figure out how to protect it.

The sad state of this commons is on display everywhere; consider the experience of being in an airport. I have found I have to be careful when going through airport security, because the trays that you place your items in for X-ray screening are now papered with advertisements, and it’s very easy to miss a lipstick-size flash memory stick against a picture of fanned-out L’Oréal lipstick colors.

I am already in a state of low-level panic about departure times, possible gate changes and any number of other contingencies. This fresh demand for vigilance, lest I lose the PowerPoint slide show I will be presenting in a few hours, feels like a straightforward conflict between me and L’Oréal.

Somehow L’Oréal has the Transportation Security Administration on its side. Who made the decision to pimp out the security trays with these advertisements? We travelers have no clue, so we search instead for a diagnosis of ourselves: Why am I so angry?

Making my way through O’Hare International Airport, I am not feeling especially receptive to the endlessly recurring message from the Lincoln Financial Group, applied to the moving handrail on the escalator: You’re In Charge®.

Settled in at my departure gate with an hour to kill, I shift in my seat and try to avert my gaze from the chattering of CNN, but find that the fields of view that haven’t been claimed for commerce are getting fewer and narrower. Of course, you can seal yourself off by putting on noise-canceling headphones, staring at a smartphone or opening a novel. But what is lost is the public space that is required for sociability, the kind that depends on people not being self-enclosed.

An airport lounge once felt rich with possibilities for spontaneous encounters. Even if we did not converse, our attention was free to alight upon one another and linger, or not. We encountered another person, even if in silence. Such encounters are always ambiguous, and their need for interpretation gives rise to a train of imaginings, often erotic. This is what makes cities exciting.

The benefits of silence are off the books. They are not measured in the gross domestic product, yet the availability of silence surely contributes to creativity and innovation. They do not show up explicitly in social statistics such as level of educational achievement, yet one consumes a great deal of silence in the course of becoming educated.

If clean air and water were no longer the rule, the economic toll would be enormous. This is easy to grasp, and that is why we have regulations to protect these common resources. We recognize their importance and their fragility. We also recognize that absent robust regulations, air and water will be used by some in ways that make them unusable for others.

A notable feature of many formerly Communist countries is the apparent absence, or impotence, of any notion of a common good. Self-serving party apparatchiks have been replaced by (or become) quasi-free market gangsters. Many citizens of these countries live in the environmental degradation that results when economic development is left to such interests, with no countervailing force of public-spiritedness. We in the liberal societies of the West find ourselves headed toward a similar condition with regard to the resource of attention, because we do not yet understand it to be a resource.

Or do we? Silence is now offered as a luxury good. In the business-class lounge at Charles de Gaulle Airport, I heard only the occasional tinkling of a spoon against china. I saw no advertisements on the walls. This silence, more than any other feature, is what makes it feel genuinely luxurious. When you step inside and the automatic doors whoosh shut behind you, the difference is nearly tactile, like slipping out of haircloth into satin. Your brow unfurrows, your neck muscles relax; after 20 minutes you no longer feel exhausted.

Outside, in the peon section, is the usual airport cacophony. Because we have allowed our attention to be monetized, if you want yours back you’re going to have to pay for it.

As the attentional commons is appropriated, one solution, for those who have the means, is to leave it behind for private clubs like the business-class lounge. Considering that it is those in the business lounge who make the decisions that determine the character of the peon section, we may start to see these things in a political light.

To engage in inventive thinking during those idle hours spent at an airport requires silence. But other people’s minds, over in the peon section, can be treated as a resource — a standing reserve of purchasing power to be steered according to the innovative marketing schemes hatched by those enjoying silence in the business lounge. When some people treat the minds of others as a resource, this is not “creating wealth” — it is a transfer.

There are many causes for the increasing concentration of wealth in a shrinking elite, but let us throw one more into the mix: the ever more aggressive appropriations of the attentional commons that we have allowed to take place.

I think we need to sharpen the conceptually murky right to privacy by supplementing it with a right not to be addressed. This would apply not, of course, to those who address me face to face as individuals, but to those who never show their faces, and treat my mind as a resource to be harvested.

The author of “Shop Class as Soulcraft” and the forthcoming book “The World Beyond Your Head: On Becoming an Individual in an Age of Distraction,” from which this article was adapted.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on March 8, 2015, on page SR5 of the New York edition with the headline: The Cost of Paying Attention.

The Cost of Paying Attention,
MARCH 7, 2015,






Examining a Generation

Tied to Smartphones


MARCH 5, 2014

The New York Times



SO attached to their cellphones are 18- to 24-year-olds that 61 percent of them sleep next to their devices, compared with just 22 percent of cellphone owners over 65 who do so, according to the Pew Research Center. While that might depress those who yearn for simpler times, such devotion delights AT&T, and now the phone carrier is introducing a major effort that highlights how connected young Americans are to their devices.

AT&T has hired Vice Media, the chronicler of youth culture, to produce a video and advertising platform, the Mobile Movement. So far Vice has produced about 15 documentary videos with young people in six cities, including Los Angeles, New York, Nashville and Austin, Tex. In the videos, which are beginning to appear on a Tumblr page and YouTube channel, interviewees discuss their creative pursuits and dating, sometimes answering specific questions about their connections to their phones but more often mentioning the devices only incidentally if at all.

In one video, Harold (only first names are used) is interviewed on a Los Angeles rooftop, where he talks about being a sock designer before telling an anecdote about his phone.

“I was with my friends at a bar dancing and I was really drunk and I dropped my phone into the toilet and when I fished it out, I rinsed it off with water and I put it in a bag of rice to try to save it,” he says. “And it totally worked but the only thing that was wrong with the phone is it would repeatedly text people the letter ‘P’ and so I thought it was kind of ironic.”

The effort is being introduced on March 8 at the South by Southwest conference in Austin, which AT&T is also sponsoring. At the conference, the brand also will screen the first episode of a web series, “Upwardly Mobile,” which highlights mobile technology advances from young developers. Another web series, “The Network Diaries,” scripted short films that prominently feature mobile devices and that were inspired by anecdotes from the documentary videos, will also have its debut at SXSW.

The multifaceted effort is aimed at so-called millennials from 18 to 34, said David Christopher, chief marketing officer at the AT&T Mobility division of AT&T.

“Millennials live their lives through mobility and mobile technologies and AT&T is at the center of that,” he said, adding that because younger consumers tend to avoid or ignore commercials, the company hired Vice to help reach that demographic.

“We know the most important technology to this generation is their cellphone and a great network that it runs on,” he said. “If we said that flat-footedly, it might come across as just too overt to them, but saying it in a way that is via them — in their own voices, in their own way of telling stories — becomes very relevant.”

Online-only commercials, also by Vice, feature clips from the unscripted videos. One that promotes AT&T Next, a service that enables consumers to get a new smartphone every 12 or 18 months, opens with phone users apparently talking about something else.

“My first, I was 16,” says a young woman. “I was like a freshman, probably,” says a young man, and the thread continues with more interviewees. “I’d wanted it for a very long time.” “And I lost it in the woods.” “It’s perfect.” Finally, an interviewee draws the double entendres to a close with, “My phone is my life.” The spot closes with the screen text, “Love it. Then leave it. Then love it again. AT&T Next — a new phone every 12 months.”

Eddy Moretti, the executive creative director of Vice, said that all the creative work had a unifying theme.

“This whole platform is driven by a very true desire to learn about what it means to be a young person living a mobile existence in America today,” he said.

Vice started as a lifestyle magazine in Montreal in 1994 and, keeping its edge intact, has become an online and video media concern valued at about $1.4 billion. Its newsmagazine on HBO, “Vice,” memorably arranged for the former N.B.A. star Dennis Rodman to meet the North Korean ruler Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang in 2013; the show’s second season begins on March 14.

For its own media properties, which include the technology website Motherboard and the music website Noisey, the Vice audience falls primarily within the coveted millennial segment, with 35 percent of its audience 18 to 24 and 41 percent aged 25 to 34, according to its media kit.

AT&T, which declined to reveal advertising and production costs for the effort, spent $1.41 billion on advertising in the first nine months of 2013, making it the second-biggest advertiser in the United States for the period, behind Procter & Gamble, according to the Kantar Media unit of WPP.

Brian Morrissey, editor in chief of Digiday, an online publication that covers digital marketing and media, said that when established brands like AT&T hired established advertising agencies to create content that resonated with younger consumers, the results could be unfortunate.

“When brands try to speak quote-unquote ‘authentically’ with millennials, it can come across like your dad dancing at a rave,” he said. “It’s awkward.”

But he reviewed some of the new content for AT&T by Vice and said it would strike a chord.

“Vice is able to communicate with kids in a way that they understand and like,” Mr. Morrissey said. “Vice is basically a millennial whisperer.”

A version of this article appears in print on March 6, 2014, on page B4 of the New York edition with the headline: Examining a Generation Tied to Smartphones.

Examining a Generation Tied to Smartphones,






Phyllis K. Robinson,

a Top Copywriter,

Dies at 89


January 21, 2011
The New York Times


In the late 1940s, it was rare to find a woman in senior management at an advertising agency. But when Doyle Dane Bernbach opened its doors on June 1, 1949, its chief copywriter was Phyllis K. Robinson, who went on to help create memorable campaigns for Polaroid cameras and Levy’s rye bread as DDB achieved legendary status in the industry.

Ms. Robinson died on Dec. 31 at her home in Manhattan, her daughter, Nancy Thompson, said. She was 89.

Ms. Robinson was recruited for Doyle Dane Bernbach by William Bernbach, for whom she had worked at Grey Advertising, and who founded the new agency with Ned Doyle and Maxwell Dane.

Doyle Dane Bernbach made Madison Avenue history for the way it created ads. It was considered the first agency to assign copywriters and art directors to work together; previously, they had completed their tasks separately.

Ms. Robinson was paired with an art director, Bob Gage, and together they produced ads for marketers like Orbach’s department store, Polaroid instant cameras and Levy’s breads. For Levy’s Real Jewish Rye, there were colorful posters. Some showed a slice of rye disappearing, bite by bite. The headline: “New York is eating it up!”

Other posters showed New Yorkers of various ethnicities eating sandwiches. The headline, which entered the vernacular: “You don’t have to be Jewish to love Levy’s Real Jewish Rye.”

For Polaroid, Ms. Robinson helped create a series of commercials featuring the actors James Garner and Mariette Hartley, who behaved so naturally together that millions of viewers mistakenly believed they were a married couple.

“It was great fun to work on, very challenging, with all sorts of new products,” Ms. Robinson said in an interview in The New York Times in 2006 on the occasion of a tribute to the Polaroid campaign at the Museum of Television and Radio.

She recalled working with Laurence Olivier in the 1970s to introduce the Polaroid SX-70 camera; at the time, stars of his caliber rarely endorsed products.

“Olivier was a dear,” she said. She described a moment when he came to the back of the auditorium where the spots were being filmed and asked, “How does this sound, Phyllis?”

“And I thought: ‘God, strike me dead. It’s not going to get better than this.’ ”

Doyle Dane Bernbach has been widely credited with helping to inspire Madison Avenue’s so-called creative revolution in the 1960s.

The agency’s ads had a clever tone, unlike the bombast, sentimentality and hyperbole prevalent on Madison Avenue at the time.

“Pre-DDB,” Ms. Robinson said in an interview with the trade publication Adweek in 2000, advertising was “artificial, sleepy and sometimes pretentious and schmaltzy.”

Ms. Robinson “was involved in some of the most important campaigns of the last century,” said Keith Reinhard, chairman emeritus of DDB Worldwide, the Omnicom Group agency that is the successor to Doyle Dane Bernbach.

Phyllis Kenner was born in New York on Oct. 22, 1921, and graduated with a bachelor of arts degree from Barnard College in 1942 after majoring in sociology. During World War II, she was a statistician for the federal Public Housing Authority.

Ms. Robinson’s first work at an ad agency came in 1946 at Bresnick & Solomont in Boston. She joined Grey the next year and Doyle Dane Bernbach two years after that.

Ms. Robinson was the copy chief for the agency’s first 13 years and a mentor to notable copywriters like Paula Green, Julian Koenig, Mary Wells Lawrence and George Lois.

She resigned as copy chief when her daughter, Nancy, was born in 1962, then worked three days a week until leaving Doyle Dane Bernbach in 1982 to start a consulting company.

Ms. Robinson was married in 1944 to Richard G. Robinson, who died in 2005. She is survived by her daughter, of Denver.

    Phyllis K. Robinson, a Top Copywriter, Dies at 89, NYT, 21.1.2011,






Internet overtakes television

to become biggest advertising sector

in the UK

Record £1.75bn online spend
makes UK first major economy
to spend more on web ads than TV,
says IAB


Wednesday 30 September 2009
02.16 BST
The Guardian
Mark Sweney
This article was first published
on guardian.co.uk at 02.16 BST
on Wednesday 30 September 2009.
It was last updated at 02.16 BST
on Wednesday 30 September 2009.


IAB figures show that of the total £1.75bn spent on internet advertising, £1.05bn, or 60%, was spent on search advertising on websites including Google.

The UK has become the first major economy where advertisers spend more on internet advertising than on television advertising, with a record £1.75bn online spend in the first six months of the year.

The milestone marks a watershed for the embattled TV industry, the leading ad medium in the UK for almost half a century. It has taken the internet little more than a decade to become the biggest advertising sector in the UK.

UK advertisers spent £1.75bn on internet advertising in the six months to the end of June, a 4.6% year-on-year increase, according to a report by the Internet Advertising Bureau and PricewaterhouseCoopers. To put this in perspective, in 1998, when the IAB first measured internet advertising, just £19.4m was spent online.

The internet now accounts for 23.5% of all advertising money spent in the UK, while TV ad spend accounts for 21.9% of marketing budgets.

The IAB originally predicted that internet ad spend would overtake TV at the end of 2009; however, the crippling advertising recession accelerated this by six months. TV advertising fell about 17% year on year in the first half, to about £1.6bn, according to the report.

The IAB's figures show that of the total of £1.75bn spent on internet advertising, £1.05bn, or 60%, was spent on search advertising on websites including Google, up 6.8% year on year.

Online classified advertising grew by 10.6% year on year to £385m, about 22% of total internet ad spend. But online display advertising, such as banners on websites, fell by 5.2% year on year, to £316.5m. This was an 18% share of all internet ad spend.

The ray of light within the online display ad sector was the nascent, but rapidly growing, online video advertising sector. The IAB estimated that this sector grew by close to 300% year on year, to almost £12m.

Thinkbox, the UK TV marketing body, has taken exception to the IAB's figures, arguing that the internet is now mature and diverse and it is inaccurate to collate all the figures as if it is one single medium.

"It is interesting but meaningless to sweep all the money spent on every aspect of online marketing into one big figure and celebrate it," said Lindsey Clay, marketing director at Thinkbox. "Online marketing spend is made up of many things, including email, classified ads, display ads (including online TV advertising) and, overwhelmingly, search marketing. They should be judged individually."

Guy Phillipson, the chief executive of the IAB, reckoned that there is still significant growth potential left in the internet ad market.

"We could absolutely see it grow to being a 30% medium [of share of ad spend], to go past £4bn to even £5bn annually," he said. "Online display advertising has plenty of room for growth."

Despite the seemingly inexorable rise of internet ad spend, a closer examination of the IAB's figures show that the recession has had an impact. In the first quarter £920m was spent on online advertising, representing 8.6% year-on-year growth. However, in the second quarter, spend fell almost £100m to £832m, representing only a 1.1% increase on the amount spent in the same period last year.

Adam Smith, futures director at WPP's combined media operation Group M, argued that the internet's share of total UK ad spend could be close to its peak.

Smith cited factors such as the increasing share of time that users spend on social networking websites, which have not attracted huge advertising spend, and the increasing saturation of internet penetration in the UK as potential limiting factors. "This day was bound to arrive, as the internet has been attracting a huge long tail of advertisers that have not advertised before doing completely new things," he said. "It is a memorable event. However, it is a bit simplistic to make this comparison [and] it is always possible that internet's share [of total UK ad spend] could go backwards if TV has a good year."

The UK is not the first country where internet ad spend has overtaken TV spend, Denmark reached the milestone about six months ago. But it is the first major economy to do so.

    Internet overtakes television to become biggest advertising sector in the UK,
    G, 30.9.2009,






Ads Follow Web Users,

and Get Much More Personal


July 31, 2009
The New York Times


For all the concern and uproar over online privacy, marketers and data companies have always known much more about consumers’ offline lives, like income, credit score, home ownership, even what car they drive and whether they have a hunting license. Recently, some of these companies have started connecting this mountain of information to consumers’ browsers.

The result is a sea change in the way consumers encounter the Web. Not only will people see customized advertising, they will see different versions of Web sites from other consumers and even receive different discount offers while shopping — all based on information from their offline history. Two women in adjoining offices could go to the same cosmetic site, but one might see a $300 Missoni perfume, the other the house-brand lipstick on sale for $2.

The technology that makes the connection is nothing new — it is a tiny piece of code called a cookie that is placed on a hard drive. But the information it holds is. And it is all done invisibly.

“Now, you’re traveling the Internet with a cookie that indicates you’re this type of consumer: age group X, income level, urban versus rural, presence of children in the household,” said Trey Barrett, a product leader at Acxiom, one of the companies offering this linking to marketers.

Advertisers and marketers say this specificity is useful, taking out the guesswork involved in online-only profiling, and showing products to the people most likely to be interested. Retailers including Gap and Victoria’s Secret are using this tactic.

But consumer advocates say such unseen tracking is troubling. On the old Internet, nobody knew you were a dog. On the new targeted Internet, they now know what kind of dog you are, your favorite leash color, the last time you had fleas and the date you were neutered.

“The industry’s love affair with persistent cookies has made it virtually impossible for users to go online without being tracked and profiled,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, in an e-mail message.

While Congress has been holding hearings on online privacy lately, the sessions have focused on online behavioral targeting. The industry has argued that no government intervention is needed, an argument that the Federal Trade Commission has so far accepted.

Consumers can avoid cookie-based tracking by deleting cookies from their computers or setting their browsers not to accept cookies. But few do, and privacy advocates say it is easy for companies to add cookies without users noticing.

For decades, data companies like Experian and Acxiom have compiled reams of information on every American: Acxiom estimates it has 1,500 pieces of data on every American, based on information from warranty cards, bridal and birth registries, magazine subscriptions, public records and even dog registrations with the American Kennel Club.

Patrick Williams, the publisher of the personal finance magazine Worth, recently asked Acxiom to find the names and addresses of 10,000 Americans from each of 11 cities who had houses worth more than $1 million, net worth of over $2 million, lived within a few miles of other rich people and subscribed to business publications.

“They are the scariest data research company around — they know far too much,” said Mr. Williams, who said he was very happy with the amount of information it gave him.

Companies like Acxiom and a competitor, Datran Media, make the connection between online and offline data when a person registers on a Web site or clicks through on an e-mail message from a marketer.

Datran’s cookies include 50 to 100 pieces of information. Both companies say cookie data is anonymous and generalized. Datran and Acxiom then sell advertising on Web sites like NBC.com, Facebook and Yahoo to companies that use their data.

For marketers, all this data is a boon. Beltone New England, a hearing-aid company, asked Datran to find people online who were 65 and over, owned a house, were head of a household, made more than $35,000 a year and lived in New England so it could show them ads. Datran also tested the same ads with a wider group of people.

“What was surprising was we found the majority of responders turned out to be women 35 to 40 who had elderly parents at home,” said Perry Ebel, Beltone’s director of marketing and business development. He said he was changing his offline marketing to include that group.

By using real-world data online, marketers can customize messages even further — showing different products to people with different shopping habits, whether it is in ads, an e-mail message or in semipersonalized Web pages.

Rodale, which publishes books along with magazines like Men’s Health and Prevention, uses Acxiom data to help determine which promotional e-mails to send to which customers. Offers aimed at women might be accompanied by an e-mail message offering a Father’s Day subscription to Men’s Health for him and a free book on losing belly fat for her. Young men might get another offer — a book on sex positions. Some marketers are using offline data more subtly — for example, showing a budget shopper a discount offer and a regular shopper a full-price section.

“The people who buy less frequently and are most price-conscious may get a better deal than someone who buys more frequently, who would buy anyway,” said Christopher S. Marriott, global managing director of Acxiom Digital, a division of Acxiom.

Of course, shoppers would have little reason to think their experience or their ads are being personalized based on their home value or Volvo ownership.

“It is a little Big Brother-ish,” said Betsy Coggswell, 49, a social worker in Fullerton, Calif., who shops online regularly. Still, she said, she wasn’t shocked. “Every time you put out information about yourself — people have got to understand — it’s going to be collected by somebody.”

Some online companies avoid matching online and offline profiles. In 2000, DoubleClick abandoned plans to connect online and offline data after a huge outcry. Google, which later acquired DoubleClick, has been conducting studies that connect the two areas, but it does not currently collect or serve ads based on such personal information without user permission, Sandra Heikkinen, a Google spokeswoman, said.

While Acxiom, Datran and some of their partners address their use of tracking in their privacy policies, such policies have become worthless, Mr. Rotenberg said. “Real transparency means that the user gets access to the information, not to a policy about the information,” he said.

Paul M. Schwartz, a law professor and privacy expert at the law school of the University of California, Berkeley, said the unwitting participation by consumers makes online marketing different from offline.

“Interactive media really gets into this creepy Orwellian thing, where it’s a record of our thoughts on the way to decision-making,” he said. “We’re like the data-input clerks now for the industry.”

    Ads Follow Web Users, and Get Much More Personal, NYT, 31.7.2009,







Angry Ads

Seek to Channel Consumer Outrage


May 15, 2009
The New York Times


The mad men of Madison Avenue are really mad these days, creating a spate of angry advertising campaigns that seek to channel the outrage, frustration and fear felt by consumers hit hard by what some are calling the Great Recession.

The campaigns take an outspoken, provocative tone that is unusual for mainstream marketing messages, which typically try to avoid aggrieved attitudes for fear of alienating audiences. The change reflects the significant shift in sentiment as the public reacts to the wrenching and, at times, frightening financial events of the last year.

“We’re turning up the volume in relation to what our customers are feeling,” said Jeffrey W. Hayzlett, chief marketing officer at the Eastman Kodak Company, which is running ads for a new line of printers and inkjet cartridges that rant about a “$5 billion stain” on the economy caused by “overpaying” for other brands of inkjet printer ink.

“It’s a departure for us,” Mr. Hayzlett acknowledged, given the “touchy-feely” image the Kodak brand has long had, but “it’s right for today’s times.”

Other brands trying to echo consumer anger include Post Shredded Wheat cereal, which declares in new ads that “Progress is overrated” and “Innovation is not your friend.” JetBlue Airways revels in the discomfort of chief executives forced off corporate jets by greeting them with a sardonic “Welcome aboard.”

Miller High Life is being sold by a blue-collar character who delights in removing the beer from hoity-toity bars, restaurants and stores that he believes are shortchanging shoppers. And Harley-Davidson deplores “the stink of greed and billion-dollar bankruptcies” in a campaign that carries a rallying cry defiant enough to be unprintable in a family newspaper. “It felt like something that needed to be said,” said Jim Nelson, chief creative officer at Carmichael Lynch in Minneapolis, the Interpublic Group agency that creates ads for Harley-Davidson.

The idea is to respond to “this climate of fear and worry and ‘What’s going to happen?’ ” Mr. Nelson said, with a campaign that will “strike an emotional chord.”

“That unconventional, rebellious tone, that ‘I’m going to live my life no matter what,’ is something a lot of people could relate to,” he added.

Indeed, Harley-Davidson has increased its market share since the campaign began in May 2008, Mr. Nelson said, and there have been “thousands and thousands of comments” praising the ads.

Kodak, Mr. Hayzlett said, is also pleased with the results of its angry ads, which are being created by Deutsch in New York, another Interpublic Group agency. Sales are “exceeding expectations” for printers and ink cartridges, he said.

The campaigns represent the intensification of a trend that began last spring, when the economy started to show signs of stress. Harley-Davidson was among the first marketers to try telling consumers it, too, was angry about how things were going.

“You need to walk in the shoes of the average consumers today,” said Marc Brownstein, president and chief executive at the Brownstein Group advertising agency in Philadelphia. “They’re a little beat up and their wallets are lighter, and the people they trusted stole from them.”

Marketers “have got to rebuild that trust,” said Mr. Brownstein, who blogs about the agency business for the trade publication Advertising Age, by being “brutally honest” in their ads.

“Candor is in,” he advised.

Post Shredded Wheat, sold by the Post Foods division of Ralcorp Holdings, tries being candid in a campaign centered on a make-believe boss named Frank Druffel who wonders, “Has progress taken us to a better place?” and concludes, “I’d say it’s taken us for a ride. (Probably in a carbon-coughing oil guzzler.)” The point is to present the brand, unchanged since 1892, as the cereal that “put the ‘no’ in innovation.”

The tone reflects a belief now widespread among “fed-up” consumers that “as the world gets more complicated, the more trouble we get ourselves in,” said Tim Piper, creative director at Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide in New York, the WPP agency that creates campaigns for Post cereals.

The boss character is supposed to be “a speaker for the truth,” Mr. Piper said, “who could say what no one else is saying.”

That tack is also being taken by JetBlue Airways in its “Welcome bigwigs” campaign, created by JWT in New York. “Looks like the days of padded paychecks, fancy drapes and private jets are over,” one ad declares. “But hey, there is a bright side” — flying on JetBlue, with amenities like “comfy leather seats” that can assuage the sting of losing private plane privileges.

The JetBlue ads “poked at the guys bringing down the economy,” said Wayne Best, executive creative director at JWT, also owned by WPP, but were not intended to cross into fury or mean-spiritedness.

In the words of Fiona Morrisson, director for advertising and brand at JetBlue, “We weren’t looking for Versailles.”

“Offering a hand to the beleaguered C.E.O.’s, telling them it’s not so bad in the real world, brought the idea to life in a tongue-in-cheek way people could relate to,” she said.

In other words, there may be a limit to how incensed a large corporation can get in an ad.

“People are disaffected and disillusioned,” said Marc E. Babej, president of Reason Inc. in New York, a brand and corporate strategy consulting company, and siding with them can help advertisers “grab a bit of attention.”

“But I would be careful as a marketer about playing with the notions of ‘We understand you’ or ‘We’re on your side,’ ” Mr. Babej said, “because there’s some risk of it harming you if it’s not really relevant to your product.”

Or as Mr. Brownstein of the Brownstein Group put it, “You can’t anger people into buying your brand.”

In which category might anger be appropriate? Perhaps for one of the ground zeroes of the economy, financial services. A campaign for the Bessemer Trust Company, which helps the wealthy manage their money, carries this frank headline: “Why should you believe anything we say?”

“Rarely in history have so many been so violated by so few,” the text begins. “We understand. We’re as angry as you are, because the actions of those few have cast a pall of doubt and suspicion over everyone even remotely related to the financial industry.”

The ad addresses consumers as if “they are basically frozen in place,” said Orson Munn, chief executive at Munn Rabôt in New York, the Bessemer Trust agency. “You have to speak with them in a way that shocks them out of being frozen.”

“It’s a very fine line, because if we go too far it’ll push the brand over the edge,” he said. “But you have to feel a little uncomfortable with advertising for it to work.”

    Angry Ads Seek to Channel Consumer Outrage, NYT, 15.5.2009,






Google to Target

Ads Based on Online Activity


March 12, 2009
Filed at 3:15 a.m. ET
The New York Times


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Google Inc will begin to aim online ads at people based on their Web browsing history, joining an industry trend that has raised privacy concerns even as it makes product pitches more effective.

The new program, dubbed "interest based" advertising, is being rolled out on a test basis across Google's network of partner websites and on its video-sharing site YouTube, according to an announcement on Google's blog on Wednesday.

The move comes a few weeks after the Web search leader's smaller rival, Yahoo Inc, unveiled its own advertising enhancements, which rely on an individual's online activity.

While behavioral ad techniques have been around for several years, some past efforts have raised privacy concerns, and Google has refrained from offering such advertising until now.

"Advertisers are under increasing pressure to be able to tie as much marketing spend as they can to direct sales revenue," said Andrew Frank, an analyst at market research firm Gartner.

Shares of Google rose $9.74, or 3.16 percent, to $317.91 on Nasdaq.

Until now, the types of text and display ads that Google served to Web surfers were based solely on the content of the specific Web page being viewed by an individual.

With behavior advertising, Google and advertisers will be able to consider an individual's broader history of Web surfing when deciding which ads to pitch.

"If, for example, you love adventure travel and therefore visit adventure travel sites, Google could show you more ads for activities like hiking trips to Patagonia or African safaris," Google Vice President of Product Management Susan Wojcicki explained on Google's blog, adding that advertisers have been asking Google for such features for a long time.

Advertising based on consumer interest or behavior have the potential to increase consumer response and so-called click-through rates, which translates into higher ad revenue for the sites.

But U.S. lawmakers held hearings last year on behavioral advertising, after concerns arose when a company called NebuAd, in a deal with cable company Charter Communication, disclosed a pilot program to track customers.

Congressman Rick Boucher, head of the telecom subcommittee of the House of Representative's Energy and Commerce, has said the issue will be a top priority this year. The Virginia Democrat's office had no immediate comment on Google's plans.


The U.S. Federal Trade Commission recently expanded its voluntary guidance on how websites inform consumers that their data is being collected, to include mobile and Internet companies. Regulators have warned that failure to comply would lead to tougher regulation.

In announcing the initiative on Wednesday, Google said privacy issues were an important consideration. "This kind of tailored advertising does raise questions about user choice and privacy -- questions the whole online ad industry has a responsibility to answer," Wojcicki said in the blog post.

Google said it has three key safeguards: consumers can choose to opt out of the program; consumers can edit their profile of preferences based on online activity; and consumers can click on a button to learn how an ad was pitched to them.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said that regardless of Google's efforts to address privacy concerns, the company's new ad program "throws up red flags" for Internet privacy.

"This is the Internet's largest search company now profiling and tracking Internet users. That shouldn't happen," said Rotenberg. He said his organization was evaluating "possibilities" about a potential response to Google's move, but declined to specify what options were under consideration.

But Ari Schwartz, vice president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, said there are positives in Google's plan, including users getting access to their own profile.

"On balance it is a step in the right direction," said Schwartz, whose group was consulted while Google developed its plan. But he noted that Google plans to still rely on consumers opting out, rather than in, which most of the public opposes.

Google, the No.1 Internet search engine in the United States, generates 97 percent of its revenue from advertising. Much of that comes from text ads that appear alongside search results.

Google acquired DoubleClick for $3.2 billion in 2008 in order to beef up its position in the market for display ads.

Adopting behavioral ad techniques is "a logical way for Google to get better at the display game," said Emily Riley, a senior analyst at Forrester Research.

In particular, she said, the vast size of Google's AdSense network of partner Web sites and the company's technology could generate valuable data for marketers and advertisers.

"In theory they should have great scale with the behaviors they're tracking," said Riley.


(Reporting by Alexei Oreskovic;

Additional reporting by Kim Dixon in Washington;

Editing by Richard Chang)

    Google to Target Ads Based on Online Activity, NYT, 12.3.2009,






Jim Horne,

a Familiar Face in Ads From the 1950s,

Dies at 91


January 25, 2009
The New York Times


It was a time when information didn’t fly around the world in a nanosecond; when images were captured on film, not computer chips; when television commercials were performed live; when product advertising supplied newspapers and magazines with a rich and steady lifeblood.

It was also a time when it was still possible to be a famous face without a famous name. In fact, Jim Horne may have been asked more often than anyone else, “Don’t I know you from somewhere?”

For about 15 years beginning in the late 1940s, Mr. Horne was ubiquitous, perhaps the most widely seen male model in the country, appearing in hundreds of advertisements in magazines and newspapers, on billboards and catalog covers, in television commercials and industrial brochures. He died on Dec. 29 in Manhattan, at 91. His wife of 45 years, Francesca Marlowe Horne, said the cause was cancer, but added that he also had congestive heart failure.

Mr. Horne had been an actor with bit parts in Hollywood movies before moving to New York City and establishing a second career. He had a chiseled jaw, a distinctively rounded hairline, a seemingly permanent pompadour, a gleaming California smile and an athlete’s physique.

It was an image that photographers and advertisers found easily adaptable to a number of stereotypes of the day: the dashing ladies’ man, the dapper dandy, the devoted dad, the suburban husband, the businessman commuter, the country club sophisticate and the one Mr. Horne, an avid fisherman, preferred: the rugged outdoorsman.

He was employed to help sell an extraordinarily eclectic range of products: automobiles and underpants; exercise equipment and mothproofing; hair tonic and gasoline; beer, blended whiskey and milk; pajamas, raincoats, cardigan sweaters, Panama hats, and suits with two pairs of pants for $44.95.

He appeared in ads for Macy’s, Abraham & Straus and Alexander’s; for York, L & M, Lucky Strike and Marlboro cigarettes (he was a Marlboro man before the Marlboro man); for Burberry, Chrysler, Budweiser, Van Heusen, Remington, The Saturday Evening Post and, in a stunningly glamorous print ad with the legendary model Suzy Parker, Grand Marnier.

In the summer of 1957, when Apparel Arts, a men’s fashion magazine, decided to create a new identity for itself after more than a quarter century, it chose Mr. Horne for the cover of the magazine’s first issue under its new name: Gentlemen’s Quarterly. He appeared there in a jaunty striped jacket peering rakishly from behind a tropical plant. He was, in the lexicon of the day, a man’s man, and in the lexicon of today, a hottie.

“Oh, was he ever!” his wife said.

James Wesley Horne Jr. was born on March 28, 1917, in Glendale, Calif. His father was a prolific director of both silent films and talkies, best known for his work with Laurel and Hardy, including “Big Business” and “Way Out West.” His mother, Cleo Ridgely, was an actress and a great beauty from whom, it was generally acknowledged, Mr. Horne inherited his looks. His twin sister, June, grew up to marry the actor Jackie Cooper.

Mr. Horne had small, sometimes uncredited parts in about two dozen films, including “Gunga Din” and “A Place in the Sun.” He auditioned for the part of Joe Bonaparte, the violinist who wants to be a boxer, in the film version of Clifford Odets’s play “Golden Boy,” but the role went instead to another unknown actor, William Holden, who shortly thereafter became Mr. Horne’s bunkmate in Army basic training. Mr. Horne served in Europe in World War II, becoming a combat photographer and earning two Bronze Stars.

After returning to California, he continued to work in the movies and began modeling as well. By the early 1950s, as televisions became more common in American homes, advertisers seized on the new medium and began looking for models who could act a little. It was an opportunity that wasn’t lost on Mr. Horne, and he moved to New York City, where he was soon immersed in bookings.

This was an era of growth in advertising, especially on television, where many commercials were broadcast live, resulting in a lot of nuttiness. Once, as Mr. Horne performed in an ad for the hair tonic Brylcreem, his comb stuck on a thread in his pocket. When he whipped it out to slick back his pompadour, he accidentally flung it across the room.

Male models were something of a new breed, weirdly anonymous and perceived by many as suspicious or threatening; once, dressed spiffily for work and passing an hour in a bar while he waited for a photographer who was late for an appointment, Mr. Horne was badly beaten by thugs who didn’t appreciate his taste in clothes.

In general, male models also didn’t get fabulously rich; as late as 1965, Mr. Horne’s hourly rate was $50. But the job allowed him to lead the high life, traveling with pals like Mickey Mantle, whom he met at Toots Shor’s restaurant, and Clark Gable, a sometime fishing companion.

Mr. Horne’s first marriage ended in divorce. He never had children and is survived by his wife, a former model herself, who became international director of the Barbizon School of Modeling. In 1980, under the name Francine Marlowe, she wrote “Male Modeling: An Inside Look” (Crown).

Mr. Horne’s modeling career continued sporadically through the 1960s, especially in print ads featuring products for “mature” men. In the mid-1960s, he became a sales manager and spokesman for an apparel company, and he later established his own business, manufacturing leather belts.

He learned the lesson of how evanescent celebrity could be without a famous name. Few, if any, of his photographs still strike a familiar chord. Well, maybe one does: a jokey shot taken in 1953 (whose rights he signed away), showing him with a sour, headachey expression of generic woe; it has been used dozens of times, even in the last decade, in ads for aspirin, tax services, hangover remedies and other stress relievers. His wife said it didn’t bother him that this was the image that survived.

“To him it was a job you did,” Mrs. Horne said. “And then you went fishing.”

    Jim Horne, a Familiar Face in Ads From the 1950s, Dies at 91, NYT, 25.1.2009,







Best and Worst Ads:

A Year the News

Eclipsed Commercial Breaks


December 29, 2008
The New York Times


Queen Elizabeth II described 1992 as “an annus horribilis” for her and the royal family. This annus may have not been that horribilis for Madison Avenue, but it came pretty close.

The biggest problem was that most advertising was overtaken by events as the year wore on. The best-laid marketing plans of mice and men — or “Mad Men” with mice — proved no match for a historic presidential race and an enormous financial crisis.

That cut both ways for marketers: overshadowing the best ads, but also drawing attention away from the worst. So half the industry is ending the year cursing its poor timing while the other half is breathing a loud sigh of relief.

Here is a recap of some high and low points of 2008.

BURGER KING After the success of the audacious “Whopper Freakout” campaign, which began in 2007, Burger King Holdings kept the heat on its rivals in the fast-food category, with mixed results. Stunts like selling Flame, a meat-scented body spray for men, were viral-marketing hits; the scent and its Web site (firemeetsdesire.com) made more news than if a vegan like Paul McCartney had turned up in a commercial dressed as the chain’s King character.

But a campaign called “Whopper Virgins” — asking residents of places like Greenland and Romania to take part in taste tests, which pitted the Whopper against the Big Mac — was off-putting; the premise came off like cultural imperialism. Agency for both: Crispin Porter & Bogusky, part of MDC Partners.

COCA-COLA A Super Bowl commercial for the Coca-Cola Classic brand sold by the Coca-Cola Company was a warm and fuzzy winner in the spirit of Coke classics like “Hilltop” and “Mean Joe Greene.” Over the skies of Manhattan, two breakaway balloons from the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade battle for a balloon bottle of Coke, only to lose to that lovable loser, Charlie Brown. Agency: Wieden & Kennedy.

MICROSOFT After years of enduring a mocking campaign from Apple that turned the phrase “I’m a PC” into a punch line, the Microsoft Corporation struck back with ads that surprisingly appropriated the phrase and effectively repurposed it as a rallying cry.

Teaser spots that preceded the Microsoft counterattack, featuring Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld as a talkative odd couple, were less successful. But they generated almost as much publicity as if the pair had plighted their troth as an actual couple. Agency: Crispin Porter & Bogusky.

MOTRIN Print and online ads for Motrin pain reliever, sold by a division of Johnson & Johnson, foolishly tried to be funny by comparing babies carried by mothers to fashion accessories. J.& J. wound up wearing tons of Pablum tossed at it by parents offended that their efforts to bond with their babies were being trivialized.

The complaints, many delivered in the form of angry “tweets” on Twitter, eventually seemed like overkill, but they killed the campaign. Agency: Taxi.

BARACK OBAMA One reason that so few people paid attention to advertising this year was a race for the White House filled with milestones, which ended with a precedent-setting president-to-be. One reason for that outcome was the deft use of media, new and traditional, by the Barack Obama campaign as well as by his supporters.

An example of an official ad that broke through was a 30-minute infomercial that the campaign ran on seven broadcast and cable networks on Oct. 29. The commercial, filmed like a documentary, managed to be slick and earnest at the same time, and finished with a live flourish with Mr. Obama at a rally in Florida. Agencies: GMMB, part of the Omnicom Group, and Murphy Putnam Media.

An example of an unofficial Obama ad that succeeded was a video clip, produced by the musician Will.i.am, called “Yes We Can,” which was viewed on YouTube and other video-sharing Web sites more than 20 million times.

STOVE TOP Almost 50 years after Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon demonstrated that in Chicago, some like it hot, Kraft Foods turned on the heat there to promote its Stove Top brand of stuffing.

Heated roofs were installed in 10 downtown bus shelters to bring to life the Stove Top promise of a warm feeling when eating a meal with stuffing as a side dish. The clever campaign was emblematic of what is known as experiential marketing, which has brought sounds and smells to bus shelters in addition to hot air. Agencies: Draft FCB, part of the Interpublic Group of Companies; JCDecaux North America, part of JCDecaux; and MediaVest, part of the Starcom MediaVest Group division of the Publicis Groupe.

TOYOTA A commercial to promote zero percent loans offered by Toyota Motor featured a version of a 1983 song, “Saved by Zero,” by the Fixx. The spot seemed innocuous enough, but incessant repetition got on America’s nerves to the point that consumers were threatening to fix Toyota’s wagon, station or otherwise.

There were even groups formed on Facebook to urge Toyota to pull the commercial. Still, all the publicity may have been beneficial at a time when people were thinking more about bailing out carmakers than buying cars; a headline in The Daily News, over an article about the Federal Reserve Board’s decision to slash interest rates, asked, “Are We Saved by Zero?” Agency: Saatchi & Saatchi, part of Publicis.

VOLKSWAGEN A tongue-in-cheek campaign for the Routan minivan sold by Volkswagen of America, part of the German automaker Volkswagen, sought to spoof the image of minivans as mom-mobiles. A celebrity mother, Brooke Shields, was featured as a scold who accuses expectant parents of wanting children just so they can experience the “German engineering” of the Routan.

Like the campaign for Motrin, the Routan campaign seemed tone-deaf. Maybe Americans consider motherhood no laughing matter. Agency: Crispin Porter & Bogusky.

Best and Worst Ads: A Year the News Eclipsed Commercial Breaks,






Tony Schwartz,

Who Helped Create ‘Daisy Ad,’



June 17, 2008

The New York Times



Tony Schwartz, a self-taught, sought-after and highly reclusive media consultant who helped create what is generally considered to be the most famous political ad to appear on television, died Saturday at his home in Manhattan. He was 84.

His death was announced by his daughter, Kayla Schwartz-Burridge.

“Media consultant” is barely adequate to describe Mr. Schwartz’s portfolio. In a career of more than half a century, he was variously an art director; advertising executive; urban folklorist who captured the cacophony of New York streets on phonograph records; radio host; Broadway sound designer; college professor, media theorist and author who wrote books about the persuasive power of sound and image; and maker of commercials for products, candidates and causes. What was more, Mr. Schwartz, who had suffered from agoraphobia since the age of 13, accomplished most of these things entirely within his Manhattan home.

Of the thousands of television and radio advertisements on which Mr. Schwartz worked, none is as well known, or as controversial, as one that was broadcast exactly once: the so-called “daisy ad,” made for Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidential campaign in 1964.

Produced by the advertising agency Doyle Dane Bernbach in collaboration with Mr. Schwartz, the minute-long spot was broadcast on Sept. 7, 1964, during NBC’s “Monday Night at the Movies.” It showed a little girl in a meadow (in reality a Manhattan park), counting aloud as she plucks the petals from a daisy. Her voice dissolves into a man’s voice counting downward, followed by the image of an atomic blast. President Johnson’s voice is heard on the soundtrack:

“These are the stakes. To make a world in which all of God’s children can live, or to go into the dark. We must either love each other, or we must die.” (The president’s speech deliberately invoked a line from “September 1, 1939,” a poem by W. H. Auden written at the outbreak of World War II.)

Though the name of Johnson’s opponent, Senator Barry M. Goldwater, was never mentioned, Goldwater’s campaign objected strenuously to the ad. So did many members of the public, Republicans and Democrats alike. The spot was pulled from the air after a single commercial showing, but it had done its work: with its dire implications about Goldwater and nuclear responsibility, the daisy ad was generally credited with contributing to Johnson’s victory at the polls in November. It was also credited with heralding the start of ferociously negative political advertising in the United States.

In interviews and on his Web site, www.tonyschwartz.org, Mr. Schwartz said he had created the daisy ad in its entirety, an account that was publicly disputed over the years by members of the Doyle Dane Bernbach team. (The daisy ad was modeled directly on a radio commercial for nuclear disarmament that Mr. Schwartz had made for the United Nations in the early 1960s.) What is generally acknowledged is that Mr. Schwartz was at least responsible for the overall audio concept of the daisy ad — the child counting up, the man counting down, the explosion — and for producing the soundtrack.

Over the years, Mr. Schwartz helped develop advertising campaigns for hundreds of political candidates, most Democrats, among them Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. (All of them, no matter how eminent, made the trek to Mr. Schwartz’s home to be filmed.) He was also known for creating some of television’s earliest, and most evocative, anti-smoking commercials, a cause on which he worked for much of his career.

The subject of frequent articles in the news media, Mr. Schwartz was described often as an impassioned visionary and occasionally as a skilled trafficker in truisms with a talent for self-promotion. His work was likened frequently — sometimes approvingly, sometimes not — to that of the media scholar Marshall McLuhan, a mentor and close friend. (He was sometimes confused with the Tony Schwartz who was a co-author of memoirs by Michael D. Eisner and Donald Trump.) But detractors and admirers alike praised Mr. Schwartz for being one of the first people to put the neglected medium of sound to effective use in television advertising. He was widely credited, for instance, with being the first person to use real children’s voices in the soundtracks of television commercials, something he began doing in the late 1950s. Advertisers had long considered young children too intractable to deliver their lines on cue; their dialogue had traditionally been recorded by adult actresses attempting to sound like children.

Anthony Schwartz was born in Manhattan on Aug. 19, 1923. He was reared in New York City and Crompond, N.Y., near Peekskill. As a youth, Tony was an ardent ham-radio operator and also interested in visual art. At 16, he went blind for about six months as a result of an unspecified episode of “an emotional type,” as he told People magazine years later. His blindness strengthened his already deep connection to the auditory world.

Mr. Schwartz earned an undergraduate degree in graphic design from the Pratt Institute, followed by service during World War II as a civilian artist for the Navy. Afterward, he worked as an art director at several ad agencies and later ran his own agency, the Wexton Company, which later became Solow/Wexton.

Around this time, Mr. Schwartz also bought his first wire recorder. Slinging it heavily over his shoulder, he began to harvest the intoxicating sounds of the city: foghorns and folk singers; street vendors hawking their wares; a shoemaker plying his trade; a Central Park zookeeper waxing poetic on the care and feeding of lions; hundreds of taxi drivers; and a slew of ordinary New Yorkers, just talking.

Mr. Schwartz also built an important archive of folk music, recording young artists like Harry Belafonte and the Weavers performing in his home. Through his extensive correspondence with other, far-flung audiophiles, he augmented his collection with their recordings of music from around the globe.

During the 1950s and afterward, Mr. Schwartz produced more than dozen record albums, most for the Folkways label. Among them were “Sounds of My City”; “1, 2, 3 and a Zing, Zing, Zing,” featuring the songs and games of New York children; and “A Dog’s Life,” which captured the sounds in the first year in the life of a real dog. (Many of these albums are available as CD’s from Smithsonian Folkways Recordings, www.folkways.si.edu.)

Because of his agoraphobia, Mr. Schwartz confined his fieldwork to his immediate neighborhood, on Manhattan’s West Side. One result was “New York 19” — the number denoted the district’s old postal zone — which documented the “music” Mr. Schwartz encountered on his walks there, from street performers to the lilting cadences of immigrant speech to a pneumatic drill singing its achingly familiar aria.

For 31 years, from 1945 to 1976, Mr. Schwartz was the producer and host of “Around New York,” a radio program broadcast on WNYC. He was also a sound designer for several Broadway plays, among them “Two for the Seesaw” (1958) and “The Miracle Worker” (1959).

Mr. Schwartz was a shrewd observer of communication in its many forms, in particular the persuasive marriage of word and image known as advertising. The aim of advertising, Mr. Schwartz often said, should not be to introduce viewers to new ideas, but rather to bring out ones that were already present, lurking subconsciously in the mind.

“The best political commercials are Rorschach patterns,” he wrote in his book “The Responsive Chord” (Anchor Press, 1973). “They do not tell the viewer anything. They surface his feelings and provide a context for him to express these feelings.”

Mr. Schwartz also wrote “Media, the Second God,” published by Random House in 1981. He taught media studies at several universities, including Fordham, Columbia, New York University and Harvard, using a variety of technologies — among them two-way telephones and live satellite transmissions — to conduct his classes from the security of his home. As he often said late in life, he had delivered lectures to every continent but Antarctica, all without leaving the house.

Besides his daughter Michaela Schwartz-Burridge, who is known as Kayla, Mr. Schwartz is survived by his wife, the former Reenah Lurie, whom he married in 1959; a son, Anton; a brother, Lasker, known as Larry; and one grandchild.

Among Mr. Schwartz’s most famous television ads is one he wrote and produced for the American Cancer Society; it was first broadcast in 1963, a year before the Surgeon General’s warning on the dangers of smoking was released. The ad showed two children dressing up in adult clothes. The announcer’s voice said, simply: “Children love to imitate their parents. Children learn by imitating their parents. Do you smoke cigarettes?”

He later produced an evocative television ad in which Patrick Reynolds, a grandson of the tobacco magnate R. J. Reynolds, named the members of his family who had died of cancer, emphysema and heart disease.

Mr. Schwartz’s commercial clients included Coca-Cola (for which he created the well-known TV ad featuring a sumptuously sweating bottle with the sound of pouring liquid as the only audio element); American Express; Chrysler; Kodak; and Paine Webber, among many others.

In 2007, Mr. Schwartz’s entire body of work from 1947 to 1999, including his field recordings and the thousands of radio and television commercials he made, was acquired by the Library of Congress.

To the end of his career, Mr. Schwartz was asked often about the daisy ad. To the end of his career, he defended it.

“For many years, it’s been referred to as the beginning of negative commercials,” Mr. Schwartz said in an interview with MSNBC in 2000. “There was nothing negative about it. Frankly, I think it was the most positive commercial ever made.”

Tony Schwartz, Who Helped Create ‘Daisy Ad,’ Dies,










Related > Anglonautes > Advertisements / Ads








Related > Anglonautes > Vocapedia


media, press,

newspapers, radio, TV,

journalism, photojournalism,

free speech, free press,

fake news, disinformation,

cartoons, advertising