Nov 26 2008
When Testing Shows that ‘Really Bad’ Is Actually ‘Really Good’
I’m particularly fascinated by the phenomenon where something is so bad — so ridiculously inane, unrealistic, repetitive, strange, or low-budget — that it is actually good.
There are countless examples in marketing where this has been the case. For example, it had been said that film executives wanted to change the title of the film Snakes on a Plane to the decidedly less memorable Pacific Flight 121 until Samuel L. Jackson stepped in and said “What are you doing here? It’s not Gone with the Wind. It’s not On the Waterfront. It’s Snakes on a Plane!” He was right. The movie was ridiculous, but everyone in America knew about it before it’s release date despite a limited marketing budget.
Here’s my point: when you think about it, a movie title is a bit like an email subject line; it alludes to what is in store for the audience if they choose to view the full content after clicking/paying. I’m sure that some of you have run subject line tests and felt pretty confident that your cleverest idea was going to win. And I’m sure that some of you have been disturbed to find out that the least clever idea can sometimes be the most effective option.
Have you ever run a campaign test only to discover that the lowest common denominator is actually the best strategy?
I got to thinking about this recently when I stumbled across a strangely hypnotizing documentary snippet posted on YouTube about the history of the “Hair Club for Men” commercials. Apparently Sy Sperling’s ubiquitous catchphrase, “I’m not only the Hair Club president, I’m also a client,” would never have happened had it not been for testing and measuring results.
But how easy is it to intentionally create an advertisement or email that is so bad, it’s good? Not easy, perhaps. Look at Salesgenie.com, a company that created one of my favorite memorably bad ads of all time, their 2007 Super Bowl campaign. Media critic Bob Garfield memorably panned the ad in his Super Bowl roundup:
Slick brian Williams-look-alike sales stud has hot babe, hot car, low handicap, envious colleagues and the boss’s notice-thanks to the leads generated by InfoUSA’s Salesgenie subscription service. This spot is so monumentally brainless and amateurish it actually attracts attention-i.e., is this really a Super Bowl ad??? No problem. The “Glengarry Glen Ross” crowd won’t downgrade for insipidness.
Despite critical panning, the cheesiness factor paid huge dividends for Salesgenie as they generated 10,000 new prospect registrations within 2 days of airing the ad during the big game. So what did Salesgenie try to do the following year? The same in-house team wrote the ads again, but they ended up creating awkward, racially-insensitive, ineffective spots with animated panda bears. I guess the lesson to be learned is that it’s not easy making something bad in a good way.
Is all of this badness giving you a headache? Why don’t you try HeadOn? Apply directly to the forehead!
[...] I know I’ve touched on the topic of direct-to-consumer TV spots in the past, but I really do have a soft spot in my heart for them. There’s something oddly [...]