The methods to market we as businesses experience are constantly evolving and changing. There are overwhelming number of adverts that the public are exposed to daily, though the exact level varies greatly, most sources cite this as several thousand adverts daily.
It’s become commonplace to create controversy in order to stand out. Regularly we see agencies put forwards comically dubious adverts in order for them to be banned from traditional advertising sources, such as on TV or at sports events, so that their target market will find these adverts online, usually on YouTube, and share them.
The public also recognises that their voices, their connections and their platforms have monetary values. When the ice bucket challenge spread, we saw that even if every person didn’t donate to the cause, spreading a message had considerable value. Using this consumer desire to spread social justice messages (particularly new/commonly unknown messages) to their network has astronomical value.
Most recently, we saw a combination of the 2 in Iceland’s Christmas advert that was banned for a benign reason from traditional advertising. Hoping to compete with John Lewis’ ‘3Sadvert' (Sentimental, Sensitive, Seasonal advertising), Iceland teamed up with Greenpeace to create a touching advert which talks about the dangers of palm oil. With a minimal real effort on the part of Iceland (it’s only banned from own brand products) but a clever advertising strategy, the touching advert would have likely been a hit regardless.
But they really hit the jackpot when the festive advert was banned, because now the socially conscious public has a reason to use their influence to spread their message and fight for the brand behind it! The petition for the advert to overturn the ban is getting close to 1 million people, with major newspapers and magazines reporting on the situation.