By Brian H Meredith
From the NZBusiness Magazine
"Marketing Maestro" Archive.
First published May 2010
Just been for a cup of tea and a lie down. Tired? No, not really. Just a bit nauseous. Might just book a few days away in the Home for the Bewildered.
The world was chock full of news today. Like it is most days.
World news. National news. Regional news.
CNN and BBC were not having any apparent trouble in keeping their 24 hour news service going at normal pace.
There was political news. Economic news. Human news.
Fears were growing over Greece’s economic crisis. The U.S. Coastguard set fire to a huge oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico. Gordon Brown was caught muttering about “a bigot” in his car ,courtesy of a radio microphone still on his person. Palestinians died in a “smuggling tunnel” in Gaza. And in New Zealand, the government was sitting under Extreme Urgency on Tobacco Tax increases.
And, with all this going on, TV3, led its main 6pm bulletin with a story about a child singer (well, 16 yrs old actually) causing teenage girls to scream, cry and faint on his arrival in Auckland. Justin Bieber, I think he is called. Never heard of him until now. But then he probably hasn’t heard of me either.
So it has come to this?
Well, yes it has.
And it was even worse than that, actually. The closest thing to a teenage girl that TV3 can front, John Campbell, also ran the story on Campbell Live which is one those, you know, sort of in-depth, “news behind the news”, formats.
You know, re-living the experience through writing this column is making me feel faint & nauseous all over again. Might just have to have another cup of tea. Another lie down.
To be fair, even the TV3 anchors appeared somewhat bemused, even uncomfortable, with the story, let alone it’s placement at the top of the bulletin’s menu.
So I find myself wondering who the person is who made that very (very very very) peculiar editorial decision. And when that person gets out of bed in the morning, what do they see in the mirror? Because whatever it is, it sure ain’t human. At not least anything that we (meaning me and, quite possibly, you) would regard as human.
Oh, and they even interviewed two teenage girls on the verge of hysteria who had stolen this child singer’s hat and were ransoming it for a hug from the child. But surely, if they got close enough to whip off his hat, they must have got close enough to snatch a hug? That’s notwithstanding the characteristic efforts of the NZ Police who were surrounding the child singer with the objective, presumably, of protecting him (but not his hat, it would seem).
And I’ve just remembered that it got worse again. A bit later in the bulletin, they highlighted the leading stories of interest on the TV3 news website. And guess what. Yep, you’re too smart for me – you’ve already got it - all four items were variations and angles on the same story ( you remember – the 16 year old child singer who makes teenage girls swoon, cry and faint – are swoon and faint the same thing?)
Now, call me judgmental, call me cynical or, to help me feel better, just call me and hire my firm for a big, juicy assignment, but do we really believe that the demographics of those who would swoon over a 16 year old child singer would match those of someone who would visit TV3’s news website? I don’t think so.
Now, please don’t think for one minute that I begrudge our teenage girls from having their idols and worshiping them. Crickey, their grandmothers did precisely the same thing when The Beatles arrived here. I absolutely do not want to spoil their enjoyment.
No, what I do begrudge is that some child (intellectually if not literally) at TV3 News believed that it was OK to spoil my own enjoyment by sticking this non-event (in the greater scheme of things) at the top of their bulletin.
Do they really believe that their audience’s demographics call for this story to be included in the bulletin (at all, let alone at Number 1 on the Menu)?
Or was it part of a clever marketing strategy designed to attract more swooning, screaming, fainting adolescents to their news audience? Surely not. It that is their strategy, they would do better to direct them to Campbell Live where they will, surely, feel a great affinity with its Presenter.
And what is the point of this rant?
Not sure really. Certainly needed to get it off my chest so I’ve done that.
But now that I think about it, I guess that it is just another example of how Brands are powerfully affected, for good or bad, by every behaviour in which they engage. My television news bulletin of choice is TV3 news at 6pm. Last night, that brand irritated the heck out of me. Our brand relationship, therefore, has taken a hit.
Will it survive that hit?
Probably. But the net balance of the brand account with me has reduced. And if they do something similar again, the balance will reduce still further. Until eventually I vote with my feet (or my remote, in this case).
The Point? Think carefully about your Brand before you irritate your core target market/s.
Comments
Post has no comments.