“Popular” is a relative term. And so is “uncool” for that matter.
I continue to be amused by how many comments my post about Sonic stirs up. I do realize that by writing about it again (I must be insane!) I might be bringing on the wrath of Sonic commercial lovers everywhere, but that’s a risk I’m willing to take.
Sidenote: I got called a “Sonic hater” by a couple guys in their podcast. Heh.
Anyway, my apparent lack of a sense of humor has made me — and that post — the target for a lot of interesting commentary. (According to “Dan,” I wouldn’t know funny if it bit me in the ass.) And the comments keep coming in. Seriously, every couple of weeks, I get a new comment. The original post was published LAST OCTOBER.
I still maintain that my distaste for the commercials is rooted in me probably not being in their target public — as in, it wasn’t SUPPOSED to be funny to me. It was supposed to be funny to … all the people that it was funny to. Tah-dah! It worked.
The fact that people are still commenting on that post — almost a year later — shows that it really hit a home run with an identifiable group of people.
Now, if some of the people who commented on the first post took the time to read more of my blog, or … I don’t know … glance at the title of the blog … it’s clear that this is a site where I discuss “PR, business, advertising and other random thoughts.” So at the time I was looking at the ads with the cricital eye of a student who was currently in marketing classes learning about advertising theory. I wasn’t some random Joe saying “Sonic sucks.” I still don’t say they suck.
Anyway, I have another point to raise. I’m curious about something. Obviously, the commercials were hilarious to folks and people love them. (”Yay!” to the ad guys who came up with them. You guys did a great job creating ads with viral quality that people are even spoofing on YouTube. This one’s funny.)
Now honestly answer me this: if you love the commercials (as you have every right to), did they motivate you to purchase more food from Sonic?
If they did, then a BIG “yay!” to the ad guys! You rock. You deserve an award.
My point is that the whole purpose of advertising is NOT to entertain (as one commenter asserted). The purpose is to motivate viewers/consumers to act. And usually that action involves a purchase. Sometimes that “action” is only mental — involving a change of attitude, perhaps.
A company would not spend millions of dollars on an ad campaign for the sole purpose of making you laugh. If making you laugh makes their sales go up or improves brand recognition, the more giggles and chuckles the better.
Comment from Giselle:
I don’t love all the Sonic commercials, but the married couple has provided me with three commercials that I actually laugh out LOUD at, when I’m by myself. I’m a little fuzzy, but I think there was the cookie dough one from a while back, the one where she snarkily remarks something about him eating some sandwich as part of his list of chores or something, and one that I just saw which made me finally do a google search for her specifically - the one where she says she’s mature for the peach iced tea order. My husband and I are completely like that sometimes, just to cap on each other. We aren’t awkward or hateful or whatever, we’re just laid back and silly. Something about her comic timing always gets me laughing! It reminds me that I’m dying for a strawberry limeade, so I guess the commercial works. Target audience…hmm, hard to say! I’m 23/f and my husband is appx 20 years older. Maybe it just targets people who think it’s funny, whoever they may be. What do I know, I’m a musician, not an advertiser.
“It reminds me that I’m dying for a strawberry limeade, so I guess the commercial works.” Yes, I’d say it does. I just hope that’s widespread.
On another note, I wonder if Sonic has thought about making a contest for people to make their own commercials. Of course, they kind of don’t need to … folks are doing it on their own … well done!
Update: Just had an interesting chat with a friend about this.
jefferyharrell: The purpose of consumer advertising is hardly EVER to motivate.
me: tell that to my marketing professor
jefferyharrell: It’s almost always to embed the advertising company’s identity in the public’s awareness.
me: who made the opposite point very clear
jefferyharrell: Your marketing professor was wrong, then.
me: well, by embedding the company’s identity into the public awareness … that has another intended result, though
jefferyharrell: The most successful ads are, historically, ones that specifically do not implore the viewer to act, but that engage the viewer on an emotional or intellectual level and creating a positive association.
me: it’s supposed to positively affect the business
jefferyharrell: Well, okay, yes. The idea is that the more you advertise, the more you sell.
But saying that advertising’s purpose is to motivate is a misleading oversimplification.
(Sorry, I don’t mean to argue with you.)
me: well, the whole point to this is to create discussion
for all i know, my professor WAS wrong
the point is that this is my perspective
and i’m now learning from yours
jefferyharrell: Well, advertising has been evolving a lot ever since the advent of the television remote control
Remember jingles?
me: yeah
most were quite good at putting a brand at the forefront of consumers’ minds
jefferyharrell: Right, but that’s because they worked in a particular environment.
Back in the day, TV audiences were essentially captive.
You could show them ANYTHING.
me: lol
jefferyharrell: The great part of a commercial jingle is that you don’t even have to be in the room to absorb it.
me: mm-hmm
especially effective
jefferyharrell: In fact, the more annoying and repetitive they were, the better they worked.
But today, jingles are totally extinct.
me: hmm
not totally
but i see your point
jefferyharrell: Yeah, they are. Name me one brand jingle of more than four seconds’ duration.
me: Oscar Meyer
jefferyharrell: They haven’t used it in twenty-five year.s
me: YES THEY HAVE!!!
trust me
it’s my favorite
i was thrilled when they brought it back
jefferyharrell: Yeah, like I’m gonna trust a PR shill who says “trust me.”
me: HAHaha
hey
none of that
besides they have that one for balogne
uh … however you spell that
bologna
balogna
lol
i should know … it’s part of the jingle
6 responses so far ↓
1 Chris Clarke // Oct 1, 2006 at 2:15 am
Two things: jingles aren’t dead, as your friend asserted. They’re long past their glory days, but people still use them…sometimes. Is Mazda’s “Zoom Zoom” considered a jingle? I’m not even sure what a jingle is, come to think of it.
And I personally don’t get the Sonic commercials. They’re not funny (although people with a sense of humour different than mine might disagree).
There are different kinds of ads, though. Some try to convince you to buy; for example, auto commercials announcing things like “low financing” or “0% interest” and the like are trying to get you to ACT NOW before the sale ends; using automobiles again as an example, some commercial try to make you think the car has a spirit or an aura about it, and they’ll show you any number of things that have nothing to do with the car (open road, beautiful landscapes, beautiful people) without even mentioning how much the car costs.
Different ads, different objectives.
2 Erin // Oct 1, 2006 at 10:07 pm
I definitely agree — many kinds of ads out there. Although, using the examples you noted, Chris, I tend to think that both commercials are ultimately reaching toward the same objective. The first you noted is using time, the urgency of “get it while it lasts” to motivate; the other is trying to connect with consumers on a less obvious level, appealing to qualities of aesthetics and class. (I wish I could dig up my notes from my persuasive discourse class — there’s a name for that!) My point is that they’re just different persuasive tactics. Granted, the immediate objectives differ somewhat, with the first clearly pushing a purchase and the second establishing a certain identity with the consumer. But I’d say the ultimate objectives are the same: buy the car.
3 Chris Clarke // Oct 2, 2006 at 2:57 pm
True! “Buy now” or “Remember this ad for the next time you buy” is still “buy the car”.
4 Jeremy Pepper // Nov 20, 2006 at 8:23 am
I disagree with your friend - ads are supposed to drive you to buy. Yes, it is about remembering the name, but there is the drive to buy … or that remembering the name is useless.
That’s why I love Jack N the Box - makes me want to go there. That’s why Sonic is a whatev to me. That’s why In-N-Out’s jingle sticks with me … and makes me go down to the wharf.
5 Blog Run » Blog Archive » DC Blogfest, PR doesn’t phone home, Jay-Z HOVA, Sonic gets Erin and AT&T is for “lovers” // Nov 20, 2006 at 8:27 am
[…] Erin Caldwell’s PRBlog: My Uncool-ness Makes Me Popular and Makes Sonic Rich The interesting nature of search engine results, criticizing a commercials that doesn’t speak to her and the continued comments and fall-out from fans. But, an interesting discussion if advertising is just for identity or call to action. […]
6 Jerry // Oct 9, 2007 at 3:43 am
Sonic food quality and taste is average and on par with most fast food chains. Neither I nor anyone I know finds Sonic’s commercials the least bit humorous. In fact the commercials are so annoying we havn’t been to sonic in over a year and our office is across the street from a sonic.
Leave a Comment