I like Jerry Lewis movies and my favorite is without question, The Nutty Professor. It is a take-off on the old Jekyll and Hyde theme -- combined with those old comic book ads for muscle-building. Remember them? The muscle man at the beach kicks sand in the guy’s face, but he’s too puny to do anything about it. So he bulks up and is ready the next time it happens?
In the film, Dr. Julius Kelp, a meek and mild college chemistry professor who is picked on by just about everyone from the college president to members of his class, uses chemistry to create a special elixir that allows his alter ego Buddy Love to come alive. Buddy is everything that Kelp is not. He’s hip and cool, but also very self-absorbed. He is focused only on his own wants without regard to who he might hurt in the process.
So, what does any of this have to do with “Dish-ing It to Downing”?
I recently received two anonymous letters.
I routinely get emails from people who don’t leave their name – letters that usually have a very hateful tone to them. This doesn’t particularly upset me. It’s an interesting phenomenon, but is it a sign of the times?
Last April, David Vaina wrote an online article called, “New Media Versus Old Media”. His summary: new media don’t follow the same ethics as traditional media. Just look at some of the hate mail (yes, it is hate mail) generated by our story on “The Real Housewives of Taylor County”. Some of it was just insulting and maybe it was because the authors didn’t have to put their real name on it. Parked in front of a computer screen, “Mr. Hyde” took over, saying what they wanted because there was no accountability or policing. It is, afterall, a free country and your right to say what you want is guaranteed by the Constitution right?
Not really. The Constitution keeps the government from making laws abridging your freedom of speech. Sometimes going on a "rant" can end-up villifying you just as much as the person you are attacking. Vaina says there are justifiable concerns about potentially negative ramifications as we transition from traditional journalism to “one shaped, at least in part, by a decentralized biosphere.” According to Vaina, advocates of this new form of journalism say that overtime the media landscape will be enriched, not degraded, by this public discourse. Admittedly though, it may take decades, not years, for that to happen. In the meantime, who weighs the damage done against the benefits to society?
Site managers for Technorati, a recognized authority on blogs and user-generated content, report that they are now tracking almost 113 million blogs and more than 1.6 million blog posts each day. I suspect one of the biggest problems with the internet is that it’s “different things to different people”. I know people who consider the internet a valuable source for information. I also know people who think it’s a big game and, using a pseudonym, you can do just about anything to anyone you want to. Consider this: research from the Pew Internet & American Life Project show 55 percent of bloggers write their online blogs under a ficticious name. The concern of many is that these bloggers will be more likely to publish false rumor because it’s harder to trace the mistake back to its source.
There are times when anonymity is justified. I think, however, most of the time you should have the courage of your convictions.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I really do care about what you think, but when it comes to emails and letters that have no redeeming value, I will do what I have always done with them: send them to the trash/recycle bin.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
The $15 Challenge: Some Food For Thought
In this week’s “Dish It to Downing”, some thoughts about the just completed Money Savers Challenge. The challenge: feeding yourself on just $15 dollars a week. At first glance, it looks easy. Then, when you actually step into the grocery store and start shopping, you realize just how far fifteen dollars doesn’t go anymore.
I toyed with the idea of just buying a couple of bags of potato chips and a six-pack, but that pretty much ate up my fifteen bucks. So, in preparation for the event, I did my homework. A week before the challenge began; I visited the Abilene Public Library for a little research into how the rest of the world does it. I checked into two subjects: the Great Depression and The Third World.
From the Great Depression I learned that folks knew how to stretch what food they had. People didn’t have a lot, but many of them shared with others because they were either better off than the next guy or wanted him to think that. Pride counted for a lot back then. People had gardens, canned their food, and raised chickens. They also learned to live on a lot less.
From the third world, I learned the value of staples such as rice and beans.
From both I learned that to survive on fifteen dollars a week, you mustn’t let anything go to waste and you better get use to living on leftovers.
Now I’m a pretty resourceful guy, so I had my shopping list made up pretty early. This is what was on it:
1 Pkg of Frozen Mixed Vegetables
1 Loaf of Bread (not sliced)
1 Quart of Milk
1 Pkg of Stewing Meat
1 Box of Rice (not Minute Rice)
1 Can of Beans
1 Dozen Eggs
2 Whole Chickens
Grand total at the check-out stand: $14.85.
I came home and started planning out my menu. The whole plan for me was based on the idea that we have become a society of convenience. We eat fast food because it’s easier than staying home and cooking it. The downside of that is that most of us have forgotten how to cook. That convenience is something we pay dearly for, not just at fast food restaurants, but at the grocery store, too.
I decided to first attack the rice. A little of that goes a long way, but I wasn’t quite sure how long it would take to cook it, so I jumped right in.
Lesson One: Read the directions. Rice isn’t hard to cook, but you really have to pay attention to the directions. Also, be willing to settle for eating your mistakes the first couple of times.
Lesson Two: Frozen means frozen. It took four days for the whole chickens to thaw enough to cook, so I survive on fried egg sandwiches for dinner, a boiled egg for lunch, and an omelet for breakfast the first couple of days. That made the last two days a veritable feast with basked chicken, beans, and mixed vegetables.
Lesson Three: You can live on leftovers. This is where all that reading about the Depression came in handy. They use to do a lot of mixing and matching back then; you know, beans and rice, etc.
So, now comes the moment of truth: How did I do?
I survived and could survive if I had to, but it made me a lot more appreciative of what I have. On the first day, I had to give a speech to a group of Rotarians in Brownwood. It was a lunch engagement, so I ate as their guest. It would have been impolite not to do so. I don’t consider that a violation of the rules because that’s a normal part of my job. Second, on the very last day, my wife’s father passed away and the house became filled with mourners bearing gifts of food. I made up for it later, though, by going back on the challenge for one extra day. Those were the only times I hedged.
But I learned a few things, too. First, things are not so bad when you are in it with someone else. We found out that by coming together and sharing with one another, we had plenty of food and perhaps even more importantly, a variety of food. We also thought about using a business model being employed more and more these days in the workplace: the power of bulk buying. Instead of each of us duplicating what the other was getting, we considered comparing notes and working as a team to stretch our food dollar even farther. We didn’t do that because we just didn’t have time to test our theory about it. Maybe we will next time.
Finally, something very unusual happened. Just like in the Great Depression, we all began to watch out for each other and to share what we had with someone else who might not have as much. We didn’t throw anything away and nothing was wasted.
It was a great chance to look at all that we have to be thankful for in this country, compared to what most people in the world do not have. It was also a sad reminder of how much we take for granted. I was ashamed, but proud, too, of how well we did.
You know, I couldn’t help but think when the idea was first pitched that it’s not a good thing when your boss asks you if you can survive on just fifteen dollars a week for food; especially in these tough economic times. I’m glad we did it, though. I learned a lot about myself.
It reminded me of a "real world" hunger exercise I was involved in some years ago. Do you know what happens to you when you don't eat? Your blood sugar falls and you become very lethargic. After just a few days, you get to the point where you are just too weak to do anything about overcoming your own predicament. It was a real education in what we must do to attack hunger on global basis. Unfortunately, there are still far too many in the world who use food as a weapon.
Still, if you really want to be impressed, look at the people of the world who feed an entire family on a fraction of what we spent. We really are the land of plenty, but keep acting like we are the only ones in the world doing the suffering. It's time to wake up, America! You can't use food deprivation as an excuse anymore.
Downing Bolls
I toyed with the idea of just buying a couple of bags of potato chips and a six-pack, but that pretty much ate up my fifteen bucks. So, in preparation for the event, I did my homework. A week before the challenge began; I visited the Abilene Public Library for a little research into how the rest of the world does it. I checked into two subjects: the Great Depression and The Third World.
From the Great Depression I learned that folks knew how to stretch what food they had. People didn’t have a lot, but many of them shared with others because they were either better off than the next guy or wanted him to think that. Pride counted for a lot back then. People had gardens, canned their food, and raised chickens. They also learned to live on a lot less.
From the third world, I learned the value of staples such as rice and beans.
From both I learned that to survive on fifteen dollars a week, you mustn’t let anything go to waste and you better get use to living on leftovers.
Now I’m a pretty resourceful guy, so I had my shopping list made up pretty early. This is what was on it:
1 Pkg of Frozen Mixed Vegetables
1 Loaf of Bread (not sliced)
1 Quart of Milk
1 Pkg of Stewing Meat
1 Box of Rice (not Minute Rice)
1 Can of Beans
1 Dozen Eggs
2 Whole Chickens
Grand total at the check-out stand: $14.85.
I came home and started planning out my menu. The whole plan for me was based on the idea that we have become a society of convenience. We eat fast food because it’s easier than staying home and cooking it. The downside of that is that most of us have forgotten how to cook. That convenience is something we pay dearly for, not just at fast food restaurants, but at the grocery store, too.
I decided to first attack the rice. A little of that goes a long way, but I wasn’t quite sure how long it would take to cook it, so I jumped right in.
Lesson One: Read the directions. Rice isn’t hard to cook, but you really have to pay attention to the directions. Also, be willing to settle for eating your mistakes the first couple of times.
Lesson Two: Frozen means frozen. It took four days for the whole chickens to thaw enough to cook, so I survive on fried egg sandwiches for dinner, a boiled egg for lunch, and an omelet for breakfast the first couple of days. That made the last two days a veritable feast with basked chicken, beans, and mixed vegetables.
Lesson Three: You can live on leftovers. This is where all that reading about the Depression came in handy. They use to do a lot of mixing and matching back then; you know, beans and rice, etc.
So, now comes the moment of truth: How did I do?
I survived and could survive if I had to, but it made me a lot more appreciative of what I have. On the first day, I had to give a speech to a group of Rotarians in Brownwood. It was a lunch engagement, so I ate as their guest. It would have been impolite not to do so. I don’t consider that a violation of the rules because that’s a normal part of my job. Second, on the very last day, my wife’s father passed away and the house became filled with mourners bearing gifts of food. I made up for it later, though, by going back on the challenge for one extra day. Those were the only times I hedged.
But I learned a few things, too. First, things are not so bad when you are in it with someone else. We found out that by coming together and sharing with one another, we had plenty of food and perhaps even more importantly, a variety of food. We also thought about using a business model being employed more and more these days in the workplace: the power of bulk buying. Instead of each of us duplicating what the other was getting, we considered comparing notes and working as a team to stretch our food dollar even farther. We didn’t do that because we just didn’t have time to test our theory about it. Maybe we will next time.
Finally, something very unusual happened. Just like in the Great Depression, we all began to watch out for each other and to share what we had with someone else who might not have as much. We didn’t throw anything away and nothing was wasted.
It was a great chance to look at all that we have to be thankful for in this country, compared to what most people in the world do not have. It was also a sad reminder of how much we take for granted. I was ashamed, but proud, too, of how well we did.
You know, I couldn’t help but think when the idea was first pitched that it’s not a good thing when your boss asks you if you can survive on just fifteen dollars a week for food; especially in these tough economic times. I’m glad we did it, though. I learned a lot about myself.
It reminded me of a "real world" hunger exercise I was involved in some years ago. Do you know what happens to you when you don't eat? Your blood sugar falls and you become very lethargic. After just a few days, you get to the point where you are just too weak to do anything about overcoming your own predicament. It was a real education in what we must do to attack hunger on global basis. Unfortunately, there are still far too many in the world who use food as a weapon.
Still, if you really want to be impressed, look at the people of the world who feed an entire family on a fraction of what we spent. We really are the land of plenty, but keep acting like we are the only ones in the world doing the suffering. It's time to wake up, America! You can't use food deprivation as an excuse anymore.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Is It News: Attacking the Messenger
I have been reporting the news for more than 30 years now and in that time; I’ve learned a few things. I have two clippings in my desk that have served me well over those years. The first is a “Calvin and Hobbes” cartoon. Calvin and Hobbes are the creation of cartoonist Bill Watterson. Calvin is a small boy and Hobbes is his stuffed Tiger, with whom he has imaginary adventures. In this particular cartoon, Calvin is yelling at his TV set: “You call this news?! This isn’t informative! This is a sound bite! This is entertainment! This is sensationalism! Fortunately, that’s all I have the patience for.”
The other clipping is from a 1940’s era Journalism textbook I found in an old book sale. In a chapter called, “What Is News”, I found the following summary:
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 extraordinary life = News
1 ordinary husband + 1 ordinary wife = 0
1 husband + 3 wives = News
1 bank cashier + 1 wife + 7 children = 0
1 bank cashier - $10,000 = News
1 chorus girl + 1 bank president + $10,000 = News
1 man + 1 auto + 1 gun + 1 quart = News
1 man + 1 wife + 1 row + 1 lawsuit = News
1 man + 1 achievement = News
1 woman + 1 adventure or achievement = News
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 79 years = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 100 years = News
It’s not exactly a textbook definition of “news” but I think it makes its point. It never seems to fail, though. Whenever someone sees a news story he doesn’t like, he always feels the necessity to attack the messenger and usually does so by questioning our news judgment. It’s not enough to say, “I didn’t like your story about _____.” It’s always some personal attack such as “You don’t know what news is” or “That kind of poor judgment about what is newsworthy is why I don't watch.” I have a pretty thick skin (you have to in this business), but I can’t help but feel that the many people have a pretty clouded view of what news really is -- and isn’t.
So, this week, I thought I’d turn to a fellow journalist Deborah Potter to explain things from where we sit. Deborah has more than 20 years in the business, including 16 as a network correspondent for CBS News and CNN. Here’s a portion of an article she wrote for the U.S. Department of State publication, Handbook of Independent Journalism.
“The answer to the question “What is news?” may seem obvious. News is what is new; it’s what’s happening. Look it up in the dictionary, and you’ll find news described as “a report of recent events or previously unknown information.” But most of the things that happen in the world every day don’t find their way into the newspaper or onto the air in a newscast.
So what makes a story newsworthy enough to be published or broadcast? The real answer is, it depends on a variety of factors. Generally speaking, news is information that is of broad interest to the intended audience, so what’s big news in Buenos Aires may not be news at all in Baku. Journalists decide what news to cover based on many of the following “news values”:
Timeliness
Did something happen recently or did we just learn about it? If so, that could make it newsworthy. The meaning of “recently” varies depending on the medium, of course. For a weekly news magazine, anything that happened since the previous edition the week before may be considered timely. For a 24-hour cable news channel, the timeliest news may be “breaking news,” or something that is happening this very minute and can be covered by a reporter live at the scene.
Impact
Are many people affected or just a few? Contamination in the water system that serves your town’s 20,000 people has impact because it affects your audience directly. A report that 10 children were killed from drinking polluted water at a summer camp in a distant city has impact too, because the audience is likely to have a strong emotional response to the story. The fact that a worker cut a utility line is not big news, unless it happens to cause a blackout across the city that lasts for several hours.
Proximity
Did something happen close to home, or did it involve people from here? A plane crash in Chad will make headlines in N'Djamena, but it’s unlikely to be front-page news in Chile unless the plane was carrying Chilean passengers.
Controversy
Are people in disagreement about this? It’s human nature to be interested in stories that involve conflict, tension, or public debate. People like to take sides, and see whose position will prevail. Conflict doesn’t always entail pitting one person’s views against another. Stories about doctors battling disease or citizens opposing an unjust law also involve conflict.
Prominence
Is a well-known person involved? Ordinary activities or mishaps can become news if they involve a prominent person like a prime minister or a film star. That plane crash in Chad would make headlines around the world if one of the passengers were a famous rock musician.
Currency
Are people here talking about this? A government meeting about bus safety might not draw much attention, unless it happens to be scheduled soon after a terrible bus accident. An incident at a football match may be in the news for several days because it’s the main topic of conversation in town.
Oddity
Is what happened unusual? As the saying goes, “If a dog bites a man, that is not news. But if a man bites a dog, it's news!” The extraordinary and the unexpected appeal to our natural human curiosity.
What makes news also depends on the makeup of the intended audience, not just where they live but who they are. Different groups of people have different lifestyles and concerns, which make them interested in different types of news. A radio news program targeted at younger listeners might include stories about music or sports stars that would not be featured in a business newspaper aimed at older, wealthier readers. A weekly magazine that covers medical news would report on the testing of an experimental drug because the doctors who read the publication presumably would be interested. But unless the drug is believed to cure a well-known disease, most general-interest local newspapers would ignore the story.”
On any given day, in any given newscast, we are trying to reach roughly 60,000 viewers; viewers whose tastes and interests are as varied as they are, and we have just half an hour to do that in. Admittedly, there will be occasions when we air stories that you don’t like or that you take exception to, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know our jobs.
Downing Bolls
The other clipping is from a 1940’s era Journalism textbook I found in an old book sale. In a chapter called, “What Is News”, I found the following summary:
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 extraordinary life = News
1 ordinary husband + 1 ordinary wife = 0
1 husband + 3 wives = News
1 bank cashier + 1 wife + 7 children = 0
1 bank cashier - $10,000 = News
1 chorus girl + 1 bank president + $10,000 = News
1 man + 1 auto + 1 gun + 1 quart = News
1 man + 1 wife + 1 row + 1 lawsuit = News
1 man + 1 achievement = News
1 woman + 1 adventure or achievement = News
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 79 years = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 100 years = News
It’s not exactly a textbook definition of “news” but I think it makes its point. It never seems to fail, though. Whenever someone sees a news story he doesn’t like, he always feels the necessity to attack the messenger and usually does so by questioning our news judgment. It’s not enough to say, “I didn’t like your story about _____.” It’s always some personal attack such as “You don’t know what news is” or “That kind of poor judgment about what is newsworthy is why I don't watch.” I have a pretty thick skin (you have to in this business), but I can’t help but feel that the many people have a pretty clouded view of what news really is -- and isn’t.
So, this week, I thought I’d turn to a fellow journalist Deborah Potter to explain things from where we sit. Deborah has more than 20 years in the business, including 16 as a network correspondent for CBS News and CNN. Here’s a portion of an article she wrote for the U.S. Department of State publication, Handbook of Independent Journalism.
“The answer to the question “What is news?” may seem obvious. News is what is new; it’s what’s happening. Look it up in the dictionary, and you’ll find news described as “a report of recent events or previously unknown information.” But most of the things that happen in the world every day don’t find their way into the newspaper or onto the air in a newscast.
So what makes a story newsworthy enough to be published or broadcast? The real answer is, it depends on a variety of factors. Generally speaking, news is information that is of broad interest to the intended audience, so what’s big news in Buenos Aires may not be news at all in Baku. Journalists decide what news to cover based on many of the following “news values”:
Timeliness
Did something happen recently or did we just learn about it? If so, that could make it newsworthy. The meaning of “recently” varies depending on the medium, of course. For a weekly news magazine, anything that happened since the previous edition the week before may be considered timely. For a 24-hour cable news channel, the timeliest news may be “breaking news,” or something that is happening this very minute and can be covered by a reporter live at the scene.
Impact
Are many people affected or just a few? Contamination in the water system that serves your town’s 20,000 people has impact because it affects your audience directly. A report that 10 children were killed from drinking polluted water at a summer camp in a distant city has impact too, because the audience is likely to have a strong emotional response to the story. The fact that a worker cut a utility line is not big news, unless it happens to cause a blackout across the city that lasts for several hours.
Proximity
Did something happen close to home, or did it involve people from here? A plane crash in Chad will make headlines in N'Djamena, but it’s unlikely to be front-page news in Chile unless the plane was carrying Chilean passengers.
Controversy
Are people in disagreement about this? It’s human nature to be interested in stories that involve conflict, tension, or public debate. People like to take sides, and see whose position will prevail. Conflict doesn’t always entail pitting one person’s views against another. Stories about doctors battling disease or citizens opposing an unjust law also involve conflict.
Prominence
Is a well-known person involved? Ordinary activities or mishaps can become news if they involve a prominent person like a prime minister or a film star. That plane crash in Chad would make headlines around the world if one of the passengers were a famous rock musician.
Currency
Are people here talking about this? A government meeting about bus safety might not draw much attention, unless it happens to be scheduled soon after a terrible bus accident. An incident at a football match may be in the news for several days because it’s the main topic of conversation in town.
Oddity
Is what happened unusual? As the saying goes, “If a dog bites a man, that is not news. But if a man bites a dog, it's news!” The extraordinary and the unexpected appeal to our natural human curiosity.
What makes news also depends on the makeup of the intended audience, not just where they live but who they are. Different groups of people have different lifestyles and concerns, which make them interested in different types of news. A radio news program targeted at younger listeners might include stories about music or sports stars that would not be featured in a business newspaper aimed at older, wealthier readers. A weekly magazine that covers medical news would report on the testing of an experimental drug because the doctors who read the publication presumably would be interested. But unless the drug is believed to cure a well-known disease, most general-interest local newspapers would ignore the story.”
On any given day, in any given newscast, we are trying to reach roughly 60,000 viewers; viewers whose tastes and interests are as varied as they are, and we have just half an hour to do that in. Admittedly, there will be occasions when we air stories that you don’t like or that you take exception to, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know our jobs.
Downing Bolls
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
“695-1181”: Enough already!
Okay, I’ve had it up to here!
Not with those repetitious RPM Direct Satellite TV commercials. No, what I’m tired of are those annoying people who feel they must bombard me with their anger at the commercials. I’m beginning to understand what it’s like to be a national advertiser on the receiving end of a hate mail campaign because I’m advertising on an unpopular TV show. You know how it goes: viewers don’t like the program so they put pressure on the advertisers. By doing that, you hit the TV station in the pocketbook and, rather than lose viewers, the station cuts the program…or in this case, the commercial.
But this is no “Book of Daniel” we’re talking about here. It is a TV commercial. Let me share a portion of a letter I got this past week. It’s very typical of what I hear from disgruntled viewers.
“I would like to advise KRBC and KTAB that I do not tune in to either with one or two exceptions and when I make the exceptions I have time the ‘695-1181’ so that I can cut the TV off until they have finished the ad, then turn it back on. I know you people think this ‘ad’ is God’s gift to your viewers, but if you only knew how many viewers are doing what I am doing, a lot of them have cut KRBC and KTAB completely.”
The writer goes on to say, “I have been around many, many years, but have never seen any TV station’s try so hard to ANTAGONIZE their viewers. Will have to give both TV stations the ‘A-Plus’ for being the most ‘ANTAGONISTIC’ TV stations in the world.”
The author of the letter claims to have been elected to serve as a spokesman for this group of “x-viewers” (I think he meant “ex-viewers”; “x-viewers” are people who watch adult programming), but chose to remain anonymous.
Well, first of all, Mr. “Ex-viewer”, you are talking to the wrong guy. I don’t have anything to do with the commercials. Here’s something else: I get it; okay? You don’t like the ads. No one, though, has ever told me what specifically they don’t like about them. Even more amazing is that they continue to refer to the commercials by nearly always singing the jingle. Like it or not, that’s an ad campaign that works!
But surely this can’t be the first ad campaign to annoy viewers. So, in the interest of accuracy, I got on the web and did a search of “annoying TV commercials” and found some of these gems:
“Plop, Plop, Fizz, Fizz. Oh, what a relief it is.”
“Try it – You’ll like it.”
“Mama Mia, That’s a spicy meatball.”
“Mother, please. I’d rather do it myself.”
Boy, remember those old commercials? We hated them and use to make fun of them. They are now considered advertising classics. Why? Because you associate them with a product.
Let’s take a moment and examine these RPM commercials more closely. We have a simple jingle line: “6-9-5 -1-1-8-1. Who are you with? RPM Direct.” Boy, it doesn’t get much simpler than that: instant recall of the company’s name and phone number. That is an ad that works.
Finally, let’s just consider the bottom line. You don’t have to pay a TV tax in this country like viewers in other countries must do because the costs of paid for through advertising. If we start pulling ads off the air, I’m sure you won’t mind replacing that revenue base, right? It’s only fair.
So, here’s my challenge to all you angry TV viewers. If you don’t like the ads, do something about them. Come up with a better ad! Here’s the caveat, though. This ad has to draw the same level of viewer response and the audience must have the same level of product recall. In other words, if you don’t like the ad, come up with something that is less offensive, but just as effective.
I’m looking forward to seeing your ideas. Get started.
By the way, to all you viewers who said you’d be watching another Abilene TV station because we are running the RPM ads… I guess you won’t be watching TV, period. RPM’s now running on that channel, too.
Downing Bolls
Not with those repetitious RPM Direct Satellite TV commercials. No, what I’m tired of are those annoying people who feel they must bombard me with their anger at the commercials. I’m beginning to understand what it’s like to be a national advertiser on the receiving end of a hate mail campaign because I’m advertising on an unpopular TV show. You know how it goes: viewers don’t like the program so they put pressure on the advertisers. By doing that, you hit the TV station in the pocketbook and, rather than lose viewers, the station cuts the program…or in this case, the commercial.
But this is no “Book of Daniel” we’re talking about here. It is a TV commercial. Let me share a portion of a letter I got this past week. It’s very typical of what I hear from disgruntled viewers.
“I would like to advise KRBC and KTAB that I do not tune in to either with one or two exceptions and when I make the exceptions I have time the ‘695-1181’ so that I can cut the TV off until they have finished the ad, then turn it back on. I know you people think this ‘ad’ is God’s gift to your viewers, but if you only knew how many viewers are doing what I am doing, a lot of them have cut KRBC and KTAB completely.”
The writer goes on to say, “I have been around many, many years, but have never seen any TV station’s try so hard to ANTAGONIZE their viewers. Will have to give both TV stations the ‘A-Plus’ for being the most ‘ANTAGONISTIC’ TV stations in the world.”
The author of the letter claims to have been elected to serve as a spokesman for this group of “x-viewers” (I think he meant “ex-viewers”; “x-viewers” are people who watch adult programming), but chose to remain anonymous.
Well, first of all, Mr. “Ex-viewer”, you are talking to the wrong guy. I don’t have anything to do with the commercials. Here’s something else: I get it; okay? You don’t like the ads. No one, though, has ever told me what specifically they don’t like about them. Even more amazing is that they continue to refer to the commercials by nearly always singing the jingle. Like it or not, that’s an ad campaign that works!
But surely this can’t be the first ad campaign to annoy viewers. So, in the interest of accuracy, I got on the web and did a search of “annoying TV commercials” and found some of these gems:
“Plop, Plop, Fizz, Fizz. Oh, what a relief it is.”
“Try it – You’ll like it.”
“Mama Mia, That’s a spicy meatball.”
“Mother, please. I’d rather do it myself.”
Boy, remember those old commercials? We hated them and use to make fun of them. They are now considered advertising classics. Why? Because you associate them with a product.
Let’s take a moment and examine these RPM commercials more closely. We have a simple jingle line: “6-9-5 -1-1-8-1. Who are you with? RPM Direct.” Boy, it doesn’t get much simpler than that: instant recall of the company’s name and phone number. That is an ad that works.
Finally, let’s just consider the bottom line. You don’t have to pay a TV tax in this country like viewers in other countries must do because the costs of paid for through advertising. If we start pulling ads off the air, I’m sure you won’t mind replacing that revenue base, right? It’s only fair.
So, here’s my challenge to all you angry TV viewers. If you don’t like the ads, do something about them. Come up with a better ad! Here’s the caveat, though. This ad has to draw the same level of viewer response and the audience must have the same level of product recall. In other words, if you don’t like the ad, come up with something that is less offensive, but just as effective.
I’m looking forward to seeing your ideas. Get started.
By the way, to all you viewers who said you’d be watching another Abilene TV station because we are running the RPM ads… I guess you won’t be watching TV, period. RPM’s now running on that channel, too.
Downing Bolls
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)