Yard Games Blog

I teach radio commercial writing, how to sell radio advertising, and how to create effective radio advertising.

 

Recently I critiqued two radio commercials for a client.

 

I was typically meticulous in my critique.

 

I’ve never told anyone this, but as soon as I’ve e-mailed an advertising critique to a client, I become a little nervous.

 

What if they’re offended? I do not want to offend someone. Especially people who…well, who pay me.

 

So when my e-mail inbox included two messages from him this morning, I took a deep breath before opening them.

 

The first was in response to my first critique:

 

“Awesome! Thanks for the fantastic job … This is REALLY helpful. I’ll be sending you some new commercials soon for your critique.”

 

The second message, responding to the second critique, said:

 

“Thanks again … great suggestions and points.”

 

It was a nice way to start the morning.

 

Usually I critique commercial copy before it’s produced. That makes sense to me, because that way the client has time to change the copy before going into production. But this time I had critiqued commercial copy that already had been recorded.

 

One hour and 16 minutes after I received the client’s second “wow, thanks!” response, I received a very long e-mail from someone I don’t know.

 

That someone appears to be the guy who wrote and produced the commercials I had critiqued. It was a copy of a message he’d sent the client.

 

It was not what one would call a rave review of my critiques.

 

Two elements of his rant leapt out at me:

 

1. He defended the use of the lame voice talent (whom I had pointed out sounded like a schlocky announcer who clearly was simply reading the copy he was being paid to read) by saying, “With our budget, that’s all we can afford.”

 

Ridiculous.

 

Those particular spots didn’t require a voiceover superstar. It would have cost only $250 - $300 to get a much better voiceover performance.

 

I don’t know what they paid their voice over guy, but if they’re not willing to shell out $250 – $300 for a decent announcer read, they need to adjust their priorities.

 

2.It was a very long e-mail. I mean, this guy was upset.

 

AND THEN I DID SOMETHING VERY, VERY SMART.

 

I closed the e-mail without reading it.

 

I got the gist of it: “You don’t know what the heck you’re talking about.”

 

Why read further?

 

So I could become offended?

 

So I could catalog and rebut his evidence of my alleged incompetence?

 

Do you know what would have happened if I had taken two minutes to read his entire attack (or, from his perspective, his defense of his work)?

 

I would have spent hours mentally refuting his every point.

 

That’s how my brain works. If I think I’ve been unfairly attacked, my instinct is to defend myself — even if only within the privacy of my own mind.

 

But I had other stuff to do today. Why waste any of my sorely limited time (and even more severely limited brain power) marshalling an argument I never would deliver?

 

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH YOU?

 

Maybe nothing.

 

Or maybe you’re a radio station producer and a thoughtless salesperson mentioned, while passing you in the hallway, “The client hates that spot you did for him.”

 

Oh? You mean that spot that was approved every step of the way and now is on the air?

 

Let it go. Getting all upset won’t help you at all.

 

Or you’re an account exec and the Traffic Director screams at you because you didn’t remind her that she had promised to change your client’s rotation, so she forgot to do it and it’s all your fault.

 

Let it go. Let her words float past you like a summer breeze. (You don’t bother to argue with the wind, do you?)

 

Or you’re a jock, and the station engineer(!) pointedly tells you the comedy bit you did on yesterday’s show “really wasn’t very funny.”

 

Should the radio station engineer be critiquing the radio air talent? No.

 

Should you care anything at all about whether the station engineer thinks you’re funny or your show is good? C’mon.

 

Let it go.

 

Use that time and energy for something constructive.

 

Why, look at me. The time I saved by not reading and then mentally constructing a devastating response to that e-mail?

 

I used it to write this article.

As someone who is supposed to be a radio advertising expert and who teaches how to write radio commercials in radio commercial writing seminars around the world, here is the sermon I find myself preaching to radio professionals.

 

WE DO NOT SELL ALUMINUM SIDING!

 

If I were to describe an industry that focu sed all of its energy on making s ales — i.e., by sparing no expense in educating its salespeople in all the latest techniques of getting in the door, asking for the order, overcoming objections and closing the sale — but which virtually ignored the quality of the product being sold and which made no real effort to insure that the product actually does what it’s supposed to for the customer…you’d probably think of a pretty shady business. Like the cliched picture of an aluminum siding salesman.

 

That aluminum siding salesperson doesn’t care about the quality of his product because he doesn’t care about the customer and because he’s not coming back for a repeat sale.

 

Radio time salespeople don’t sell “time;” they sell commercials.

 

The commercials are marketed as selling tools for the advertiser. If the commercials don’t sell for the client, the client is not getting his money’s worth and is less likely to reorder.

 

RADIO NEEDS REPEAT BUSINESS: Radio spot sales is one of the few businesses that depend upon repeat sales but whose practitioners typically believe their job is done when the sale is closed.

 

In most other industries, the salesperson’s job isn’t completed until the product is successfully delivered. If your radio station’s commercial copy is written by an overworked salesperson who has no training in copywriting –  or a similarly undertrained Copywriter or Continuity Director — how good can you expect your copy (i.e., your product) to be?

 

Writing radio commercials is neither a science nor an art. Writing effecting radio commercials is a craft. If you want to become proficient at it, you need to learn how to do it and then to practice it.

 

What is a good commercial?

 

It’s not one that entertains.

 

It’s not one that’s “well-produced.”

 

It’s not one that wins awards.

 

A good commercial is one that SELLS.

 

What is a commercial that sells?

 

Is it one that mentions the sponsor’s name a certain number of times? That names a price? That lists the benefits of the product or service? That mentions the client’ phone number?

 

No. A commercial that sells is a commercial that motivates the listener to act.

DOMINO’S PAPA JOHNS COMMERCIAL CRITIQUE IS IT SMART TO ATTACK COMPETITORS IN COMMERCIALS?

Sometimes attacking the competition in your television advertising or radio commercials is smart.

Sometimes it’s what we in the advertising business call “not smart”.

A little background regarding this commercial.

Years ago Pizza Hut filed suit, claiming that Papa John’s Pizza’s slogan, “Better Ingredients. Better pizza,” is “false advertising.” That is the court case to which this TV commercial for Domino’s Pizza refers.

Remember, this advertisement was paid for by Domino’s Pizza…which had no involvement with that court ruling.

The court ruling was on a claim involving Pizza Hut and Papa John’s…but not Domino’s…which coughed up a lot of money for this commercial….

——-

BRANDON SOLANO - DOMINO’S HEAD CHEF: For years, Papa John’s has been telling us they have better ingredients, better pizza. But when challenged in this court, they stated their slogan is “puffery.” What’s puffery? Scott, you’re a lawyer…

SCOTT: Puffery: an exaggerated statement based on opinion, not fact.

BRANDON SOLANO: Here’s what’s not puffery. Our new hand-tossed extra cheese and pepperoni pizzas just beat Papa John’s in a national taste test. And to celebrate, we’re offering two medium, two topping pizzas for just $5.99 each. Our pizzas taste better, and that’s not puffery. That’s proven.

——-

This is what we in the advertising business call “Really Dumb.” It violates one of the most basic tenets of positioning: Bigger brands should not promote their smaller competitors.

Domino’s has a much larger piece of the market pie (sorry about that one), but bizarrely it chooses to bring a smaller competitor to the attention of many consumers who previously had been unfamiliar with the other brand.

Dominos also maintains a much larger “consumer mind share”: When you ask, “When I say ‘pizza delivery service, what names come to mind?” far more people will say “Dominos” than ” Papa John’s.”

But THIS commercial helps link the larger brand (Dominos) to the smaller, less known brand (Papa John’s).

While no doubt Dominos thinks the spot puts Papa John’s in its place, many consumers will be left with the name “Papa John’s pizza” without recalling the allegations against it.

Having a lawyer stand in front of a courthouse and talk about puffery does not further Domino’s current “Better Ingredients. Better Pizza” advertising campaign..

This commercial exemplifies an ad campaign whose creators have no understanding of what is known as positioning. They are trying to tell consumers that “Domino’s pizza tastes better.” But the first 17 of the 30 seconds were spent talking about a competitor.

That’s a foolish approach to advertising.