I knew long ago that this week’s blog post was going to be about Super Bowl ads. It’s unfortunate that most of the commercials were unexciting… The consumer generated contents continue to create some of the most interesting commercials, in my opinion. Which begs the question of why are marketers paying so much money to ad agencies when crowdsourcing has proven time and again to be a great alternative? In fact, there were some downright awful ads!

Awesome + Awesome = Awesomer does not work! That kind of silly execution may be aligned with Emerald Nuts’ brand equity, but it does nothing for Pop Secret. Though, being the bad ad does generate some publicity (hence people like me talking about it). Also, it is “ground breaking” in the fact that it tries to communicate way more than what a commercial is supposed to do (i.e. to promote two brands). But, in the end, in my opinion, it doesn’t work.

So, I ask again, why are ad agencies still in business? Because ad agencies have really good salespeople, who know how to make us corporate folks feel good about how we’re spending our money.

If I was to be the judge and the jury, the consumer generated CareerBuilder ad titled “Worst Seat” would win best ad this year.

Too often, people remember funny commercial, but forget the brand. I believe this ad successfully achieved both.

Consider the audience of the game, this kind of fart joke humor appeals to the demographics. Yet, everyone could easily identify with this commercial. It may not be farting, but we all know how it feels to sit between two idiots.

However, the humor did not distract from the main message that it’s time to move on. Find a new job, and Careerbuilder can help.

This ad is the summation of a larger campaign where consumers generated the content, and voted on the content. It is this kind of comprehensive campaigns that makes a $3 million ad spot worthwhile. Considering the economy and the job market right now, it’s surprising that Careerbuilder’s main competitors have not been more aggressive with ad spend during this game.

Google’s “Parisian Love” did win hearts everywhere, while showing off everything Google. So maybe there is some value in having good ad agencies still.

Related articles online

• This year’s Super Bowl ads go goofy and frugal (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

I hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving break. For me, it was over all too fast.

While I was home, I had an interesting conversation with my mother. It was a very enlightening conversation – about marketing clutter, confusing marketing messages, etc.

Verizon launched an aggressive campaign against AT&T over 3G coverage. This solicited an equally aggressive response from AT&T. In fact, AT&T has been fighting it in the courtroom. It has been fighting it on the air. And it all just became clutter for the average consumer, like my mother.

The head-to-head comparisons were confusing. My mother actually said that she no longer know who to believe. Verizon says it’s the best. AT&T says it’s the best. So, which is the best?

We both paid better attention to the commercials the next time they aired. We realized that the comparisons were not exactly the same. That’s where the problem is with checklist comparisons.

Product A can pick attribute 1, 2, and 3. Then, they would say they’re the best, at least in these three attributes.

Product B would then pick attribute 4, 5, and 6. They would say they’re the best, according to these three different attributes.

Which is really the best? Who knows? Surely, the consumers wouldn’t.

A couple without cellphones is more connected than a couple *with* cellphones, originally uploaded by Ed Yourdon.