Characters; the best trend in advertising.

I recently wrote about strategic focus in advertising, and the very successful Turners' campaign. Paul Feldwick , advertising effectiveness expert and author, sent us his congratulations. He also pointed out how well characters work in advertising (which I hadn't mentioned in my short post), and how they've become unfashionable in ad agencies. My response grew too long for a normal LinkedIn post, so I wrote this article. I strongly agree with Feldwick. He's prompted me to connect my views on focus and commitment, to the use of characters. Hopefully it's helpful, although there won't be much new for Paul. His original comment is at the bottom.

Hi Paul,

I really hope you do get to come back here to New Zealand. In a highly contested category, you'd be my favourite advertising effectiveness expert - largely because you've taken the time to understand the history and breadth of effectiveness thinking, rather than just its latest evolution. (Feldwick's entertaining 'The Anatomy of Humbug’ should be compulsory reading for the industry. His more recent 'Why Does the Pedlar Sing?' is doubly relevant for this topic.)

Being a disciple of yours, I completely agree that having a likeable, entertaining and unforgettably well-branded character is powerful, and undoubtedly the key to Turners' campaign success. A couple of years ago I raved about the power of characters in a COVID-related LinkedIn video called What’s Your Thing?’ I introduced it with the line, 'Here's one that might annoy some advertising creatives'.

I referred then to Stickman, PAK'nSAVE's iconic, long-running, and spectacularly successful supermarket 'spokesperson', as an ideal modern example. It took nearly 12 years for that campaign to be celebrated by the industry, when it won both a creative award and a sustained effectiveness award in the same year. It was very clear at both those events that the industry had grown to love Stickman – and this included the creative community.

To me it was also clear that the industry was waking up to something that Stickman represented.

‘New Zealand’s Favourite Ads’ list, published by TRA (The Research Agency) is a good indication of what our big marketers are doing, and what’s connecting with the New Zealand public. In September, TRA’s Lloyd Thomason (yes, related) wrote ‘Brand Characters have gone from being rather out of fashion to dominating New Zealand's Favourite Ad List’.

In the Sept/Oct issue of New Zealand Marketing Magazine, Lloyd gave 5 reasons why marketers should consider using one. Here’s TRA’s September Favourite Ads list, in which the theme very much continues… https://theresearchagency.com/mainframe/new-zealands-top-10-favourite-ads-september-2022.? Tina from Turners hasn’t yet made it on to the list. C’mon TRA...

So when you note that characters have ‘become desperately unfashionable in ad agencies’, I'm pleased to report that the tide seems to be turning here in New Zealand. I also know that more marketers are asking FCB New Zealand (and I’m sure, other agencies) if they can have their own 'Stickman'. I expect this will to extend to Tina now, although in this case there was no creative agency involved.

I'm increasingly interested in how we can help create more great advertising characters. Perhaps I'm having legacy concerns in my old age.

I agree that the creative community generally doesn't run gleefully towards characters. I think the likelihood of winning a creative award is one reason. However, the NZ creative community does seem to love Tina from Turners, so I’m optimistic about its chances here - if Sean Wiggans at Turners wants to enter it. (I expect the creatives concerned, Kim Thorp and Darryl Parsons , won’t be overly concerned about winning more awards.) The challenge lies with the more highly-prized international awards, where (understandably) experimental, ground-breaking approaches are generally prized over sustained appeal. It's also difficult for international judges to appreciate cultural context from afar. I have no idea what they'd make of this very Kiwi TikTok video... https://youtube.com/shorts/bltdzmf45uI

I think the second barrier is that creatives instinctively want to do something that’s built on a fresh and interesting angle. They've learnt that their campaign is then more likely to be distinctive, famous and effective. So if they’re asked, ‘Please come up with a likeable character representing a brand that wants to sell you a second hand car’ - or whatever the category-generic equivalent is from whatever client they’re working on - we should empathise with their scepticism. That approach, and it does happen, represents a laziness - and not the good sort.

Don't start by asking for a brand character. Start with an interesting angle.

Stickman is based on the idea that ‘Everything we do, we do to save you money’. The character himself exemplifies that very simple, and very focused idea. He’s not just a character that says whatever generic thing a supermarket wants to say. In fact, the loveable character and humour is actually based on what you don’t get at PAK’nSAVE… the sacrifice that enables them to have the lowest prices.

With Turners, everything changed when we agreed to focus entirely on buying the customer’s old car. Firstly, this meant potential customers could get on with buying themselves a new one. Probably from Turners, as it's turned out. But aside from removing that major barrier to purchase, it also enabled a loveable advertising character to be created, and fresh stories to be told. Tina didn't need to be like a salesperson, she could be more like the audience. She could be passionate about cars – about getting a car. She could talk about how much easier it is to bring a car to Turners rather than sell it yourself. That’s all fresh territory for the category.

The third reason I think there aren’t more characters in advertising, is that they go hand-in-hand with longevity. This is an industry that celebrates, rewards and enjoys ‘new’. If you have a lasting character, then you don’t get to create a completely new campaign every year or two. (I was once told by a senior marketing client that they didn’t want to consider introducing a character because it would take the fun out of their job. Aside from that probably not being true, I would have hoped that sustained effectiveness for the business owners would be a bigger criteria.) There’s also the problem of dramatically reduced tenure, on both the marketing and ad agency side. New person, new campaign. I suspect that’s the number one reason there aren’t more sustained campaigns in a world where they actually make more sense than ever. Tina from Turners is happening, for years not months, because the business case is recognised at a board level.

Fortunately today, most of my clients believe in the power of characters - when you can make them work, which is usually a matter of budget and scale. In fact I think New Zealand might be entering a major advertising trend - one I can already see culminating with, ‘Do we need to have a character? That’s what everyone does.’

David (DT) Thomason

Paul Feldwick's original comment on my Tina from Turners post:

Congratulations! as a sometime judge of the NZ Effies (2014 - they haven't asked me back yet) I don't doubt it worked. But at the risk of stating the obvious I'd also like to point out what's in front of us here.

A character - who talks to us - with a lot of charm - with an alliterative name that obviously chimes with a famous rock star - which includes the brand name - which works as a slogan - which uses humour - and (via dancing) has lots of potential to link into the world of entertainment and popular culture through all sorts of media.

All these things work, though they've all become desperately unfashionable in ad agencies. I'll be (pleasantly) surprised if this even gets considered for any creative awards. But it's exactly what we need to see more of. Bravo.