Doing what’s right vs doing what everyone else is doing.

Catching up with a good and very respected Hong Kong industry friend recently, he lamented how it seems these days that marketing clients in Hong Kong consider traditional media outdated and won’t entertain any ideas unless they are more contemporary or ‘trendy’, as in content-driven digital work or KOL focused.

 What?

 This, coupled with the predisposition towards celebrity-driven campaigns seems to point to a worrying misunderstanding of how advertising, online or off, can achieve cut-through and ROI.

 It also might explain why Hong Kong creativity seems to be in a me-too rut these days. A pot-pourri of celebrity endorsement and happy faced wallpaper, none of which differentiates or begs to stand out from the usual blandvertising.

 Let me just get back to the basics for an unfashionable moment.

 I grew up in a world where at the core of any campaign, there should be an idea that will drive that campaign, regardless of whichever media it gets rolled out through.

 Simplicity, and originality rules.

 This has nothing to do with which channels are ‘trendy’ and happening, but everything to do with delivering the brand message in new and surprising ways.

 The problem here is the me-too mentality which seems to be a driving factor in today’s campaign decision making.

 When somebody comes up with a new and creative use of a particular media, that hasn’t been done before, it can be viewed as fresh and different, and will likely draw attention.

 But as soon as everyone jumps on that particular bandwagon and is follows suit (seeing that it worked, so ‘safe’), it simply becomes me-too. And as the public becomes accustomed to seeing it, less effective.

 The problem also points to how people interpret, or rather misinterpret, what is creative.

 Being creative does not mean doing what everyone else is doing just because it’s considered young and contemporary.

 Whether that’s an online film, a social media campaign, or the use of a KOL. It can only be considered creative if there is a creative idea behind it.

 Look at online films for example. To me they’re just TV commercials without the time limit. Just because you shoot one, with a celebrity and a good director, doesn’t make it good.

 Does not mean that thousands are going to watch and respond to it. The films that get shared and talked about are those that are special. That are good. Fresh and original. Rewatchable.

 So what if you get as many people in your company and their friends and family as you can to all view and click ‘Like’. You’re only kidding yourself.

 That’s the power of non-paid media, the consumer is in control. If they don’t find it particularly interesting, just because you and your management are all proud and pleased with it means zilch.

 The same goes with the over-reliance on celebrities in Hong Kong. Putting all of your spend into going with a particular star just because everyone else does it does not guarantee cut-through or recall. Especially when you are paying to employ a famous face which that’s been seen in more ads than the McDonalds logo.

 However, using a celebrity because of an idea which makes them relevant to your brand makes more sense.

 A good example of this would be the campaign for the health brand Dr Reborn, which features one half of the pop duo Twins, Gillian Chung. The theme of being ‘reborn’ could be seen to relate also to her own career (at least that's how I interpreted it).

 Or, again in Hong Kong, a campaign for healthcare diabetes milk drink product Glucema featuring the actress Kandy Wong Shan Yee (糖妹), which at least carries a connotation to her Chinese name and alludes to her somewhat lively character (although the commercial itself is somewhat tacky and annoying).

Okay, I can buy that. Someone thought about it.

If you want to know how to do a celebrity-driven campaign that embraces both new and traditional channels working together in seamless harmony, look no further than the Nike work featuring American footballer Colin Kaepernick.

 Think about it. It started life as a classic, simple poster. Very old school.

 It was designed primarily (given the main audience for American Football) for the US market.

 Yet it became talked about all over the world and expanded into a global social media campaign with an amplification effect due to its somewhat controversial nature that took it into the news mainstream with an equally powerful online film to reiterate its message.

 In terms of ROI, could it get any better than that?

 This did not happen just because it featured a celebrity, but why it featured that particular celebrity, which in itself, was a brave and potentially risky move.

 Because it had an idea at its core. Because it was controversial, for a good reason.

 More than that, it was 100% pure Nike, epitomising the brand DNA of ‘Just do it’ in every way. From what Colin Kaepernick did (taking a stand, or rather knee, against racism), to what Nike did by making a statement of it.

As a budding copywriter back in the day, I remember seeing the whole real body of a car stuck to a 48-sheet poster site, to advertise Araldite, a glue. .

It was mindblowing. The audacity. It became the talk of the town, and not just in ad circles. If social media has existed, it would gone through the roof. It didn't need to have a famous Formula 1 racing car driver sitting in the seat just to guarantee attention.

It also had a beautifully understated and brilliant headline accompanying it. "Also sticks handles to teapots".

 When you have a strong creative idea behind your campaign, it can stand out and be effective regardless of whether it features a famous star. Be it online or offline or anywhere else the line might go next in the ever evolving media world.

 It’s about doing the right thing, not doing what everyone else seems to be doing so you can be seen as contemporary.