I was troubled when I heard two leaps, each made by a scientist, on NPR over the weekend. 

One scientist cited a 2008 pre-election study in which American voters unconsciously rated Tony Blair as  "more American" than Barack Obama. (How they revealed the alleged unconscious choice wasn't clear from the interview.) The researcher blamed race. Maybe, but there are other possibilities. Here's one: Tony Blair was George Bush's ally; perhaps the results merely revealed loyalty to Bush. The other scientist cited a study in which diners tipped more generously when servers repeated orders back to them verbatim. He concluded that mimicking was causal. Maybe, but again, there are other possibilities. Here's one: perhaps repeating the order increases diners' confidence that the server won't screw up the order, and that leads them to tip better. 

Responsible scientists acknowledge their own fallibility and guard against leaping to conclusions. That's why double and triple blind tests, replication, peer review, and tests that eliminate other possibilities are hallmarks of the scientific process.

Marketers who discipline themselves in the same way are more likely to learn what works. But even marketers with the best intentions are subject to the guile of self-serving conclusions. When sales go up during an ad campaign, the account manager, media planner, creative director, writer and art director will be prone to give the credit to, respectively, strategy, targeting, concept, copy and design. Who knows. Maybe an interior designer will say that the wallpaper he or she picked out for the conference room provided the inspiration for the winning campaign.

So here's an exercise for you. Gas mask sales rose in the months following September, 2001. Outside of strategy, targeting, concept, copy, design and wallpaper ... can you think of any other possible causes?

—Steve Cuno

Add Comment
 
 
I write a column for Swift, the newsletter of the James Randi Educational Foundation. Not a few of those readers recoil at the very mention of the word marketer. 

I have to admit, there are times I don't blame them. Every day, I see marketing practices that make me wince.

Not all. Marketing, like any discipline, can be used for good or bad, and for purposes landing in-between. Clearly at the end labeled "good" are campaigns urging people not to smoke. I'd also say that keeping the economy going—within reason—is a good thing. Honestly promoting product benefits so that consumers make informed choices is a good thing, too. Plus, evidence shows that international trade, which marketing fuels, is the best war-prevention program humanity has ever devised. 

We might argue over where on the continuum to place marketing that urges people to buy what they don't need, to choose the more costly brand, or to replace a car, cell phone or wardrobe when the old one still serves.

But some marketing activities land clearly at the polarity marked BAD. Shall I list a few? 

• Health products, claims and treatments that don't work. They hurt people by inflicting direct harm, or by lulling them from seeking real treatment for a serious condition. These include homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, wrist magnets, most so-called "alternative" medical preparations (you know, the ones that "Big Pharma" and "Big Medicine" supposedly "don't want you to know about"), faith healing, misinformation spread by the likes of Kevin Trudeau, Suzanne Sommers and Jenny McCarthy.

• Products that don't work and can hurt people financially. Examples include: nonsense from the likes of (once again) Kevin Trudeau (he gets around), stock market prediction books and software, carefully worded (so as to be legal, yet still deceptive) investment schemes, most multi-level marketing schemes.

• Products that are pure flimflam, like psychic hotlines and religious scams.

• Carefully worded claims defended by bogus studies. As I've written elsewhere, I can cook up a study showing that hiring the RESPONSE Agency lowers your risk of cancer.

• Clintonian lies, defined as "technically accurate but designed to mislead." Examples: A recent promotion for new cars for just $88 down and $88 per month. Yeah, right, as long as you don't read the small type. After three months, the payments rocket up to cover what you didn't pay during that time, and to cost you a good deal more than market rates. Or weight loss products which, in the small type, tell you that their claims are "not typical" and that they only work when you diet and exercise (which means the product is moot). Or, until recently, credit card issuers that took you unawares with default rates and other abuses. Or, so-called free samples given only after you surrender a credit card number, later to find you're getting and being billed for shipments after the free one.

• Out-and-out lying. Going out of business! The world's best! Never undersold! 

• Making things look better than they really are. Gray area here, I admit. But we all know what it’s like to make a purchase only to find that the product isn’t what was conveyed. Marketers who do that don’t do it by accident.

What have I left out? Readers, please click COMMENTS (above) and add your own. And, please reward honest marketers with your business, and withhold it from those who abuse your trust.
 
Marketers, there are plenty of worthy products and causes out there to focus our talents on. Let's not stoop. 

—Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
Target Marketing publisher Ethan Bolt quotes Steve Cuno in his new article "7 Tips Copywriting Tips That Should Be Put to the Test.” This is the third time Cuno has been quoted in the magazine.
Add Comment
 
 
Steve Cuno's latest Deliver article

I cringed when I read an article on how to launch a successful business. The author claimed that after deciding upon a product or service, the next most important step was to come up with a “catchy slogan.” The article appeared in a national magazine. Heaven only knows how many more lame slogans you and I will have to endure as a result.

To be fair, there are good slogans. It’s hard to argue with… (click here to read the rest)
Add Comment
 
 
If you’re an advertiser, TiVo can bring both bad and good news. On the bad side, it lets people zip past your ads. On the good side, it tells you which ads are skipped and which aren’t, so you can learn something about appealing to viewers.

TiVo just announced the least-zapped televised movie promos for yesterday’s Oscar contenders. During the past six months, “Up in the Air” with George Clooney was zapped the least. Similarly titled animated feature “Up” was a close second. “Avatar” came in third.

I might add that TiVo finds that the most-watched categories of TV commercials in general are, first, movie promos and, second, direct response spots. Think about that next time you’re about to sink your budget into a self-indulgenty entertaining spot just because your ad agency assures you it will win a Clio.

—Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
Kudos to the billboard company that made—and fixed—a mistake on one of our campaigns.

Yesterday we hopped in the car for a look at the newly posted billboards we designed for our client. The first board we checked looked fine, except for one small detail. The billboard company had posted the top half of our design at the bottom and the bottom half at the top. Which meant, to anyone driving by, the board wouldn't make much sense.

We called our billboard rep. His response? Chagrin, an apology, and "I'll take care of it." No excuses. No "you gotta unnerstan my position.” 
 
Anyone can goof. It takes a professional to own and fix it. By admitting and taking care of the mistake, our rep earned our trust. We won't hesitate to work with him again.

How refreshing.

—Steve Cuno.
1 Comment
 
 
An honest apology is a wonderful thing. It is also rare. Whether the fesser-upper is a private citizen, public figure or corporate entity, you almost never hear "I blew it, I'm sorry, and here's what I'm doing to make amends." More often you hear something passively self-excusing, like, "…if mistakes were made, we are truly sorry," or something that, in the guise of an apology, attempts to shift blame, like, "We're sorry people reacted in that way."

So I prepared to cheer when a new Toyota TV spot opened with a statement about their having learned a valuable lesson. But the cheer died on my lips when, instead of admitting faults and enumerating how Toyota would set things right, the spot told viewers to visit their local dealer to learn more. 

Visit a dealer to see how sorry they are? Come on. When I make a mistake—an activity with which I am not unacquainted—I don't send a message saying, "To see how I've changed, come see me." I show up, in person, on bended knee, and disclose.
 
For Toyota to ask the market to make a trip to their turf and offer to listen while they plead their case is a foolish display of unconscionable arrogance. 

—Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
It's time for Mr. Joe Szymanski, fellow principal here at the RESPONSE Agency, to visit the dentist for a semi-annual checkup. When he called just now, however, the receptionist didn't give him an appointment. She gave him a reservation. 

I like that word choice. Only testing will reveal if reservations with a dentist sell better than appointments. But I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
On Sunday, gun rights activists marched into a Virginia Starbucks wearing plainly visible guns. They hoped to provoke Starbucks into tossing them out so that they could raise a First Amendment fuss.

Starbucks ignored them.

That was smart PR by Starbucks. Staying out of a fray takes vision, smarts and guts. And, that was bad PR by gun rights activists. The public is less likely to agree you're being picked on when you go around provoking confrontations.

(Click here to read the NPR story.)

Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
An angry client hauled me into his office, slammed our latest ad down on his desk, and told me to pull it. Why? It was (and I had to concede this) ugly. Why his underling approved it was beyond him.

I happened to have brought along a spreadsheet showing the results. The ad was outselling its more pleasingly-designed predecessor seven-to-one. "Keep running it," growled the client. 

Don't get me wrong. I understand the importance of design. I understand that the look of your advertising reflects upon your brand. And bad design is certainly never an objective.

But sometimes bad design is a valuable tool. In fact, sometimes bad design outsells good. 

Consider all those ugly ads in in-flight magazines. You know, the full-page ads crammed with three columns of 8-point type without the slightest regard for design. Know why they never go away? Because they sell oodles of products. 

Sometimes successful direct marketers run ugly ads because, starting out, they don't know better and/or can't afford a designer. When profits roll in and they spruce up the ads, they often find the improved look makes no difference in sales. Sometimes the makeover even drives sales down.

Steve Cuno
Add Comment