Why mobile is the future of advertising

In this AdAge interview, Google Mobile Product Manager Summit Agarwal sums up why the mobile web is absolutely changing everything for marketers:

The phone is the ultimate ad vehicle. It's the first one ever in the history of the planet that people go to bed with. It's ubiquitous across the world, across demographics, across age groups.

Your mobile audience: what's in it for them?

One of the biggest opportunities for today's marketers is the mobile web. The cell phone is the device with the most potential to encourage immediate action, since most users carrying it with them all the time and since it almost always commands the user's immediate attention. The problem, however, is that most people don't want ads on their phones. In fact, they're only going to get more adamant about not wanting ads after marketers start making the mistake of assuming they do.

So how can marketers communicate with customers in a way that is constructive and welcome? The key is providing information that is useful to the consumer--on their terms, not yours. In a sense, it's like any other medium: by understanding what's in it for them, you'll do a much better job of being heard and engaging your audience.

What specific kinds of information can effectively be communicated via mobile? There are some great examples in this AdAge column, but here are a few others that immediately come to mind:

• Restaurant reservation confirmations, other service provider (doctors, dentists, stylyst) reminder. And giving customers the ability to make reservations/appointments via mobile web is a no brainer.
  
• Weight loss encouragement and nutrition reminders sent right before breakfast, lunch, and dinner by weight management and fitness centers
• Reminders about financial aid, registration, and other deadline from colleges and universities

The idea is to anticipate needs users will have while on the go. And as web users of all kinds become more task-oriented, more mobile will increasingly displace desktop computer use. That's great news if you have valuable information to share. If you don't, then it's time to start thinking about what you can do to change that. The best place to start? Ask your customers what kind of information--if any--they'd like to receive on the cell phone. If you've worked hard to earn their trust, they'll tell you. If you haven't, you need to work on that before expecting they'll give you permission to communicate with them via the mobile web.

Photo: sofa on stock.xchng

Is online TV for real? You betcha.

Hard upon the heels of her Joe-the-Plumber -clogged visit to Memorial Coliseum, Sarah Palin is attracting even more attention elsewhere--online, on Hulu.com, for example. AdAge.com reports that while the live TV-viewing audience was SNL's largest in 14 years, it will soon be surpassed by the online viewing audience:

Two clips of the Alaska governor on "SNL," her fake press conference and appearance on "Weekend Update," have racked up 6.1 million views on NBC.com. Derivative versions such as those used in news coverage, as well as pirated versions of the clips, have been viewed another 2.85 million times on sites like YouTube, MySpace and Yahoo, according to web video measurement firm Visible Measures.

Combined, the videos have been viewed 8.85 million times since Sunday, an impressive number in four days. But that doesn't include what may be the biggest source of online viewing: NBCU and News Corp.'s joint venture Hulu.com.

Neither Hulu nor NBC will provide Hulu's streaming numbers, but they're likely to be high. Hulu streamed four times as many videos (142 million) as NBC.com (36 million) during September, according to Nielsen's Video Census. While it's possible a high percentage of viewers looking for "SNL" clips would go first to NBC.com, it's also likely that Hulu counts for as many, if not more, views as NBC. The opening skit with Tina Fey holding a press conference as Sarah Palin, while the real VP nominee looked on, was the No. 3 most watched Hulu clip this week, while the clip of Amy Poehler's Palin rap sat at No. 2.

The success of Hulu.com points to three important trends for marketers and other communication-watchers:

• Audiences are learning that there's no sense in investing 30 minutes in a show when you can watch the best bits in a fraction of the time. Shorter is better.
  
• The size of the audience gravitating to online viewing is only going to increase, so keep an eye on what you're being asked to pay for broadcast and cable air time.
• Also pay close attention to content that's timely, and line up your advertising accordingly. Palin is a phenomenon, but a week from Wednesday she may start to be forgotten altogether. Get on the bandwagon as soon as you can, but bail out before the wheels start to fall off.
  

Cutting Through the Clutter

In today's communication environment, one of the biggest challenges is getting your message to stand out. To cut through the clutter, you can't just raise the volume: you need to target your audience very precisely and create a message that immediately catches their attention without resorting to gimmicks or shock value.

As consumers have more and more options for tuning out advertising, communicating a marketing message becomes even more of a challenge. But it's not impossible, as this article in Monday's Wall Street Journal demonstrates. A sample:

Can the marketing stimulus be delivered at a time when the customer has few other distractions?

Marketing messages should target customers at times when they are unoccupied, perhaps even actively seeking some sort of information to process. Consider, for example, an airplane on the landing path into an airport. Sitting upright, with in-flight entertainment and electronic devices switched off, passengers have little to do but to look out of the window and wait for the aircraft to land.

Seeking to capitalize on this opportunity, London-based Ad-Air Group PLC places advertisements flat on the ground over an area as large as five acres alongside flight paths in and out of the world's busiest airports. Depending on their landing approach, passengers are provided with an unrestricted view of an ad for more than 10 seconds.

Read the other four questions and consider how your organization can cut through the clutter instead of just adding more noise.

Brands that thrive in a down economy

What brands do well when the economy takes a downturn? According to this Brandweek article, a few obvious ones like discount retailers and repair services. But there are also some surprises:

[C]onsumers are willing to spend on some forms of escapism. Entertainment can expect to fare well during a downturn, experts say. The weekend after a $700 billion bailout was passed by Congress, theatergoers flocked to the malls, sending the weekend gross for the top dozen flicks to $95.4 million, up 41.5% from the same period a year ago, per Media by Numbers, Encino, Calif.

"The conventional wisdom is that an economic downturn helps the movie business," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of Media By Numbers, Los Angeles. "They find escapism for a relatively small amount of money."

Then there's beer. It seems only logical that watching the Dow plummet into the abyss would drive some to drink. The U.S. beer industry is expected to post its second consecutive year of case sales gains, per the Beverage Information Group's 2008 Beer Handbook.

Another interesting side effect of a down economy is an increase in enrollment at two-year and vocational colleges. This only seems logical, however, if the school is know for affordability and outcomes, since potential enrollees will be especially focused on getting a return on their investment.

Brands that benefit from hard times, however, shouldn't celebrate too hard: after all, what goes up must come down:

Wal-Mart, which seemed to be losing brand power only a year ago, today is poised to reap the rewards of consumers who are looking to save some cash. In September, as same-store sales for Kohl's and Nordstrom fell 5.5% and 9.6%, respectively, Wal-Mart's rose 2.4%. Author and branding expert Rob Frankel thinks the retailer's gains will closely mirror the economy: "Wal-Mart is the brand that reminds people they are poor. Nobody shops at Wal-Mart because they want to; they shop there because they have to. The minute the economy recovers, Wal-Mart's sales will drop like a brick."

What's the lesson in all this? Be true to your brand promise, regardless of short-term changes in market conditions or trends. Because if you change your identity too often, you'll end up with no identity whatsoever--and that's a formula for failure in even the best economy.

Illustration: svilen001 on stock.xchng

10-14 year olds prefer web to TV

A study cited in yesterday's New York Times indicates that for younger audiences, the web is taking "first-screen" status away from TV:

For children ages 10 to 14 who use the Internet, the computer is a bigger draw than the TV set, according to a study recently released by DoubleClick Performics, a search marketing company. The study found that 83 percent of Internet users in that age bracket spent an hour or more online a day, but only 68 percent devoted that much time to television.

If you're marketing to these audiences, there's another important factor to consider: the mobile web. With cell phones becoming an ever more ubiquitous part of the middle schooler's life, the best place to reach them is on the device that's with them 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. However, as the web and the phone become one in the same, the ethics of marketing to teens will get even more complex.

When the everyday becomes a luxury, differentiation becomes even more important

Remember the menu question? Well, it wasn't about food, but a recent Time article shows why restaurants are such a great metaphor for marketing your organization to the 21st century consumer:

The U.S. economic downturn has claimed another victim: Bennigan's Grill & Tavern, the 32-year-old chain of casual-dining fern bars. Amid sky-high gas and food prices and tightening consumer spending, the chain's Texas-based parent company declared bankruptcy July 29, saying it would shutter 150 eateries. While the franchise outlets remain open for now, Americans who want to peruse oversize menus for oversize portions of unremarkable food in unremarkable settings may soon have to check out Applebee's or Chili's. Or Ruby Tuesday or T.G.I. Friday's. Or the scores of other family-style restaurants serving deep-fried mozzarella sticks beneath hypnotically rotating ceiling fans.

They're a lot harder to distinguish than they are to find. Bennigan's had an Irish theme, with burgers slathered in Guinness and a drink called the Blarney Blast, but it was about as Gaelic as Barack O'Bama...

Bennigan's failed a few days after the state of California banned trans fats, so it's tempting to blame its demise on an antiobesity backlash. But fast-food joints are doing fine. The real problem is that middle-class families are struggling, and food prices are soaring. In good times, a trip to the local Outback or Olive Garden could be part of the family routine; with gas prices near $4 a gallon, it's become a special occasion.

And Bennigan's--an Old Navy of cuisine, a Levittown of the dining experience--just wasn't all that special. If Americans still want chicken wings and chocolate desserts served with an Irish surname, they can always go to Houlihan's.

In a challenging economy, it's more important than ever to stand out so that you're the only option for your customers and to ensure that you get as much wallet share as you can. Trying to be all things to people is the quickest way to become an object lesson in the paradox of choice.

Photo: Ashley on Picasa
Hat tip: Matt G.

Viral: be a host, not a parasite

Good story in this morning's JG about viral...a snippet:

[V]iral ads...have been around for years and routinely appear on YouTube and social-networking sites. Forrester Research estimates interactive advertising, which includes viral ads, was worth $20 billion in the U.S. this year – an amount expected to triple by 2012.

But the strategy could backfire, according to Allen Adamson, author of the recently published book “Brand Digital: Simple Ways Top Brands Succeed in the Digital World.”

“It could get people talking, but you also have to be careful – people may be too busy or don’t want to work that hard to figure out what the heck it’s about,” said Adamson, who is managing director at brand consulting firm Landor Associates. “With this, people may not connect the ad to the brand at all, and you may end up shooting yourself in the foot.”

Another problem with viral that the AP story above doesn't cover: you can't start your own virus--that's up to your audience. You can put something out there and promote it, but it only becomes truly "viral" at the whim of the audience. B.L. Ochman summed this up very nicely in a post last week:

You can't dictate what people will find funny by labeling it "hilarious". People have brains and are smart enough to figure out what they like without being hit over the head. Labels like "hilarious video" or "viral video" that are not created by viewers are bogus.

You don't tell us what's hilarious or viral. We tell you.

Today more than ever, you can't fake authenticity. You can't plan spontaneity. And you can't dictate the terms of the conversation. What can you do, then? Create things that are worth talking about. Easier said than done, but it's definitely worth the extra effort and expense.

Maybe the best way to think about viral, then, is to consider yourself the "host": you provide the environment for the virus to thrive, but it's up to others to spread it. By trying to force the conversation, conversely, you become a parasite, latching yourself onto your audience in hopes that you'll infect them. And we all know how well people respond to parasites.

Not the prettiest metaphor ever, but it seems to fit.

Your audience's favorite subject IS your audience

I read about a study last week that found teens are only "sorta" interested in the Olympics. The problem isn't that the Games are boring, but they're suffering from the same challenge nearly every medium and message faces today: they have to compete against text messages, blogs, cell phone conversations, and other content all focused on teens' favorite topic: themselves.

Now teens aren't alone in this: we all like content that's all about us. There are a couple of differences between millennials and the rest of us, however:

1. They're the first generation to have easy access to tools that allow them to create their own content, which means that content about themselves is always accesible, and

2. They're not predisposed to choose old media over other options.

In other words, we Gen Xers and Baby Boomers aren't less self-centered; we're just more conditioned to turn on the TV and less conditioned to create content.

This is a crucial point to remember when crafting your message, whether or not you have a Olympic-sized budget or idea. If your message isn't about your audience, it's not going to have much of a chance of cutting through. You can't just talk about yourself. Today's gold medal communicators start by figuring out how their message is relevant to their audience, and they focus on that. Do anything else, and you'll be lucky to make them even "sorta" interested.

Made to Stick sticks it to the GM ad

I'm not the only one who sees some contradictions in GM's heavy rotation Olympic ad. Here's what they're saying on the Made to Stick blog:

[I]t seems to be a rare specimen: the self-refuting argument. First, there’s the primary argument, made via the titles: “…goes for miles and miles on every gallon,” “hybrid,” “biofuel,” “clean diesel,” “fuel cell.” I.e., GM is Rainforest Pure. GM = Green Motors.

Then, at the end of the ad, as the song comes to an emotional close, comes the rejoinder: the HUMMER logo. Brilliant! Objection sustained.

The GM spot has made me dream of launching my own ad, with a (tough but inspiring) Lucinda Williams song playing over a montage of great moments in feminist history — from Seneca Falls to Rosie the Riveter, from Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Betty Friedan to Carly and Hillary. And then, with a dramatic flourish, as the cymbals crash and fade, comes: the HOOTERS logo.

From a marketing standpoint at least, it's time for GM to pick a side: stand by the Hummer and lose any environmentalist aspirations, or promote fuel efficiency and new technologies at the expense of Hummer porn. Regardless of whether the perception is based in reality, the Hummer stands for everything that environmentally-conscious consumers hate about gas-powered vehicles, so GM can't have it both ways. And because they're trying to do just that, I think the worst is yet to come for our shiny, blue friends.

The menu question

A few weeks ago, I asked the following question:

[W]ould you rather go to a restaurant that:

• Has a huge menu (so big you can hardly get through the whole thing) that stays the same every time you visit, or
• Has a one-page menu that changes every time you visit?

Assuming the quality is consistent, which would you choose? And why?

As I mentioned, the question related to a marketing issue and wasn’t really about food. It must have hit a nerve, though, because the post received quite a few comments and even more e-mails, most of which took the restaurant analogy and ran with it.

So what was the point? Well, I’ve been working on some web usability studies for clients, and I’ve become increasingly convinced that less is more—on the web and elsewhere. I believe in the paradox of choice to some extent, but I still think people want variety. The challenge is providing variety within a constraint, which sounds like a contradiction in terms even though it's not. The answers I received--almost everyone chose the one-page menu that changes frequently--reinforced my belief that there’s a distinct difference between giving your audience something new--and high quality--every time you see them, as opposed to just throwing everything out there at once and hoping they’ll discover the good stuff.

Part of the problem is that people just don’t have—or aren’t willing to give you—the time to wade through a huge menu. Jon summed this us nicely in his comment:

I hate facing a menu that I cannot completely read before ordering. I hate that!

And Heather, a new reader from Oregon, added this:

I always get intimidated with a too long menu, like I might miss THE special dish...because I couldn't find it!

The issue of quality isn't just about what you might overlook. It also involves the time and attention an organization will give to things when it's trying to do too much. Beth made this point in her comment:

I find that restaurants with too many offerings end up being a jack of all trades, master of none.

As did Julianne, who knows her stuff when it comes to both restaurants and marketing:

I have talked to enough chefs to know that when they are able to choose the dishes for the day guided by the season or inspiration or fresh ingredients or a new wine on the list, and they can set the menu to express their talents and training, that they then bring enthusiasm and pride to this dish, and it's likely the best you'll ever taste.

The challenge for all marketers—not just restaurants—is keeping things exciting, satisfying our need for fresh options but making those choices clear and easy to find.
Arienne made this point in her comment about restaurants with constantly changing one-page menus:

These are almost always the best places to dine because you explore something new.

And sometimes, as Joe stated, the element of surprise itself is what draws people in:

One of my favorite restaurants in Denver does not even have that. They walk up and tell you the 3 choices you have. And...I have never went to Denver without eating there!

All of these responses were great, but my favorite came from Sarah, who agreed with a lot of the points made above while putting her usual unique spin on things:

I don't like to sacrifice quality for quantity. Restaurants with giant menus generally have something to satisfy any palette, but none of the dishes excel....I also feel that a restaurant that's always changing requires an active, involved owner and/or chef, whereas the place with the huge static menu requires some yahoo with a clipboard to merely keep an eye out for the Sysco truck while some 16-year-old stoner chops a bag of onions before peeling a crate of potatoes and rinsing off last week's fish to get rid of the ammonia smell.

There are several analogies between your organization and these two types of restaurants. One big issue, of course, is whether it's being managed by an "active, involved owner and/or chef" or "some yahoo with a clipboard." Today more than ever, it’s important to do a few things well instead of being all things to all people--and that takes time and attention that generalists just can't give.

It also comes down to how today's audience interacts with your message. On the web, for example, we know that people who visit your page spend just a few minutes on your site before leaving. So when you're thinking about what should go on your home page, and how much content to include overall, think "today's special," not "everything on the menu is good...what do you like?" You need to spoon-feed your audience nothing but the best options you have to offer, with confidence that when they're hungry for more, they'll return to you.

Taking "The Real Thing" a step too far

Given increasing concerns about nutrition and obesity--especially childhood obesity--these are hard times for soft drink companies. So what's a company like Coca-Cola to do? Well, according to this New York Times story, the folks at Coke think it's time to share a few details about their secret recipe. Little did we know, however, that one of the most prominent ingredients is bullshit:

In a campaign introduced last month in Britain, Coke divulged a few facts about the formula. It has “no added preservatives or artificial flavors.” Its mastermind, Dr. Pemberton, selected “the best spices from around the world"...

[...]

“When we talked to consumers about Coke, we realized they didn’t know that it has no added preservatives or artificial flavors,” said Cathryn Sleight, marketing director of Coca-Cola Great Britain. “We felt it was important to reassure Coke drinkers of this fact.”

Now I don't know about you, but "reassure" seems like a bit of a stretch. The point isn't whether anybody is losing sleep wondering if there's anything "unnatural" in their soda. Isn't it more likely that Coca-Cola may be trying to subtlely infer that Coke isn't as bad for you as all those empty calories might lead you to believe?

Here's a simple rule: don't try to fool people into thinking your product is something it's not. It doesn't work and it makes consumers lose faith in your brand. After all, if you're overstating one thing about your product, why should I believe that everything you say isn't overstated?

Bright ideas from Brandweek

Looking for some quick inspiration? Brandweek's "Bright Ideas for 2008" is the perfect jump start for your brain. Number 10-- "Greenrating"--is a must-read cautionary tale for anyone hoping to hop on the environmentally-friendly bandwagon (suffice it to say that you'll want to make sure that bandwagon is a hybrid). And if you want to find out the latest about "Lickertising"-- discussed on SBB back in February--just click over to number 6. It's juicy stuff.

A question

And I ask this for a specific, marketing-related reason (although it has nothing to do with food): would you rather go to a restaurant that:

• Has a huge menu (so big you can hardly get through the whole thing) that stays the same every time you visit, or
• Has a one-page menu that changes every time you visit?

Assuming the quality is consistent, which would you choose? And why? Answer in the comments or e-mail me your thoughts. I'll 'splain later.

Photo: JonCaves on Flickr

Sears to tweens: "We're cool!" Tweens to Sears: "No, you're not."

Another example of a retailer trying to fight perceptions instead of focusing on its wheelhouse: AdAge.com reports that struggling Sears is courting tweens with a bunch of online junk:

The traditional retailer known for its print catalog is taking a decidedly untraditional approach to back-to-school marketing, blanketing the online world by partnering with just about every youth-focused social, virtual and entertainment network out there -- all in hot pursuit of 8- to 14-year-olds that don't exactly see Sears as fashion forward.

"Our belief is that, particularly for this tween market, there's a little bit of undiscovered opportunity within Sears," said Richard Gerstein, Sears' chief marketing officer. "Part of what ... Sears needs to do is build credibility with this tween market. There are a lot of people out there that have that credibility, so we've partnered with them to help us do that."

Two things about this approach:

1. You can't co-opt someone else's credibility in an area where you have none of your own. You can't steal someone else's story. And you can't fool people into thinking you're something you're not--especially the most marketing-savvy generation ever.

2. If you're a 100-year old company and you call your business a "well-kept secret " or an "undiscovered opportunity" among a particular customer base, turn out the lights. If they haven't found you after 100 years, you're probably lost for good.

So what should Sears do instead? I don't know for sure, but it begins with conceding some of the audience and admitting that being uncool is still better than being out of business.

BlueTie banking on "featuretisements"

Can your calendar or your e-mail predict what products and services you're thinking of buying? BlueTie.com thinks so--and the company believes it can do so more effectively than Gmail.

BlueTie's product is called the "featuretisement," and a story in this week's Forbes details company founder David Koretz's plans for growth:

"[F]eaturetisements," match an event someone types into his calendar or e-mail (such as a trip to Chicago) with, say, a possibly useful ad detailing flights that day.

[...]

So far [Koretz] has 26 brands, including Orbitz, ftd, Research In Motion's BlackBerry and Amazon, advertising to clusters of his 3 million e-mail customers. BlueTie gets paid only if someone books a ticket or buys flowers. Koretz says 2% are doing just that, while the average rate for merely clicking through on the Web is 0.5%.

He has spent the past few months trying to sell BlueTie's featuretisement technology to Facebook, Microsoft and MySpace...

[...]

He thought of featuretisements one night after a meeting with managers of Google's Gmail service, which was already placing targeted ads alongside messages. "They told me not to go into application advertising, because they were going to own the space. I was frustrated and spent six hours brainstorming with a colleague," he says. The two realized that Gmail is often on the wrong end of a communication. "If I send you a message about my Kilimanjaro climb, you'll see ads for treks in Africa. But you never signaled you had any interest in going there. That got us thinking about what people do signal."

One thing's certain: Koretz understand the pitfalls of advertising on social networks, so his plan is to develop interactive solutions, not just passive ads:

Koretz and others say social network members want to share messages and photos with their friends, not click on ads. A few of the scenarios he has talked up to Facebook and MySpace: a click-to-print capability (via a service like Kodak's) for all those photos, an option to buy movie tickets based on an instant message exchange and gift-buying buttons that flash alongside birthday notifications. Says Koretz: "You have to see intent, and then not annoy the hell out of people."

I don't know if BlueTie's idea will fly. But Koretz's last quote--"You have to see intent, and then not annoy the hell out of people"--is the best description I've seen in while of what it takes to be a successful 21st-century marketer. Whether you're advertising on TV, in the paper, or on the web, keep those words in mind.

How to reach sports fans beyond the stadium

With the opening of Lucas Oil Stadium just weeks away, advertisers are eagerly awaiting the chance to reach Colts fans in the team's new home. According to a recent post on Sports Marketing 2.0, though, online might be a better place to spend ad dollars targeted at sports fans:

There are 7.5 million Colts favorite team fans online and over 20% spend 20+ hours online each week!

[...]

[W]hen you consider that 68.7% of the US Population are NFL fans, and only 32 cities have NFL teams, it makes you realize that targeting stadiums and regions around stadiums fall way short of reaching the majority of NFL TEAM fans.

The upshot of all this is that team Web sites are the only way to reach MOST of the favorite team fan bases, yet most sponsors are totally focused on the stadium and the region around it.

While I agree with Pat's premise, I think in-stadium advertising has additional benefits when it can be seen on TV. Dasher boards, scoreboard signage, and other ads can give your brand some air time during the game, when fans eyes are focused on the screen. In-stadium advertising can be expensive, though, so just make sure you're buying as a marketer, not as a fan.

Two great presentations from The Secret Diary of a Bonafide Marketing Genius

How do you become a bonafide marketing genius? You create great, irreverent, comprehensive presentations like “What the F**K is Social Media?”

| View | Upload your own

And what else do bonafide marketing geniuses do? Every now and then, they share great, irreverent, comprehensive presentations from other marketing geniuses, like Paul Isakson's "What's Next in Marketing & Advertising?"

| View | Upload your own

Hat tip: PR Squared

Two great reminders of what works

What's the best way to market your product? First, have a product that's worth talking about. So sayeth Pixar's John Lasseter in the Los Angeles Times...:

"Quality is the best business plan of all."

And Sir Richard Branson in this month's GQ, speaking about the key to getting consumers to go green:

“It’s up to business to come up with the inventions that enable people to still enjoy a good lifestyle. I’m just finishing converting Necker Island, an island I own in the Caribbean. It’ll be 100 percent carbon-neutral. The cost of putting in windmills will be paid back in four and a half years. And after that, we’ll have free fuel going forward for the next fifty years. Going green shouldn’t cost you.”

Creating a product that markets itself is difficult, of course, but it's still easier than putting out a crappy product and trying to fool people into thinking it's great.

Hat tip: Lou Harry's A&E on IBJ.com (yes, again)

The verdict on these Schroder Joseph and Associates' ads? Pretty good.

In February I posted about the killjoyness that is most law firm advertising. There's a strain of thinking that says since the law is a serious business, firms must promote themselves in only the most staid way possible, and anything that couldn't be created by Ross Fishman's Automatic Ad Generator falls outside the lines of good taste.

Well, the women at Schroder Joseph & Associates have a better idea: why not create ads that differentiate their firm, get noticed, and invite the audience to have a little fun? The all-female firm put together an ad campaign that does all of those things by turning some common stereotypes on their head. The Buffalo News explains:

“Ever Argue with a Woman?” reads the headline of one of the ads for Schroder Joseph & Associates LLP. “Labor Pains? Talk to us. (We’re women . . . We get it),” states another

Of course, some of the stuffier shirts at the American Bar Association website have gotten their wing tips all winged out over the whole thing. More from the Buffalo News:

The main criticisms of the ads, which play up the firm’s feminine strengths, is that they perpetuate sexual stereotyping.

“Great, next they’ll sell us on female surgeons because they sew better,” reads a post on adrants.com.

A comment on the ABA Web site said the ads open the door to male lawyers touting masculine virtues and suggests some not-so-politically-correct tag lines.

“Men Work Harder and Don’t Take Time Off For Childbirth” or “How Many Women Play Pro Football . . . Women Are Weak,” are two of the proposed male-centric ads.

(Obviously, the genius who came up with those probably wouldn't know a good headline if it hit him in the bow tie.)

Another unique twist to the story is that the ads not were the brainchild of in-house marketing staff or an ad agency; the idea came from Jennifer Dowdell of Business First, a Buffalo-area business weekly:

“This wasn’t about ‘we’re women, hear us roar,’ ” Dowdell said. “But they are an all-women firm, which makes them unique.”

Like it or not, ABA scolds, if you're not unique, you're invisible. And if you're going to create safe, boring ads, you may as well not run them at all.