Are Consumer Generated Ads a Good Idea?

In November 2009, right before I graduated from UF, I posted an article about Consumer Generated Ads in relation to the Amazon Kindle. I was absolutely thrilled with the ad. I found it charming and artistic and, above all, out of the ordinary. After last Sunday's Superbowl my opinion on Consumer Generated Advertising has changed; at least enough to say that corporations need to be more strict when it comes to who is creating the advertisements for their brands. There is a lot that goes into advertising. Advertising professionals take a business problem and tear it apart, piece by piece, forming a strategy and developing the best possible solution. They then execute this solution in the most creative way possible, if not the most memorable. 

Don't get me wrong, these spots were entertaining and memorable, but did it leave me wanting to get up from my couch right away and rush to buy the product? Not really. More realistically, it was not added to my shopping list. Looking back on the PepsiMax spots I'm reminded more of a beer commercial than a soda commercial. If the target audience is the same but the product is dissimilar, can the ad be executed in the same way? I'm not sure it works in the same manner and here is why*:

1. Beer is alcoholic. An alcoholic drink is typically consumed with a crowd and found at celebrations. It is fun and adds another level of festivities to a party. Soda is not fun in this same way. It is more "child-like" by nature, consumption of soda alone is not the first sign of a serious disease and therefore generally substituted for water, and it does not add much to any festivity... unless paired with liquor, but that's a different argument entirely.
2. If Beer were a personality it would be manly, burly, interested in sports, fun-loving yet serious, respectable and friendly. If soda were a personality it would be juvenile, entertaining and lively, cheerful, and sometimes refined.

*Of course this is only an opinion, but I'm sure most would agree they cannot be treated as beverage equals.

I feel that the consumers behind the PepsiMax ads were looking towards the "greats" in beverage Superbowl advertising like Budweiser and Coke, but failed to see the strategic juxtaposition between the two types of ads. It appears that they only perceived them shallowly and tried to imitate the type of humor used.

On Feb. 7, in a blog post titled "Consumer-Generated Ads Win Big at Superbowl", Teri Rogers writes:

"This was the first time that Pepsi and Doritos partnered for an event and Crash the Super Bowl was a huge success. Not only did the contest garner a record number of fan submissions, it also generated an unprecedented number of consumer votes. Just goes to show the power of the consumer and how the creative landscape has changed. Not only do consumers want to watch great spots, they want to be a part of the process of not only creating them, but also selecting the winners."

I agree. To an extent, of course. The consumer does have great power over brands, so much that PR agencies exist (take the Kenneth Cole incident for instance). I also agree that consumers want to be a part of everything surrounding the brands with which they identify. However, this has a lot to do with social media as a whole. Consumers are now a very identifiable part of a brand because of and through social media outlets. The degree of separation between consumers and brands is significantly minimized today. However, that does not mean that consumers should be taking the place of advertising agencies when it comes to creating something so vital to a brand's future. 


Here is the Ad Meter on how the Superbowl ads ranked among viewers... what are your thoughts?


Till next time,
The New Ad Grad