JetBlue Wants Little Babies To Cry Before It Will Lower Its Prices

I’ve been being far too positive and nice about ads lately. Must be my kind and generous personality shining through.

(I am actually a decent person, honest.)

So here’s a terrible one, “FlyBabies” by MullenLowe for JetBlue in the US.

Here, we see mothers and their babies board a flight. But, this is no ordinary flight! It's a special flight where any time a baby cries, JetBlue will take 25% off everyone's next flight. Isn't that lovely?

Well.

The first issue, which I admit is at least partly to do with the US style of advertising, is the mawkish, over-egged drama of the whole thing. Nervous mothers, people staring, and obviously planted, scripted dialogue undermining any sense of genuine emotion. It feels inherently fake and forced.

Flight attendants: like huge, insincere spiders.

But my main beef with this film is that there’s no value to it. It was a stunt. A one-off. JetBlue don’t actually give a discount to people when babies cry on their flights.

(Which is fair enough. That would be a really stupid idea.)

It's an event, created to be filmed. What then is the point to anyone else? I can't imagine why we're supposed to be impressed with the kindness of a single event. If you're going to lecture us on a moral about being nicer to parents, you've got to make more of an effort than this.

I mean, it’s nice that a handful of people got free flights.

(It’s nice for them, anyway.)

No one else gets anything out of it though. What we get is a wee story about how great JetBlue are, because they once did a cool thing for a few people on one flight.

And then there’s this, from Elle:

‘For now, a spokesperson for JetBlue says the airline has no immediate plans to repeat the stunt. But, she added, "you never know what JetBlue has up their sleeves!"’

Which is basically the PR equivalent for “don’t look behind the curtain!”

I’m not saying this to be a Scrooge or to hate on kids. Quite the opposite. If anything it’s perverse that JetBlue are celebrating and rewarding and revelling in a child’s tears.

An understandable action, but I thought they were trying to make the opposite point.

That’s literally what they’re doing, when you come down to it. Linking financial gain with upsetting children. You're practically putting an incentive on people to make their kids cry. This isn't supposed to be Oliver Twist for heaven's sake.

(Although the choreography is almost as obvious.)

This is one of the dumbest, most meritless ads I think I’ve ever seen. JetBlue and MullenLowe, I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Cara Delevingne Is Not A Good Face For Your Brand

I’ll keep this short and simple.

Cara Delevingne is a very successful model. She’s got a distinctive look, and wears the camera well. She’s good at what she does.

But I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone is using her for their campaigns right now.

Think about it. She’s everywhere. She may look good, but she’s looking good everywhere, for everyone she works for. And she has multiple brands that she works for.

So there’s the problem. What’s the value in working with someone who is inherently disassociated and disengaged from your brand? Someone like Cara Delevingne may be the face of a brand for a moment, but all it gives you is five minutes of memory in the mind of the consumer, before they see her in some other ad, perhaps even a competitor.

I know she’s working for Top Shop right now. A few months ago it was Burberry. Next week maybe it’ll be Gap. Who knows.

Face it. When you get someone like Cara Delevingne to front your campaign, you’re not building your brand. You’re building hers.

A Bit of Branding from Richard Bran(d)son

Richard Branson of Virgin fame has some ads out on the Tube. The sales pitch?

Your sales pitch.

The idea is that you, the reader, pitch ideas for businesses – you #PitchToRich.

It’s brilliant.

Think about it. It’s a pitch for business ideas. They are advertising cash prizes for great business ideas. Richard Branson of course is a famously successful businessman, so it lends credibility.

But more to the point, this is a no-lose campaign for Branson. At best, he gets great ideas for businesses, at a relatively cheap price and with the chance to snap up entrepreneurs who may have the ability to implement them. These things cannot be taken lightly – but Virgin has the chance to win them at a low cost.

And what is the negative side? What’s the worst case scenario?

At worst, they get no good ideas. They perhaps lose a little money. But they build the Branson, Virgin brand for cheap. Because the basis for so much of Richard Branson’s success is not so much his business acumen in a literal sense, but his business acumen in the sense that he knows how to use the fact that people think he has business acumen.

I know - that’s a little confused.

But the point is that Richard Branson is famous for being an innovator, a great businessman – but most importantly as a man who takes risks and believes strongly in trying out new ideas. And even if it were not true, the fact that people believe it is in of itself a business advantage. It makes competitors afraid, and investors bullish.

And this campaign, whether it yields great ideas or not, is building and maintaining that reputation – and building and maintaining the business case for Richard Branson and Virgin for years to come.

Every Ad is Someone’s Baby

A colleague said that to me the other day. It’s important to remember sometimes, when you take a break from the trench warfare that is agency-client relations, that your co-workers aren’t just people doing a job. Whatever your role in an agency, your work is your baby. Still more so as a designer or copywriter. Every line and placed graphic is part of your personal validation, evidence of your ability. And for it to be questioned and picked apart by those around you is no easy thing. You really do have to work to have a thick skin, because your work is both inherently personal and inherently vulnerable.

And that’s a good thing. It would be easy to dismiss what I’m saying as just the prissiness of artistes, self-obsession, unnecessary touchiness. But that’s what makes for great work. Great work, at any level, at any level of ‘importance’, demands personal commitment. If you can’t care, you can’t work – as I’ve said before, if you can’t bring yourself to care, why would your audience?

So care, and fight, and rage against those who want to change what you’re doing. And bend, and compromise, and conciliate. Because those twin impulses are what advertising is about – creativity plus corporate. Practical art.

And as an account handler, with a foot in both the client and the creative worlds, respect your client, certainly. But also respect your creative partners. Because they are the key to making the work that you really want to be a part of. And the ads that you are making are their babies.

A little care and attention goes a long way.