The Shirtless Brand

I’m 43. The last year of the baby boom. And probably the biggest difference between a boomer and a millennial (digitally speaking) is a concern for privacy. We generally have it. They mostly don’t. Even when I looked good with my shirt off, I don’t think I would ever have dreamed of putting a topless picture of myself in a place where everyone could see it. It just wasn’t done. And…why would I want to do that?

Ditto my partying self. I would no more have wanted to let the world see a photo of me with a lampshade on my head than I would have EL Marko’d 666 on my forehead at a Pentecostal Revival. And yet I have friends in the younger set that have plenty of red eyed party photos hanging out there on the web.

The same goes for less extreme expressions of openness. I am not comfortable with the idea of a FaceBook page that merges my personal and work lives. But millions are.

That strong sense of privacy also affects my feelings about how to market. My instinct is to provide a defined, finite message. 2-2-2-mints-in-one! This is what I want you to see and think and repeat. That doesn’t work anymore. If as a marketer I don’t let it all hang out, people online will either let it out in spite of my wishes, or publicly surmise about what I haven’t revealed.

I think there is no better evidence of this than Wal-Mart’s PR issues over the past several years. Nothing can be guaranteed to stay secret anymore. Except the identities of the oil execs that wrote the energy policy with Dick Cheney. But that is not something for this blog.

What is is is beginning to formulate ideas on a new definition of integrated marketing. Of recognizing that what’s important in providing an integrated message is not that everything be PMS 243, but rather that we define a brand in the context of its meaning rather than its brand dress. OK, OK, you can say “d’uh” all you want, but think about your last 10 comments in creative meetings. And then you’ll see that you aren’t all Mr/Ms Perfect. Take that, smug ones!

Today, we haven’t a prayer of ensuring that text not appear within 10 picas of the logo – in part because no one remembers what a pica is anymore. But we can create assets that reflect the spirit of the brand, of which appearance may – or may not – be a part. That reflect the voice of the brand, rather than necessarily a tagline. Or if we have a tagline, to have the sense to make it emotive rather than kerplunk descriptive.

One thing I used to use in presentations was a graphic I found online of the Coke logo with the red swapped out for Pepsi blue. It was made by a fan of Coke who thought it looked better. That sound you just heard was the simultaneous dry heave of half of the people of Atlanta. Coke in Pepsi blue? It’s sacrilege! I’d never say a brand should ignore that sort of thing. But not all UGC is harmful, even if it isn’t approved by the brand cops.

Note to self: spend less time worrying about the size of the logo in an ad, and more about the spirit expressed in the message. And get with the digital program.

So I made a MySpace and a Facebook page. Hey, I’m a joiner. And I think I would be drummed out of digital if I didn’t have a FunWall and a Facebook Newsfeed that told me that someone I barely know is eating bacon for breakfast.

I changed a bit. But I categorically refuse to post shirtless pics on those pages.

You’re welcome.

Thanks for reading and don’t forget to write.