Caught in a Bubble
Are media, marketing and entertainment 
professionals caught in an inner city latte-sipping bubble that’s out of touch with the rest of Australia? How can they continue to be relevant to an audience that leads a life very different to their own? In a feature that first appeared in Encore, Amanda Meade finds out.
When News Corp’s group editorial director Campbell Reid edited The Daily Telegraph and The Australian in the late 1990s he prided himself on catching public transport instead of driving his company car and parking it in the company car park.
As busy as he was, Reid insisted the daily commute with the general public kept him in touch with the readers of his papers.
Earlier this month, Mumbrella reported on a survey which found many advertising agency personnel live in an inner city “bubble” that renders them out of touch with middle Australia. The survey, conducted by outdoor advertising company Adshel, found that 41 per cent of Sydney agency folk live in the city or inner city, compared to just four per cent of the general public.
At least this industry doesn’t have a massive focus on winning awards judged by people who are if possible even more out of touch with everyday people…
Good article.
Reminded me of an infographic that was doing the rounds a while back comparing the use of social media by agency people versus the general population. It’s worth a look:
http://www.fastcocreate.com/16.....not-normal
Its a fine line, key is def to understand and appeal to a “non inner city” audience but often that manifests itself as simply bad work. Exhibit #1: Coles – Superhero.
US understand breadth of audience and diversity but are clever in the way they bring that to life. Allstate – Mayhem prime example. Broad appeal can = quality idea.
Great feature Amanda. I’ve been just as guilty as the next guy in AdLand when it comes to this subject on more then one occassion. The one layer I would add to temper this discussion is the idea of marketing to the aspirational self. Women’s mags have done it for aeons. Magazines written for 12 year old girls write on topics and in a style for 15 year, 15 year old titles for 18 year olds and so on. Its simply because we as humans (inner city ad wanker, western suburbs aussie battler or country cocky) all want to aspire to next ‘next step up’ and the best advertising takes thin into account. You don’t develop an ad strategy for your actual target market, you write one for the target market they WANT to be.
Good article. This happens in most fields though. A chef will always talk about flavours and foods with a greater deal of zeal than those who eat to survive, and sometimes doesn’t get why others aren’t so passionate. Advertising to the common Joe Public is for the most part a nuisance and distraction to them, something to change the channel to avoid if possible. I see some previous campaigns where companies (via their agency) really seem to think that Australian’s are super keen to jump on a brands website and play around. News flash – we don’t. Nobody except agency staff seem to give a shit about watching a ute be test driven around a track, or watching some random family soak up those stubborn stains with a good detergent. I have said it before and I will repeat it again – all most Australians care about are if its value for money, nothing else. The rest of the fluff in advertising is all done to impress others in the game, the general public have already changed the channel.
NB: Can someone offer a decent explanation as to why Twitter is seen as an important meter? It is used by less than 8% of the population, and you can safely assume that the demographic of Twit users differs greatly from the 92% of those who ignore it. Unless of course this country is made up of entirely wannabe comedians, narcissists and sycophants.
The arrogance of trying to hang out with those less cool than yourself. Ugly.
We are all just people with the same fears, doubts and worries.
The best work occurs when one looks into oneself with honesty and humility.
That’s how real bridges are formed, not deliberately hanging out with the plebs.
Seinfeld looked at his world with bemusement.
Funnily enough, millions around the world shared his findings.
Ben, how do you know the Coles Superhero is ‘bad work’? It’s too early to know how the average punter will react to it. Sounds like you’re making a subjective judgement to me because you don’t like the creative. ‘Good work’ is surely, effective work. We work in advertising after all. Is it effective? Too soon to tell. I note that the other ‘bad’ Coles work has all been highly effective.
@Ricki…Absolutely subjective only but I can safely say the work is bad…It may well prove to be effective from a harder metrics POV. My point is that you can be effective and do good work – they are not mutually exclusive.
Coles work is not good – it may be effective but that doesn’t make it right.
The great challenge of creating work is for it to be both creative but also not leave people with an ill feeling about the brand.
You can make work, quite easily in fact, to move product. Keep the big media spend behind it and it becomes annoying. To the point where people complain about your advertising. This leaves you with a longer term problem, something Coles will have to fix in say, 5 years or so. Where their brand is wroth nothing. All they will have is price.
This positioning is clever for a company, growing out of a bad place and regaining some market share and was cleverly instigated by the CEO.
The only short sightedness is that he has done this at the expensive of his brand. So if the business strategy ever has to change in the future and I’m guessing it will have to at some point, thye are going to be in a whole heap of trouble.
Ben and Ricki….how do you know it is damaging the brand?
I’m not saying I personally love what they’re doing but I’m not a typical consumer either. I work in this silly business. The only research I’ve been privy to in relation to the Coles work (and being subject to confidentiality I cannot disclose my source) showed a surprising affection for the ‘big red hand’ etc from the average punter. Who is complaining about it apart from the advertising fraternity? And I think you’re discounting their other messages that all feed into the brand perception – MKR, Masterchef, Curtis Stone, ‘Hormone Free’ etc. All of those offer propositions beyond price.
I do appreciate opinions on this, but without the research to back it up, it all does look like it’s coming out of a bubble to me.
Good article until Nick Cater was wheeled out for a quote. Ex-Editor of The Australian newspaper, a loss making publication kept afloat by a US billionaire to spread conservative propaganda. Yeah, he’s down with the people. He KNOWS what people in the suburbs want. And of course it just so happens that when the people in the ‘burbs want is what big business wants! Who would have thought it? The Coles example is ludicrous. There was no outcry from consumers against the Animals Australia bags, the campaign was dropped purely due to pressure from big-agri. Most consumers would take the side of Animals Australia over factory farmers as shown by the outrage over live exports etc.
Isn’t it hilarious that the Rhonda character could be considered an example of stepping outside the bubble and nailing it.
Pmsl.