Meet the brand that turned David Bowie’s death into a tacky marketing message
Imagine you’re the person in charge of writing the marketing messages for a financial advice site.
Topical is good, right?
What’s topical?
David Bowie.
"*" indicates required fields
Sign up to our free daily update to get the latest in media and marketing.
I guess in a way, this article is doing the same thing…benefiting from topical SEO….
Aren’t you doing the same? Creating articles on David Bowie and how it relates to their readers – slightly hypocritical. From what I read they aren’t selling anything!
@Matt
No that is not the case. Mumbrella is a resource for the media, marketing and advertising sectors. It is reporting on a piece of marketing that is trying to piggyback on the recently departed, megastar, David Bowie.
Professionals in this sector need to understand the line and be reminded about what is good and what is not so good in terms of strategy. That way they learn and an industry news portal like Mumbrella enables this to be achieved.
Mumbrella are not doing the same.
This is as tacky as all the other brands trying to find relevance with Star Wars. I have witnessed so many poorly aligned social posts and email campaigns that have actually inspired me to unsubscribe, or unlike.
Finding relevancy in a crowded market is essential for any brand, but sloppy thought processes lead to sloppy work.
Just to clarify the claims in this mornings update – we have not edited the image nor the title of the article. We did add those words you mentioned to help clarify the connection following online feedback.
The email always had this different image and title to the one in the article. The email was sent to a closed distribution list, hence the different image and title. We do not add, edit or delete comments in our blog unless they contain profanities or are defamatory…and we certainly do apologise in this instance for any offence caused. We hope it is obvious by now that offence was not our intention.
‘We hope it is obvious by now that offence was not our intention.’No Rodney, your intention was the offence.