Re: PR is better for branding than advertising?

From: Amrit Hallan <amrithallan_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu 11 Apr 2002 07:24:46 -0600

Kelley Mitchell <esc1krm_at_ups.com> wrote:

> But, as stated earlier, that purpose is brand support and brand
> maintenance rather than brand formation, an opposing viewpoint to
> currently accepted marketing communications practice.

These days we see many ads, especially from medical companies,
that don't directly sell the services, but try to associate
themselves with a social cause or campaign. For instance, there's
a company called Dr. Morepan (or Dr. Morepen) in India. They have
three flicks, in each they tell you how you can exercise daily
and keep healthy. In one ad they show a person keeps the
breakfast plates on the opposite sides of the dining table, and
then walks from here to there to eat individual bites - it acts
as a morning walk. Then in another, the same character, doesn't
use a remote while surfing the channels. Now here's a campaign
that doesn't tell you what to do in case of a medical problem, it
tells you how to avoid that problem.

The most moving is from www.OneEarth.org, about saving the
mountain gorillas, where they show how one single person can take
on big hurdles. The person that stands in front of tank and
forces it to turn around exudes so much power that the scene
really brings tears to my eyes each time I see it.

I think such campaigns are very positive. They don't directly
promote themselves or their services, but they touch the viewer
in a way that the name, or the brand, remains in the mind for a
long time.

But then, does the actual brand gets sidelined? If the message is
so powerful, then isn't there a propensity to forget the brand
that's promoting the message?

Amrit
Web Site Development - http://www.bytesworth.com
Copywriting and Copy Editing - http://www.amrithallan.com
WebDevE-Publication: bytesworth-subscribe_at_topica.com





Received on Thu Apr 11 2002 - 08:24:46 CDT