Advertisement
Catchy ad jingles have been around for all time, but I found myself doing something new the other day. For a couple of years now, the McDonalds adverts here carry the slogan "I'm loving it" which I thought was kind of freaky in itself - anyone that tells me what I'm thinking is probably up to no good. Anyway, on TV adverts, this was made into a little jingle going "do-do-do-do-dooo, I'm lovin' it." Maybe it's the same outside the UK.
Fair enough. But the other day, I noticed a peculiarity. In a new ad, the slogan has disappeared. There's just the "do-do-do-do-dooo" bit. I couldn't tell you if this was excatly the same as before, but only half of it, or if it was a whole new version. Not the point. The point is that I found myself *thinking* the "I'm lovin it" bit in my head. I was expecting it, so when it wasn't there, my brain did it anyway.
Musically, the way the do-do-do-do-doooo bit is written means it really doesn't stand alone. It's a rising series of notes, and the final one is extended in anticipation of the second half. It's very simple, but even if you hadn't heard the old, complete version, you'd expect something to follow.
So does this explain the whole scheme? Embed the phrase into people's minds as stage 1, then purposefully stop using it as stage 2. This "jingle memory", separated from marketing campaigns through its absence, reinforces the phrase from the point of view of the *listener* rather than the advert/company. "I'm lovin' it" is *my* perspective now, handed to me then casually abandoned by its original owner.
Watch out for the jingles, they're killers.
Fair enough. But the other day, I noticed a peculiarity. In a new ad, the slogan has disappeared. There's just the "do-do-do-do-dooo" bit. I couldn't tell you if this was excatly the same as before, but only half of it, or if it was a whole new version. Not the point. The point is that I found myself *thinking* the "I'm lovin it" bit in my head. I was expecting it, so when it wasn't there, my brain did it anyway.
Musically, the way the do-do-do-do-doooo bit is written means it really doesn't stand alone. It's a rising series of notes, and the final one is extended in anticipation of the second half. It's very simple, but even if you hadn't heard the old, complete version, you'd expect something to follow.
So does this explain the whole scheme? Embed the phrase into people's minds as stage 1, then purposefully stop using it as stage 2. This "jingle memory", separated from marketing campaigns through its absence, reinforces the phrase from the point of view of the *listener* rather than the advert/company. "I'm lovin' it" is *my* perspective now, handed to me then casually abandoned by its original owner.
Watch out for the jingles, they're killers.
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Thu, February 16, 2006 - 12:35 AMYeah, that's a good point. I usually don't watch tv, but I've been tuning in to the Olympics (what can I say, I'm a sucker for figure skating), and noticed that as well. They didn't say the "I'm lovin' it" part, but they still show it on the screen. I found myself filling it in too, but I didn't really notice it until you brought it up.
It's creepy, but I have to respect it as being a nifty bit of programming. Really subtle and elegant - I'd give it a 4.6. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Thu, February 16, 2006 - 9:51 AMsome disjointed thoughts:
1) >"I'm lovin' it" is *my* perspective now<
yes, Scribe, the thrust of this whole embedding scheme is carried by the fact that the jingle is a first-person testimonial -
2) in Supersize Me, we saw an example of how well McDonald’s installed the “two all-beef patties...” song during the mid-1980s - in fact, I think that later in the course of that ad campaign, a few of the television commercials featured the song’s melody, alone - I must have been around 10 years old; I could’ve picked out the tune on a piano - McDonald’s seems to have always been pioneering new ways to sell fast food to children -
3) the new jingle/anti-jingle is a sort of innocuous, gratuitously concurrent statement, ripped from the code of apathy-banter that characterizes my generation: “what’s up?” “not much.” “how’s it goin’?” “not bad.” “how’s the new apartment?” “lovin’ it.” - in the Big-Mac-ingredients-list-song, at least there was some concrete imagery; it wasn’t meaningless, it was food - with “I’m lovin’ it,” McDonald’s is installing a sort of hybrid image/feeling/name recognition into a pre-existing idiomatic expression, and a fairly amorphous, blanket statement, at that - now, when you tell someone that you’re “lovin’” your new apartment, are you also singing the trigger-point testimonial to yourself?
4) love? -
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Thu, February 16, 2006 - 2:44 PMTrue they been at it a long time. Hell, even the "Happy meal" is along the same lines I guess, in that it's based on the same "acquirement" emotional principle. They're not McDonald's Happy Meals (well.. they are, stay with me) - they're *my* happy meal now that *I've* bought it. They don't make McDonalds "happy" (at least, the consumption of it), they make the owner happy - or that's what you come to believe.
In fact, I'd love to see a comparison of McDonalds adverts - I'd wager that while the "look at our burger" ones (admittedly the Burger King and KFC ones come to mind) are all "wow, loads of meat, we've put dripping cheese on, we sell it to you for 99p" stuff, the adverts for Happy Meals on the other hand are more linked with "situationalised" emotions - the one that I can remember involves a kid buying one for his sister who he's upset or something. "Burgers" = a product = made well. "Happy meals" = an experience = consumed for an everyday purpose. So in that sense, it's interesting that the *emotional* branding has been extended outwards, to make *going to McDonalds* an experience on the same lines as a Happy Meal, rather than just a place to buy neat burgers.
I'm interested in advert priming vs consumer ability to decide if a product/service is good or bad, but it's a big area so maybe something to come back to.
In the meantime, I'm off to see if there's an archive of McDonalds ads somewhere on the web... -
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Thu, February 16, 2006 - 3:27 PMOK, this is good, I'm learning. This is definitely worth a click as it has videos of a few US McD's ads from over the years, but also cos it makes me laugh:
www.stayfreemagazine.org/archi...s.html
Disclaimer: I'm not in the US and I'm not as old as some of these ads (I guess) so I haven't seen any of these before:
Observation 1: The final advert actually shows Ronald McDonald saying "I'm Loving It". I guess this gets phased out over time.
Observation 2: The music in the original ads was actually kind of cool, in a swingy kind of way.
Observation 3: The early adverts are certainly "different", but what strikes me is that they resemble *Disneyland/world/planet*. This backs up the "experience" line, but actually in a lot more of a sinister (to me) way than the current ad campaigns. Actually, wait, no, I find today's campaign more sinister. To wit:
Early McD/Disney line: These are places you can go to fulfil your imagination, to escape the real world and forget about everything. But when you're done, you have to go back "home" to the boring place.
Current campaign: McDonalds is just part of your life. When you want to *become* happy (not when you're already happy), you think of McDonalds. This is *an* emotion, not an experience. Why the switch? Cos going to McD/Disney for a special time is too much of a "build up", like going on holiday. You can get people to come to you far more often if they see it as an every day thing.
Observation 4: Early McDonald ads have something in common with the film "Yellow Submarine". -
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Thu, April 13, 2006 - 12:44 PMI thank you for that link, Scribe - Harrod’s commentary following the transcriptions is just hilarious - you may have already seen this, but I think it connects to what you said regarding, “advert priming vs consumer ability to decide if a product/service is good or bad”
culturejamming.tribe.net/photo...14c694
1] are these advertisers so arrogant that they don’t think we’ll notice?
2] was it planned by some third-party community outreach program or some such nonsense, penalizing McD’s for its history of pandering to children by superimposing a contrapuntal voice over their banner?
3] was it planned by McD’s, “itself,” as a sort of image-upgrade maneuver?
your thoughts? -
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Thu, April 13, 2006 - 1:54 PMHehe, nice photo. (And cheers for bringing the tribe to my attention too - I'm quite lazy when it comes to seeking others out...)
1) notice people's information other than their own? or notice the juxtaposition of 2 jarring messages? Either way, advertisers are only ever targeting and cultivating a majority of people over a period of time. One billboard in one place is a drop in the ocean...
2) Gotta love the idea of a disenfranchies billboard co. employee just "shuffling" the advert line-up...
3) Although I believe in coincidences more than most, the idea's also not something that I'd put past the McAdvertisers. Still, see #1 - if there were repeated sightings (> 2, say) then I'd say something was definitely up.
I actually love the "double-bluff" going on in the McAd - not only do McDonalds go for the "OMG look what I bought I'm so cool with my new burgers" message, but they also manage to build on the mass-consumption lie that is "Shopping Makes You Happy". 2 birds with one stone! (Or 2 rabbits with 1 stick...)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Tue, May 30, 2006 - 4:46 AMIt’s nothing compared to the subtle insidious add placement in Xmen-3 where in the jet scene just before the showdown on Alcatraz the seat which iceman leans against has
PS
3
marked clearly (but veeeeeeeery out on the periphery of context) on the bridge portion of the seat which holds the head rest up…….
….seconds later…Oh, fancy that children in the back of an SUV with Playstation controllers in their hands for a fraction of a second and a brief scene of a video game screen. -
-
Re: Mcvertisements: Fill in the Blanks?
Tue, May 30, 2006 - 9:38 AMThis prompted me to do a tiny bit of digging (oh, ok, I checked Wikipedia... ;) just cos I wondered how the 2 industries (videogames and film) fit together, corporate-wise.
By the looks of it, it's somewhat interesting as contradictory to what I expected, Sony otherwise have "nothing" (at least coroporately) to do with X-Men III. By way of disclaimer, I'm a bit rusty on my corporate mergers et al, so maybe there's a link I don't know about. But from what Wikipedia says (links below), Sony own Columbia and MGM, while Murdoch's News Corp own Fox (who distribute X-M III). Obviously, product placement is a matter of moolah, rather than business links, but it's good to check these things.
News Corp who own Fox that distributes X-M III: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_Corporation
Sony who own MGM and COlumbia who make the PS III: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony
-
-
'jingle memory'
Thu, June 15, 2006 - 8:19 AMThere's a convenience store chain that had a similar jingle. It's in the midwest, called White Hen Pantry. The jingle used to be "When you run out, run out to White Hen." Later they made two deviations:
1) "When you run out, run out to" followed by the ding-dong chime you hear when you enter the store. Conveniently the same notes that the words "White Hen" were.
2)"When you run out, run out to" and nothing. I caught myself many a time filling it in mentally or out loud. -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Sun, June 25, 2006 - 2:27 AMYes, it's probably more common than I realised... In fact, the ultimate goal of branding is quite possibly to "transcend" to a point where names and sayings can be left behind, and only images and tunes are left, tied inextricably into the emotional centres of our bains. The nike swoosh, the golden arches (more than just a curvy M), Asda's double-back-pocket-tap... Recognisation, and reaction. Stimuli geared up to trigger the trademarked response at a moment's notice.
ISTR in the book "My Idea of Fun" by Will Self, the main character is instructed to make a list of all the things he does and thoughts he has that are part of his "routine", i.e. done usually without thinking about it. Perhaps this would be an interesting exercise for this topic... :) -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Sun, June 25, 2006 - 12:09 PMHuman beings are comfortable when they "understand" something. That's what branding is about--once you've "mastered" a brand, you feel better the next time you observe it. Just my own pet theory. Sorry for interrupting. -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Mon, June 26, 2006 - 1:23 AMThis is an interesting idea, Timbo - I like it for this :) By that logic, we (as consumers) are more drawn to ever-increasing numbers of brands and "consumer concepts" [*] and, rather than having brands _pushed_ onto us, there might actually be something in us that "seeks them out" once we've had a little taste?
I think there is something to that - all the more so if a brand is initially mysterious and you're not particularly sure what it's *for* (teaser advertising, anti-branding...). This mystery might be conceived as such by the marketers, but alternatively may also me a kind of social mystery - i.e. cult concepts and the huge amount of memes that generally start on the Internet but then flourish (quickly) into a semi-mainstream thread before (quickly) disappearing.
[*] Listening to Alan Watts the other day talk about how "things" are actually "thinks" - where does my head stop and my neck begin? Brand = Concept = Thing = Think = yes, a handy way to organise the "product(/thing)-based" way we traditionally treat how we choose things to buy? -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Thu, June 29, 2006 - 1:11 AMWell, given that human beings, evolutionarily, theoretically, became comfortable, survived, by testing out things for edibility, it might make sense that we might become addicted to "suceeding" through brand identification. I mean, if one becomes acquainted with a brand and is happy with that than why not become acquainted with more brands? I know this is a bit obtuse but I think there is something to it. -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Mon, July 3, 2006 - 2:10 PMnot a bad hypothesis.
i u want to test its validity, u might want to research brain studies as to what areas are affected by branding.
does it change depending on the product?
or is there a specific area?
if so, is that area the same as is triggered for hunger/food?
what are the similarities/differences? -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Tue, July 4, 2006 - 2:02 AMIs there a difference here, though, between biological needs (such as food) and "emotional stability"? As I see it, humans are basically pattern-matching creatures who are more comfortable if they can think less and follow previously-determined rules - leading to a liking for stable, unchanging environments. But is this separate from hunting for food, or is food just one part of the whole survival thing? (In addition to defending from predators, tne environment, etc)
Or maybe that's just what Timbo said a few posts up :)
I think what you mean, then, is that "brand culture" as an era/paradigm is possibly a "natural tendency" - a kind of network medium to which we are naturally drawn once it has become semi-ubiquitous anyway. Branding and Status are clearly interlinked. Logos are a social affair.
In a way, this undermines the "individualist" pattern usually associated with free markets - i.e. that the transfer of goods is an exchange between 2 parties only. Under branding (if it *is* indeed directly linked to social status), surely the idea of the "rational, independent consumer" must be discarded in favour of a "(still rational?) self- and peer-appraising consumer"?
-
-
-
-
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Sun, June 25, 2006 - 4:25 PMthe question is:
how does one subvert it?
twist it, flip it so the original meme gets tagged with a new context... -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Wed, June 28, 2006 - 9:39 AMyou just have to re-program your brain
every time you think of macdonalds
just think of this:
www.youtube.com/watch -
-
Re: 'jingle memory'
Wed, June 28, 2006 - 9:51 AMListen to Wesley Willis- many times he'd put two different taglines together:
Burger King- Soup is good food!
-
-
-
-
