Sunday, May 18, 2003
The Music Store ads suck for a good reason
I'll never forget certain television ads that grabbed my attention by showing something shocking or memorable that had no relation to the product or the company being advertised. I'll also never remember which products or companies those ads were promoting. So thanks to whoever it was that ran those ads for the entertainment that they provided me, but if your goal was product or brand awareness, you wasted your money. At the other extreme, I've watched many ads that went into great, well-reasoned detail about why I should buy this or that, but none of them were interesting enough for me to pay attention. If I were in the mood to do research or listen to intelligent reasoning, I wouldn't be watching TV, would I?
The challenge, then, is to come up with an ad that grabs viewers' attention just enough to deliver a clear, concise message to them about your product, without going so overboard that they only remember the ad and not the product. The greater challenge, of course, is to have a clear, concise message in the first place, so that your product will actually be marketable and understandable. Apple's message with the iTunes Music Store is a very simple one: "your favorite songs, 99 cents each, go to applemusic.com to learn more". Any further explanation would be too much information for the typical ADHD-stricken television viewer. I mean, do people really want to hear about the virtues of AAC compression while they're watching Friends?
Because Apple's message is a simple one, it only has to spend about three seconds passing along that message. That leaves the rest of the commercial open to anything that's going to get viewers in the proper mood to hear (and remember) the message. If you're Apple, you want it to be something that will get people talking, and thinking, and comparing the experiences of the people in the ad to their own experiences, and concluding that the product will allow them to have those experiences all to themselves. Who among us hasn't taken the opportunity to sing our favorite songs out loud when we thought no one was listening, without regard for how out of range or out of key we might be? How many of us would be ebarrassed if we had to do so in front of a camera? When I see those individuals singing along with their iPod, I see myself. When I'm listening to my iPod, I often sing out loud when I think no one is around, despite the fact that I cannot sing very well. If someone catches me, I usually can't help but laugh it off, because the other person probably can't sing very well either. For those who don't have an iPod, the ad should make them realize that they too could be singing out of tune along with their favorite artists.
I was part of a conversation last week (not started by me), concerning which of the two girls in the Music Store ads was the better singer. While this debate had all the merit of an Americal Idol discussion, the conversation did eventually turn to the fact that Apple is indeed selling popular songs for a dollar apiece. In other words, the ads worked. The "hook" in the ads is interesting enough to elicit discussion among viewers, and has just enough relation to the product to get people to remember what that product is. Macintosh users who see the ads should get the message rather quickly, and should be buying music in no time.
Since Apple's product is currently not available to the vast majority (Windows users) of viewers, the key in this case is simply to make them aware that Apple is the new 'King of Digital Music'. If some of them go to applemusic.com only to find out that the service is currently Mac-only, so much the better. It should nudge some of them that much closer to realizing that if you want access to the latest and greatest innovations in personal computing, you have to do so on your Mac, so you need to buy one now. Otherwise, you can stick with your PC and wait another eight months in the hope that Apple will throw you a few breadcrumbs. And then you'll miss out on the next great innovation as well. Oh, and that iPod you bought that you're using with your existing PC? If you get a Mac, you can use your iPod for much greater purposes. You should have bought a Mac to with your iPod in the first place, but here's another chance.
The idea of using the Music Store to lure Windows iPod users over to the correct side of the fence is pure genius. But for most people, the whole idea of downloading compressed music from the Internet, using software to copy it into a hand-held device, and carrying that device around with you so that you can listen to it, is still a foreign concept. Despite the fact that the iPod is the number one selling digital music player, Apple has still sold fewer than a million of them, which means that greater than 99% of computer users have yet to take the plunge. The biggest question I always get about the iPod is, "where do you get the music from?". When I explain that you can pull the music off your existing CD's, the responses I get are usually "that's a lot of work," and "why would I do that when I can just listen to the CD?". While there are ample reasons for why you would indeed want to do it, they do have a point about the irony of pverpaying for a CD, copying the music off of it, and then leaving the CD sitting on a shelf collecting dust.
The "other" method of acquiring music doesn't sound so attractive, either. When you explain what all is involved in downloading music from a pirate network (acquiring extra software, often having to search long and hard to find what you're looking for, and oh yeah, it's not quite legal), it's usually enough to turn most users off. The answer that I've always wanted to give people about where to get music for their iPod is "you can easily and cheaply get the music by using iTunes, and then just drag it into your iPod or burn them with no hassle." Now, I can finally give that answer.
Although they don't go into as much detail, Apple's new ads essentially give that same answer: "Your favorite songs now only cost you a dollar each, and you too can hold a tiny music player in your hand and sing along with the song you just bought so cheaply. Come to our website and learn about how you can join this revolution. We don't care whether or not you can sing, whether you're a kid or an old hippie, whether you listen to the Who or Pink or Eminen. We've got it all, and so can you."
On the surface, Apple's new ads really do suck. They're not particularly enjoyable to watch, even if you're a rabid Mac user like me who would gladly watch thirty seconds of anyhting, as long as it ended with an Apple logo on the screen. But they do a fantastic job of getting the above message across without forcing the viewer to think too much about it. For that reason, they've got my approval. Later on, once the idea of buying music over the Internet has become more accepted and understood, it will be time for Apple to go into more detail about how the Music Store is so much better than it needs to be, and how you wouldn't want to buy music online from anyone else. For now, it's enough to get people talking about the concept and remembering who it is that has brought it to the masses first.
The Music Store doesn't seem to need much advertising right now anyway, considering that Apple has sold over two million songs in sixteen days. That's not bad for a service that's currently limited to MacOS X users who have downloaded and installed iTunes 4 and QuickTime 6.2, and not bad for a service that only has 200,000 songs available so far. It's especially impressive considering that you need to have broadband Internet to enjoy using it, something that all too few computer users have opted for up to this point. The iTunes Music Store would be enough to get me to upgrade to high-speed Internet if I didn't have it already, and I can't be the only one who feels that way. The opportunity to use tools like iTunes 4 and Sherlock 3, not the ability to load the same old web pages faster, is the real argument for moving to broadband, something that more Mac users will probably take to heart once they realize how much time and frustration they can save if they buy their music fifty times faster. So not only do the record labels are artists owe Apple a debt of gratitude for its innovations this time around, so do apparently the Cable and DSL providers who are bound to get new Mac-using, music-loving customers out of this.
It looks like Apple has changed everything and made life better for everyone involved yet again. That's certainly the same old song. Feel free to sing about it yourself.
I'll never forget certain television ads that grabbed my attention by showing something shocking or memorable that had no relation to the product or the company being advertised. I'll also never remember which products or companies those ads were promoting. So thanks to whoever it was that ran those ads for the entertainment that they provided me, but if your goal was product or brand awareness, you wasted your money. At the other extreme, I've watched many ads that went into great, well-reasoned detail about why I should buy this or that, but none of them were interesting enough for me to pay attention. If I were in the mood to do research or listen to intelligent reasoning, I wouldn't be watching TV, would I?
The challenge, then, is to come up with an ad that grabs viewers' attention just enough to deliver a clear, concise message to them about your product, without going so overboard that they only remember the ad and not the product. The greater challenge, of course, is to have a clear, concise message in the first place, so that your product will actually be marketable and understandable. Apple's message with the iTunes Music Store is a very simple one: "your favorite songs, 99 cents each, go to applemusic.com to learn more". Any further explanation would be too much information for the typical ADHD-stricken television viewer. I mean, do people really want to hear about the virtues of AAC compression while they're watching Friends?
Because Apple's message is a simple one, it only has to spend about three seconds passing along that message. That leaves the rest of the commercial open to anything that's going to get viewers in the proper mood to hear (and remember) the message. If you're Apple, you want it to be something that will get people talking, and thinking, and comparing the experiences of the people in the ad to their own experiences, and concluding that the product will allow them to have those experiences all to themselves. Who among us hasn't taken the opportunity to sing our favorite songs out loud when we thought no one was listening, without regard for how out of range or out of key we might be? How many of us would be ebarrassed if we had to do so in front of a camera? When I see those individuals singing along with their iPod, I see myself. When I'm listening to my iPod, I often sing out loud when I think no one is around, despite the fact that I cannot sing very well. If someone catches me, I usually can't help but laugh it off, because the other person probably can't sing very well either. For those who don't have an iPod, the ad should make them realize that they too could be singing out of tune along with their favorite artists.
I was part of a conversation last week (not started by me), concerning which of the two girls in the Music Store ads was the better singer. While this debate had all the merit of an Americal Idol discussion, the conversation did eventually turn to the fact that Apple is indeed selling popular songs for a dollar apiece. In other words, the ads worked. The "hook" in the ads is interesting enough to elicit discussion among viewers, and has just enough relation to the product to get people to remember what that product is. Macintosh users who see the ads should get the message rather quickly, and should be buying music in no time.
Since Apple's product is currently not available to the vast majority (Windows users) of viewers, the key in this case is simply to make them aware that Apple is the new 'King of Digital Music'. If some of them go to applemusic.com only to find out that the service is currently Mac-only, so much the better. It should nudge some of them that much closer to realizing that if you want access to the latest and greatest innovations in personal computing, you have to do so on your Mac, so you need to buy one now. Otherwise, you can stick with your PC and wait another eight months in the hope that Apple will throw you a few breadcrumbs. And then you'll miss out on the next great innovation as well. Oh, and that iPod you bought that you're using with your existing PC? If you get a Mac, you can use your iPod for much greater purposes. You should have bought a Mac to with your iPod in the first place, but here's another chance.
The idea of using the Music Store to lure Windows iPod users over to the correct side of the fence is pure genius. But for most people, the whole idea of downloading compressed music from the Internet, using software to copy it into a hand-held device, and carrying that device around with you so that you can listen to it, is still a foreign concept. Despite the fact that the iPod is the number one selling digital music player, Apple has still sold fewer than a million of them, which means that greater than 99% of computer users have yet to take the plunge. The biggest question I always get about the iPod is, "where do you get the music from?". When I explain that you can pull the music off your existing CD's, the responses I get are usually "that's a lot of work," and "why would I do that when I can just listen to the CD?". While there are ample reasons for why you would indeed want to do it, they do have a point about the irony of pverpaying for a CD, copying the music off of it, and then leaving the CD sitting on a shelf collecting dust.
The "other" method of acquiring music doesn't sound so attractive, either. When you explain what all is involved in downloading music from a pirate network (acquiring extra software, often having to search long and hard to find what you're looking for, and oh yeah, it's not quite legal), it's usually enough to turn most users off. The answer that I've always wanted to give people about where to get music for their iPod is "you can easily and cheaply get the music by using iTunes, and then just drag it into your iPod or burn them with no hassle." Now, I can finally give that answer.
Although they don't go into as much detail, Apple's new ads essentially give that same answer: "Your favorite songs now only cost you a dollar each, and you too can hold a tiny music player in your hand and sing along with the song you just bought so cheaply. Come to our website and learn about how you can join this revolution. We don't care whether or not you can sing, whether you're a kid or an old hippie, whether you listen to the Who or Pink or Eminen. We've got it all, and so can you."
On the surface, Apple's new ads really do suck. They're not particularly enjoyable to watch, even if you're a rabid Mac user like me who would gladly watch thirty seconds of anyhting, as long as it ended with an Apple logo on the screen. But they do a fantastic job of getting the above message across without forcing the viewer to think too much about it. For that reason, they've got my approval. Later on, once the idea of buying music over the Internet has become more accepted and understood, it will be time for Apple to go into more detail about how the Music Store is so much better than it needs to be, and how you wouldn't want to buy music online from anyone else. For now, it's enough to get people talking about the concept and remembering who it is that has brought it to the masses first.
The Music Store doesn't seem to need much advertising right now anyway, considering that Apple has sold over two million songs in sixteen days. That's not bad for a service that's currently limited to MacOS X users who have downloaded and installed iTunes 4 and QuickTime 6.2, and not bad for a service that only has 200,000 songs available so far. It's especially impressive considering that you need to have broadband Internet to enjoy using it, something that all too few computer users have opted for up to this point. The iTunes Music Store would be enough to get me to upgrade to high-speed Internet if I didn't have it already, and I can't be the only one who feels that way. The opportunity to use tools like iTunes 4 and Sherlock 3, not the ability to load the same old web pages faster, is the real argument for moving to broadband, something that more Mac users will probably take to heart once they realize how much time and frustration they can save if they buy their music fifty times faster. So not only do the record labels are artists owe Apple a debt of gratitude for its innovations this time around, so do apparently the Cable and DSL providers who are bound to get new Mac-using, music-loving customers out of this.
It looks like Apple has changed everything and made life better for everyone involved yet again. That's certainly the same old song. Feel free to sing about it yourself.
Comments:
Post a Comment
