http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422 The NewsBiscuit Community en-US Sun, 19 May 2013 15:43:29 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/search.php http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422#post-121350 Fri, 04 May 2012 09:07:58 +0000 Vertically Challenged Giant 121350@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>kga6 - it was supposed to be a NiB when I started writing it, but then I accidentally wrote too much. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422#post-121321 Thu, 03 May 2012 20:39:10 +0000 kga6 121321@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Excellent idea. These surveys really are a load of nonsense. Great start and finish - for me this would stick better if maybe some of the middle was trimmed/made more punchy. Like “volumosity” though. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422#post-121306 Thu, 03 May 2012 19:06:36 +0000 dvo4fun 121306@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>"A previous campaign was pulled, and a disgruntled junior member of the marketing team fired, after an investigation found that ‘it’snotmyjobtomakeupchemicalswhydon’tyoudoityourfuckingself’ was not a genuine ingredient in their product"</p> <p>Hell's teeth VCG - have you been bugging my living room whilst I've been shouting at the TV? </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422#post-121292 Thu, 03 May 2012 16:57:35 +0000 waylandsmithy 121292@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>Nice, great last line! </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422#post-121279 Thu, 03 May 2012 15:55:54 +0000 Screenie 121279@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>80% of this one man agrees. </p> http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=42422#post-121266 Thu, 03 May 2012 14:54:04 +0000 Vertically Challenged Giant 121266@http://newsbiscuit.com/forum/ <p>A new advert for Pantene Pro-V shampoo has set the industry abuzz after the small print revealed that the central claim of the campaign was disagreed with by over 90% of the ridiculously small sample size surveyed, which is believed to be a first even amongst cosmetics advertising.</p> <p>The ad boldly proclaims that the new product leaves hair ‘even more shinier and clean looking and stuff than ever’, but the text which appears briefly at the bottom of the screen shows that only ‘9% of 11 women surveyed agree’. This has led to an investigation by the Advertising Standards Agency after they received a number of complaints from rival companies, who were disappointed that they hadn’t thought of this tactic before Pantene.</p> <p>‘We regularly waste several hours surveying up to 70 people before embarking on an expensive advertising campaign based on a dubious 60% success rate. I never would have believed that we could get away with even less.’ said Maxine Carver, UK marketing manager for Garnier, ‘This campaign could revolutionise the way shampoo is advertised, with even more emphasis on bright colours and made up, scientific-sounding words like “volumosity”, and less time dedicated to actually seeing if people like the product.’</p> <p>Industry analyst Clive Atkinson has urged caution though, warning that a campaign based on a 0% success rate would be likely to be banned by the ASA, and companies should ensure that at least one person agrees with their vague and questionable claims before launching a campaign on national television.</p> <p>‘I will be very interested to see the outcome of the investigation into this advert. It is an admittedly poor result, but a proper survey was carried out, and one person did agree with the claim, so I don’t believe the ASA can uphold this complaint.’ explained Mr Atkinson, ‘The fact that the one person was the sister of Pantene’s advertising director is irrelevant. So are the claims from several of those surveyed that the product didn’t make their hair ‘shinier and clean’ but actually left it ‘greasy, disgusting and fallen out on the floor’, because they had that all important positive response.’</p> <p>This is not the first time Pantene have found their advertising under scrutiny. A previous campaign was pulled, and a disgruntled junior member of the marketing team fired, after an investigation found that ‘it’snotmyjobtomakeupchemicalswhydon’tyoudoityourfuckingself’ was not a genuine ingredient in their product. </p>