| Topic Name: |
When is Branding enough? |
| Message Name: |
Branding... |
| Date Posted: |
06/10/2005 |
| In Reply To: |
Don't send viewers to the web unless you have more information that adds to the story; or perhaps a sidebar that didn't fit into the package.
That kind of "branding" supports your position of giving the viewer as much (or as little) info as they want and need. They'll learn that they can see it on your station, or read it on your web site. But, yes, referring to it on EVERY story is insane. Perhaps you may want to skip the story-by-story references to your web site during the 'cast, and do a bumper that says "for more information on the stories we bring you, log-on..."
While we're at it, i agree with "statobvious" that live-for-live is a waste. As is the "we have team coverage" intro, that has been beaten to death on these boards.
Our viewers are intelligent and smart. They can tell when you're marketing to them, and when you're giving them the news.
Respect them, and they'll be loyal to you. |
| Message: |
...is taking a white-hot iron bar and pressing it into the skin.
OK. Few years ago I worked for a TV outfit that had serious image problems. Namely that it cut corners, tried to get by on the cheap, used outdated equipment.
This was costing them clients.
So the solution was to "re-brand" the company -- at a cost of $2 million pluss.
We all got a meeting explaining how this would help our image. And all the stationary and business cards featured the unique trademark of our new brand: a rounded corner to reflect our space age sleekness.
A photog who'd missed the speech came in and picked up his new business cards.
The first words out of his mouth was about the rounded corner: "We're [company name]. We cut corners!"
This actually popped up constantly afterwards. The rebranding only reinforced the image we'd spent a ton of money trying to change.
|
|
