<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Advertising on The Findings Report</title><link>https://www.findingsreport.com/subjects/advertising/</link><description>Recent content in Advertising on The Findings Report</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 05:03:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.findingsreport.com/subjects/advertising/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>In defense of Super Bowl commercials ... when executed well</title><link>https://www.findingsreport.com/2013/02/04/in-defense-of-super-bowl-commercials-when-executed-well/</link><pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 05:03:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.findingsreport.com/2013/02/04/in-defense-of-super-bowl-commercials-when-executed-well/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;There isn’t a bigger forum for television advertising than Super Bowl commercials. It was once Carnegie Hall and the Grand Ole Opry rolled into one—a place for brands and their agencies to raise the stakes and entertain the largest television audience in the world. Some of the most memorable advertisements of all time debuted on a Super Bowl broadcast. So, why was 2013 so lackluster?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/W16qzZ7J5YQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Let’s roll back the clock about a dozen years. 2000’s Super Bowl XXXIV is a great case study year—one that set the stage for what ills us now. Just a few months before the dot-com boom would crash, 2000 would go down as a year when advertisers clearly went “over the top.” Flush with cash from a hot economy and an insane startup mentality, agencies convinced their clients to go big or go home. Budweiser unveiled “
&lt;a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W16qzZ7J5YQ"&gt;Wassup&lt;/a&gt;,” 7-Up asked us to “
&lt;a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2o9vQwcDa8"&gt;Show Us Your Can&lt;/a&gt;”, and a bevy of .com companies that aren’t with us today proved just how irreverent they could be thanks to work done by a lot of disruptive advertising agencies who are also not with us today. It led many critics to decry the blatant waste of media dollars and argue that advertisers needed to tone down the frenzy. In truth, it was pretty crazy.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>The Hunt for Real Creativity in Advertising</title><link>https://www.findingsreport.com/2012/05/14/the-hunt-for-real-creativity-in-advertising/</link><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 20:16:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.findingsreport.com/2012/05/14/the-hunt-for-real-creativity-in-advertising/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;My Monday morning ritual is deeply ingrained. I arrive early to find a stack of advertising and media trades to digest before launching into my client work for the week. One of those trades is
&lt;a href="https://www.adweek.com/"&gt;AdWeek&lt;/a&gt;. I’ve been reading it for years but only recently noticed a new behavior on my part. When I come across the review of the week’s featured campaign I have to fire up my browser and search for the spot online so that I can view it. In years past this would have never been the case. I would have seen the spot during my television viewing. Lately, I can’t recall which advertisements I’ve seen on television.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>