Mmm, Cheesy…

By / /

By Copywriter Marissa Ferrari

(File under “Still More Fawning Over CPB”)

Last night, my husband informed me that I am a sucker for advertising. Actually, the specific phrase he used replaced “sucker” with another choice word, but it’s probably not wise to repeat that here.

He said this because for the third consecutive evening, we were both in front of the television when the new(ish) Burger King Cheesy Tots ad aired. And for the third night in a row, I said, “Mmm, cheesy” out loud in what I’m sure was an unnaturally low, creepily bordering-on-sexual voice. He also pointed out that I experienced a uniquely uncomfortable combination of severe stomach cramps and uncontrollable carb-bomb energy after inhaling a Bread Bowl Pasta from Domino’s. And still went back a week later for a second helping, after viewing several of the product’s cheery talking-bowl spots.

I argued that I was genuinely interested in Cheesy Tots, which the ads simply brought to my attention. For real, who wouldn’t love deep-fried potatoes injected with a healthy dose of Velveeta? Delicious! My position was validated as I rolled through the BK drive-thru this morning (for the first time in years, mind you) and bit into undeniably tasty hunks of crispy potatoes and melty cheese.

What I probably won’t admit to my husband (pretty sure he doesn’t read this blog) is that I am a sucker for advertising. Good advertising. And what makes both of these campaigns – indeed, many CPB-driven campaigns – work for me is the suggestion of personality. Sure, both include lovely product shots sprinkled with features and benefits, but the real story is told by characters. A schlubby guy hastily pulling on yesterday’s jeans while attempting to placate a rejected bed, and a neurotic ceramic bowl wringing its metaphorical hands over being replaced by doughier brethren. Very relatable, very memorable and, therefore, very effective.

But for me, the value of a campaign that’s funny or smart or left-of-center extends beyond its memorability. The personality of these spots reflects the thinking of those driving the brand and product. The fine gents and ladies in charge of these product roll-outs undoubtedly considered a broad range of concepts when planning their marketing communications. The fact that they chose so well suggests to me I might also like the decisions made in the course of developing the products themselves. In my consumer’s struggle to differentiate between the tasty, tame and toxic, these clues are very helpful. Making these campaigns very successful.

Marissa Ferrari has not been paid to endorse Burger King, Domino’s or Crispin Porter + Bogusky. She would, of course, consider any offer to do so. Contact her at marissa.ferrari[at]yahoo.com.

Comments

  1. Brian W. June 10, 2009

    i’m with ya. i use my dollars

    i’m with ya. i use my dollars to support brands that do good work too. mostly because i want to see those brands do well so they keep entertaining me with their media buys.

    i remember before cp+b had BK, the brand would bounce around from agency to agency like a pinball cranking out boring wallpaper. they used to be one of “those” clients. a client agencies courted for the money, not the work, and a client that was a death sentence to get assigned to.

    what i’d like to know is, what happened? and how do you do it? is it all really just a matter of a uber smart CMO at the right time and place?

  2. Patrick C. June 10, 2009

    Brian-
    I think you’re right

    Brian-

    I think you’re right on. It more than likely has a lot to do with a CMO who has the guts (or intelligence) to trust his or her agency partner(s). Of course, I think CPBs established track record of success makes doing so that much easier.

  3. bob June 10, 2009

    pretty sure the breadbowl ad

    pretty sure the breadbowl ad is not cpb

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *