Telling a good story is at the core of good marketing or branding. But what happens when the story is tongue-in-cheek and the audience doesn’t “get it?” Has the average audience become dumber?
When average consumers or business people believe the message and the message or story is bogus — just for fun — where does that leave us? Has the intelligence of the average individual changed?
Although these examples aren’t marketing messages per se, they do showcase the gullibility of the average person on the street. The first one is from the Canadian Broadcasting Company with comedian Rick Mercer interviewing Americans (including US politicians) about Canada and Canadians.
Hint #1: The prime minister at the time of this taping was Jean Chretien. Poutine is a French Canadian French fry snack with melted cheese on top.
Hint #2: The parliament building of Canada isn’t made out of ice.
Hint #3: There are more than two area codes in Canada.
The second is from the UK. Same concept.
I wonder… if this exercise was conducted in other countries with questions about the US, if the results would be similar.
What do you think? Has the average audience gotten dumber?
Related posts:
As a flag-waving Canadian I remember watching that Rick Mercer bit with glee when it came out a few years ago. But now that I’ve left Canada, I realize that it is missing out on a fundamental point – why should Americans know who the prime minister is?
What has been established? That very few Americans know who Jean Chretien is (or moreover current PM Stephen Harper), and that there is no such thing as the South Saskatchewan Seal Hunt. However, they *DO* know that Britney is in rehab, Simon Cowell is a jerk, and Tom Cruise is a scientologist.
My point? Consumers are not dumber, they are actually much smarter now than ever before… about topical subjects that matter to them in their own reality.
Let’s put it to the test: try selling an XBox to a PS3 fanboy and see how gullible topically intelligent consumers really are!
Cheers
Parry
I’m not sure audiences are dumber, but they surely are more confused! With advertainment, entertainment, emerging media and technology blurring the lines of fact and fiction, it’s no wonder people can’t tell the difference. We’re just overloaded with too much to sort through. (We’ll leave the fact that many people are more interested in the latest celebrity news and salacious story than in some of the important issues of the day for another time.) And all the technology in our hands lets anyone create a dazzling, credible presentation that can be posted, aired, broadcast and distributed right to their target audiences – whether it’s true or not. It definitely makes things tougher for the marketing and pr people trying to get their messages across. It’s alway been important to make it simple, clear and concise for your target audiences – now it’s critical. Otherwise, the message is just one more blip on the radar screen for consumers bombarded all day every day by incoming communication bombs.
You’d be surprised as how much people in Argentina know about the US…
As we are sometimes surprised when we hear that “Rio is the capital city of Argentina”
Personally, I find this more than a little unsettling. The approach isn’t new, of course. This technique has been done on radio stations for years, except instead of cherry picking the responses to have the greatest impact, it’s all done live. The results aren’t that different.
While Parry has a point (Why WOULD anyone know who the PM of Canada is, or what the distinction is between a state and a province for that matter), the U.S. would be better off knowing more, generally. (Just wait for my next book, “Water is Wet, and Other Insightful Observations”)
What this does show us, though, is that social consensus is pretty much meaningless in the U.S. It’s better to examine the evidence for yourself than to go with what everyone else is telling you.
Elaine,
You made my day: This is funny stuff. Am I worried? Nope? And I can’t wait to visit your national Igloo. Wow! Sounds like an incredible piece of architecture.
@Cam Beck
Social consensus is based upon mutually agreed upon beliefs within a group. So… to say that social consensus is pretty much meaningless in the US would be to say that the majority of Americans don’t think the USA is the best country in the world; that Americans don’t think baseball, basketball and football are the best sports in the world; and so on.
May I humbly suggest you wiki the phrase “Truthiness” and revisit your position on the meaninglessness of social consensus?
Parry – I’m not sure I follow… I’ll concede that there is a consensus of many things. My point is that consensus an a particular subject means nothing when the majority is as uninformed as these videos display.
If I still misunderstand (or misunderestimate, as it were) your point, please let me know.
Elaine,
Interesting post. Do I think people in the U.S. are dumber now than they were before? I’d answer the question in this way: they’re less informed and less interested in what’s going on in the world because they’re more interested in pop culture, American Idol, the misdeeds of Hollywood stars and sports. These things seem to matter more than more cultural or cerebral pursuits in our society. Unfortunately. We really need more focus in a variety of areas and better balance as a society to make us more well-rounded people.
This reminds me a bit of how Americans are universally criticized for not speaking a second language (by non-Americans, usually, and by bilingual Americans always — but that’s a different point altogether).
Of course, having to cross an ocean to find that different language impacts our absolute necessity to learn one, with the exception of our southern border, where virtually everyone already does speak Spanish.
I think Americans in general have a very mediocre grasp of international affairs, primarily because the average American doesn’t have to engage in them often. Talk to a businessperson with international responsibility and you’ll find a good grasp of what’s important.
“Who the PM of Canada is” impacts very few in the US — he isn’t quoted much, keeps a very low international profile, and doesn’t make much of an effort to be heard ‘down here’. And that’s probably fine with him and his constituents. So I’m not sure this is a sign of a coming educational apocalypse.
Everytime I hear discussions of this sort, I can’t help but hear charges of eliticism at the expense of “those who don’t better” brewing. Today, I’m casting my lot with the hoi polloi, recalling other fine milestones:
(a) Howard Stern’s (terrestrial) radio show deserves a bit of credit for this with his infamous “Homeless Game” segment, where listeners wagered whether people who lived on the streets could answer questions about what went on in the world.
This gave rise to…
(b) Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking” segments on “The Tonight Show” in which people on the streets of Los Angeles on Hollywood Boulevard around Universal Studios are asked about current affairs and respond in usually clueless fashion.
-as well as-
(c) “Street Smarts” (2000-2005) an insipid game show in which two contestants bet on the answers given by three people on the street in regards to general affairs.
My personal favorite, only because I thought it was an SCTV sketch until I saw back to back episodes in 1986, was
(d) “Headline Chasers” (1985-1986). Easily one of the worst game shows I ever saw, imagine “The Newlywed Show” cum “Face the Nation” meets “Wheel of Fortune”. Wink Martindale, fresh from “Tic Tac Dough” convinced Merv Griffin to back this turkey, which consisted of couples solving crossword-style phony headlines based on “actual” events for cash prizes.
So there’s definitely entertainment value in looking at what the masses don’t know as far as daily comings and goings, given the barrage and deluge of every headline and clipping. My larger worry is the ability to make connections regarding “what it all means”, the relevancy and importance of an item in people’s lives. It’s not enough to know facts if one can’t and won’t connect them to one’s life and situation. That’s most troubling, wherever I sit.
There is a compelling case to be made for those in [fill in the blank city] US to know what goes on in Canada. Whether it’s in addition to, versus at the expense of the “junk” they absorb now isn’t be my call.
The problem is in how we are encouraged to frame and process news itself, in addition to the array of choce. The abundance is so overwhelming, we are less prone to taking advantage of it. The world remains large, and yet more accessible, more diverse and yet so unchanging in the narrative presented. If the sources we trust– particularly the local ones which are struggling in their own affairs, are unyielding and uncurious, we should we be?
Critical media skills, in addition to literacy, are so important for adults as much as youth in news, advertising, and basic life. It has nothing to do with intelligence, more to do with options and effectiveness of those who service them. Entertaining when there’s failure perhaps, but frightening in its ultimate implications all the same.
Thank you all for your wonderful comments and dialog.
Maybe knowing who the Canadian prime minister is, isn’t as much the issue as knowing a bit more about the world and what goes on in it. It’s true that the masses are engrossed with popular culture and can tell you about Anna Nicole’s burial or who’s in rehab. But, if Americans aren’t educated about the rest of the world – even in a general sense – how will they be able to distinguish propaganda from news, evalute the threats from the “outside” or analyze/interpret the messages that do get through?
I agree with Leo. I believe that people in other countries know quite a bit about the US from TV, films, etc. I also agree with Cam in that it can’t hurt for them to know more about the world. That’s probably a reflection of the education system coupled with the lack of interest by adults once they finish school and deal with their high-stress lives.
Have we become a society yearning for escapism in any way we can get it? How will this affect marketing messages or has it already?
Can we lighten up a little?
These clips show is good editing to make them entertaining and funny. We have no way of know what was left on the cutting room floor. Look lots of folks don’t know much about foreign nations. This isn’t new, it isn’t likely to change, and it isn’t restricted to Americans.
As for marketing, nothing has changed. We need to know our audiences educational levels, their attitudes, their emotional and psychological attributes and respond to them with messaging that resonates.
Funny clips. Thank you for sharing them. But I don’t think we should panic about what they demonstrate.
I accept your take, Lewis, and yes, these are comedy shows meant to entertain. Do you think marketing American products and services outside the US is affected by the bias others have of Americans as being self-centered?
@Cam
To clarify, what I mean is “perception is reality.” 95% of Americans continue the pursuit of happiness without knowing the Canadian PM. From a marketing standpoint, consumers’ economic decisions are based upon their perceptions… so as marketers certainly what is of most import is social consensus around our product, brand, idea, etc.
I think we’re more on the same page than originally thought – perhaps it’s a matter of semantics. Funnily enough, that echoes Prime Minister Poutine’s foreign policy…
Elaine,
Just as made in Japan carried heavy baggage in the US until the ’70s, made in the USA means different things to those outside the US today, some good (think jeans) some not so good (think cars).
When we market our products inside or outside the US, we need to understand our audiences and work to relate to them. That is the hard part of marketing.
Parry, I’ll convey your sentiments to former PM “Poutine!”:)
Lewis, good point. Knowing the customer/audience is everything.
As for the posssible dumbing down of the masses, it may not have an adverse effect on the average citizen, but let’s hope corporate executives dealing in a global economy and foreign policy government officials know their stuff on world issues.
Knowing our audience is important, whether to the sole exclusion of everything else, wouldn’t go that far.
The converse is equally true and important: Many folks do know much about what goes on in the world, while others don’t about any given time. Personally, there’s much that honestly doesn’t do it for me. All a consequence (or trimuph) of marketing itself, no?
Maybe all the above isn’t new, and isn’t likely to change in terms of entertainment. But I also hope much has changed in terms of what we know and understand about who we market to, even through silly insights like this.
I certainly appreciate the ability create messages that do more than resonate and reinforce (and in worse cases, pander). There’s definitely value in expanding what counts as relevant when marketing as well.
Consumers are much smarter than we give them credit for. I’m a writer at Deliver magazine, and we’ve done several stories on the importance of knowing your customer and more importantly, not underestimating them.
oday’s consumer may not be terribly interested in foreign policy, but they do know a good deal about what they want and more relevantly what they buy.
No argument from me on that point, Nancy. When it comes to consumerism, most people in the U.S. know their stuff. It’s the broader picture as a citizen of this planet where I think many fall short.
IT AIN’T THE AUDIENCE, IT’S THE MEDIA.
Visual: anything goes today in the TV/Video arena and no one pays close enough attention (quite rightly) to notice subtleties.
Verbal: As we all have ruefully learned, witticisms in e-mail usually fall flat and often cause business disasters. Try a series of “tongue-in-cheek” e-mails to your most intelligent clients and your smartest suppliers. One or more relationships will take a serious hit. Guaranteed.
That’s why at Prism Ltd., we recommend to clients that non-inter-active marketing should stay away from sarcasm and cynicism. If the audience has no feedback tool for a “reality check” on how you are talking to them, you and your brand are taking needless risk. A S Prisant, COO, Prism Ltd.
Thanks for that insight, Alexander. Good point.