The Week magazine, in a time of crisis, proposes a novel and risky business concept that guarantees that readers will remember ads printed in their magazine more than other competitive magazines, the New York Times revealed.
In theory, The Week will see advertisers flock to its publication. If an advertiser’s effectiveness falls through – the ad effectiveness will be monitored by Affinity’s Print Effectiveness Rating System, a.k.a Vista – the said advertiser will be given free ad space in The Week until the advertisement reaches the top one-third of magazines that the ad has been run in.
All in all, advertisers have little to lose. How dangerous this new strategy is for competitors remains to be seen. But, the concept is ingenious. The Week is the first to come out with the concept, thereby potentially taking advertisers away from other magazines. Although competitive publications will notice the threat and lose its advertisers to The Week, little can be done about the situation. How so? It’s because The Week guarantees top one-third effectiveness among magazines that the ad is run. If other competitive publications follow suit, the guarantee of top one-third becomes less attainable and would send advertisers to The Week wherein by the time other publications have entered the game, The Week will have shown time and time again that it’s ads outperform the competition.
All that The Week has left is to keep up their end of the bargain.
Being that there were only 80 select advertisers granted ad space in The Week, we see a market for the rejects.
Do I see an all out bidding war for future ad space?
Photo: Sarti Tailors
Thanks to Copyranter making light of the unrestrained advertisement industry, Australian boutique, Superette, unveiled their controversial campaign in time for the (former) Halloween season boasting the slogan, ‘Be Caught Dead in it.’ Distasteful? Yes, but with the state of a fashion and a culture obsessive society we’ve been unfortunate to have been born into, such a state of obsession for clothes wouldn’t surprise me had it compelled someone to kill. People have killed for less, although my manic state of mind wouldn’t exactly overpower my sanity for the articles clothing that these models are fashioning.
You’d think with a predominantly gay fashion industry that a Marc Jacobs (of all people) ad of a kissing couple, who happened to be men, wouldn’t cause so much of a whisper. Note that Marc Jacobs, flaunting his reputation for controversy, has outdone himself in the past with tween Dakota Fanning back in ’06. I’ve walked around the city and given as much attention of two, shorts and cardigan/v-neck wearing gay men kissing as I did of a straight couple. So in rejecting the Marc Jacobs ad, does Men’s Vogue not realize that 90% of its demographic are Marc Jacobs devotees? According to The Cut, Marc Jacobs released his statement describing his disbelief:
“Funnily enough the most complaints were about the series with Dick Page and James Gibbs because they are a gay couple. Men’s Vogue even refused to publish it. Dick is a very close friend of mine and I’ve known him for 20 years — he’s been part of the Marc family for 20 years. And I like the idea of having a gay couple in a men’s ad because it makes sense. And I wanted the ads to be like they are — very romantic, tender and sweet. I certainly didn’t want to have anything provocative, not at all.”
Can Men’s Vogue not afford to research their demographic? I think of it as an investment considering the state of the economy and the fate of magazines these days.