Brand Ng

Mountain Dew's mouse-liquefaction lawsuit defense is easier to stomach than you might think

Stewart Little, doin' the Dew / SONY

In a lawsuit against PepsiCo, a man claimed he found a mouse in a can of Mountain Dew.  The Atlantic Wire reported on Pepsi's defense:

Pepsi's lawyers... found experts to testify... that "the mouse would have dissolved in the soda had it been in the can from the time of its bottling until the day the plaintiff drank it," according to the Record. (It would have become a "jelly-like substance," according to Pepsi, adds LegalNewsline.) 

Typically, it's Marketing which asks Legal to approve edgy communications.  They would have been well served to do the reverse in this case.

That said, PepsiCo is quite lucky that this case is for Mountain Dew and not for some other beverage, say Lipton Brisk, or Diet Pepsi.

Smokers don't smoke for health benefits, and neither do drinkers of Mountain Dew. Dew drinkers already know that it's bad for them and, as such, this PR "problem" is unlikely to change the long term behavior of current drinkers.

The Mountain Dew brand has spent the last couple of decades attaching itself to action sports and all things "x-treme."  And action sports athletes are always trying to do tricks that are new and more creative--things which are usually more dangerous.  

Mountain Dew's ability to dissolve a living creature might ultimately be additive to its brand. Teens may view it as a valuable feature of the soda as they jockey, on the halfpipe, for status and manhood.

How teenagers view facebook and twitter

This cartoon, drawn by a teenager, is a reminder--for me at least--that while just about every high school kid is on the web today, their choices of platforms sharply define their identities.  

I get the impression that marketers believe that 100% of the 12-17 set are on facebook and twitter. Even if that were true (it's definitely not, especially when it comes to twitter), teens aren't there uniformly.  They may also be trying out different personality styles, using different venues to express themselves differently.

Brands that focus all of their attention on these two platforms could risk missing the edgiest, most creative and nerdiest groups (all of whom are likely to overindex as future tastemakers).  

Moreover, while brands might believe they are on the cutting edge simply by participating on both facebook/twitter, they may actually be relegating themselves to "vanilla" status.

Cartoon credit: [Taylor-Ruth / Hanging Rock Comics]*

* The age of the cartoon will ultimately be significant to the message: the drawing was originally published in July 2011, just after the invite-onlylaunch of Google+ and the $30M myspace fire sale.

Abercrombie loses in this Situation, making the Jersey Shore cast ever more powerful

                                                                                                                                                            Ian Spanier/MTV

Just when you thought that the celebrity brands of Jersey Shore cast members would mercifully fade into the distance, Abercrombie put them back into the spotlight.  In effect, A&F has given the cast a golden opportunity to sharpen the edges of their brands, galvanize their fan bases, and make themselves more marketable overall: it's a great time to be on the cast of Jersey Shore.

Earlier today, Abercrombie and Fitch issued a tongue-in-cheek press release offering money to Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino and other cast members NOT to wear their products.  The stunt was picked up by mainstream outlets like USA Today and the WSJ and not just Access Hollywood, E!, and the like.

But while it's ostensibly negative to have a an apparel company insult you publicly, this action has opened up a new set of opportunities for the cast members.  By manufacturing this issue, A&F is pushing the GTL crew into the arms of smaller, scrappier competitors, such as Ed Hardy, Affliction and others, any of which could benefit to a greater degree than Abercrombie.  Or potentially even worse for A&F, the cast could create or license their own clothing line.

How the Jersey Shore cast gains from this:

• Acknowledgment of influence.  A&F acknowledges and propulgates the idea that Jersey Shore is incredibly influential.
• Money.  I don't know what constitutes "a substantial payment," but whatever it is, cash is being offered.  And that cash could be used to start a new clothing line, for instance.  
• A news platform to launch that new clothing line, or to talk about a new endorsement
• Sharpened brand edges, by helping define what they aren't (they aren't A&F-wearing preppies; they're self-proclaimed Guidos). And with a sharpened brand comes tighter identification with their biggest fans, who aspire to be more like them--God help us.

Meanwhile, it feels like A&F loses a bit in this PR stunt, even as they sharpen their own brand:

• They might be alienating their own customers.  The Abercrombe and Fitch brand might not be completely aligned with the Jersey Shore brand, but it likely has an overlapping customer profile.  In fact, last year, A&F sold a popular t-shirt emblazoned with the words, "The Fitchuation." 
• They're creating enemies who they're currently helping to popularize. Because the message is a punch-in-the-face to the cast, the cast, hurt feelings in tow, might take less money to endorse competitive products.  Unless the stunt is all a hoax, it is certain that Pauly D and the gang will be energized to make life difficult for A&F.
• They're a little late to the game. It's not even an original idea that A&F marketers could preen themselves over.  Last year, very similar stunts were already played out: a nightclub in New Orleans banned clothes seen on Jersey Shore , and  Coach was suspected of sending Gucci bags to Snooki.

In any case, I don't think it will be long until we see a JWoWW clothing label--she already has a tanning lotion.

                  
Sign at Republic, a bar in New Orleans                        Fitchuation T-Shirts were on sale at A&F in 2010