Did you see John? Centre Point's advertising campaign is fantastic

While flicking through the Big Issue this week I saw Centre Point's fundraising advert. The above is a screen shot of their landing page www.centrepointroom.org.uk/john38

"John" is the young man pictured on the landing page and who features in the advert. The full page black and white advert stands out amongst the many colourful ads and John's picture takes up  a good portion of the page. He is pictured underneath the heading, "Did you see John? Have a look on page 30. Did you see him? Or did you look past him and carry on with your life?"

This shocked me, as I had not seen him. I turned to page 30 and low and behold there John was. I felt a pang of guilt and then awe as this is a fantastic advertising campaign.


The advert is good because:

• It highlights the invisibility of the homeless in our society.
• It engages readers in a clever way.
• It makes potential donors feel guilty about their own behaviour.
• They have invested in a large advert to fully explain the cause.

It could be even better if:

• It had a QR code so that potential donors could log onto the website immediately through their smart phones.

I have deliberately not posted the advert. If you want to see it in print go and buy the Big Issue and help support the homeless.

Twitter ensures customer complaints are public

In an effort to connect with their customers and create a modern brand image ASOS and BT have created customer care accounts on Twitter. The benefits for these two brands are clear. Not only do they allow rapid response to complaints that are convenient for the aggrieved customer; they reinforce and reaffirm their brand image. ASOS’s account continues their efforts to remain an innovative clothing brand; born out of their markets desire to be part of the new celebrity and internet led fashion scene. For BT it is part of a wider marketing strategy to appeal to young professionals who grew up with the brand but who do not necessarily relate it to the modern world of communications.

The approach of both accounts is to speak to their customers in a way that is friendly, professional and polite. In my view, the language used can be compared to friendly coffee baristas’ who enjoys providing good customer service. ASOS and BT successfully appear human (BT go so far as to name the staff that are operating their twitter feed) yet because they become human, they are opening themselves up to the rebukes and over-exaggerated claims baristas face everyday.

In the past an unhappy consumer had only a few options by which to lodge a complaint. They could make a relatively public complaint in a shop or restaurant that would have been witnessed by members of the public in the vicinity. Or they could go down the formal route of emailing, writing to or calling the company they were unhappy with which would usually remain private between the customer and company. However, in the age of Twitter written complaints (that carry more weight than raised voices in a shop) are published for all to see.

Having worked in the service industry since I was 15 and dealt with many complaints I would say that the majority are legitimate. However, there are a minority that are exaggerated and often due to no fault of the major company, restaurant or shop. How damaging is it to a brand when the latter appear on their Twitter feeds? If I was new to ASOS, as a lot of customers are in their emerging markets, I could be forgiven for being unsure whether to trust a company that one Twitter user labelled “A huge piece of shit.” I doubt that for ASOS, who’s customer care account has conversations with many satisfied customer and a successful social media presence, that the aforementioned tweet caused to much concern. Yet surely for small businesses interaction with customers on Twitter could be dangerous.

Five years ago I wouldn’t have expected a small café or local bar to have a website. Nowadays if they don’t I’m suspicious. Equally I expect places billed as being stylish and aimed at the young professionals market to have a presence on Facebook or a blog. In five years time, it’s likely my suspicion of small businesses who do not have a website will extend to those who are not online socially. There are already websites such as Trip Advisor who allow users to write scathing reviews of small hotels and B&Bs. For the reviews that are unjust (and we’ve all seen bad reviews for hotels we know to be friendly and clean) surely this is defamation or at the very least libel.

Twitter is 5 years old this week and has established a new avenue for marketers to explore. Do the benefits out way the risks of leaving your brand in the hands of faceless online comments? Is it time the marketing industry worked with social media providers to develop a set of guidelines to distinguish what is and is not acceptable for complaints published on the internet? Or would that be an attack on free speech and the social aspect of social media?