MxMIndia

Tag: Hard Knocks

  • Freedom of expression is not absolute; it does not give you the license to defame people, and deliberately provoke communal/religious tensions. However, I don't think Nandy did any of that, he merely expressed a point of view (and later clarified)

    Anil Thakraney: They should go easy on Ashis Nandy

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Sociologist and author Ashis Nandy made a controversial point about the Dalits at the Jaipur Litfest, and he now finds himself in a soup. Although the man later clarified and apologized for his comments, an FIR has already been lodged at the time of writing this piece. And because Nandy has been booked under the SC & ST Act, his arrest would seem like a very possible event.

     

    For those not in the loop, Nandy had said: “Most corrupt people come from Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.” He later said that he was misquoted and misunderstood, and that he is sorry. This would ordinarily be the end of the controversy. But it isn’t, because he’s charged under the abovementioned Act.

     

    I have stated in a previous post that freedom of expression is not absolute; it does not give you the license to defame people, and deliberately provoke communal/religious tensions. The Indian Constitution states this as much. However, I don’t think Nandy did any of that, he merely expressed a point of view (and later clarified). The logical thing would be to ask him to explain his statement in detail, and if it’s found to be defamatory to a community, Nandy can be tried in a court of law. Indeed, that’s what might have happened if he had, let’s assume, said that most corruption comes from Hindus or Sindhis or Kashmiris or UPwallahs or Tamilians, etc. However, under the SC & ST Act, casteist statements invite criminal liability, and therefore an FIR and subsequently the arrest come into play. And as per law, this is a non-bailable offence.

     

    Now, I am not a lawyer, but I would imagine the said Act makes even minor criticism of our SC, ST and OBC brothers and sisters a matter of criminality. This doesn’t seem fair. Perhaps the time has come to re-define this Act a little more clearly and a little more fairly. So that while atrocities can invite criminal charges (as they must), general points of view (even if factually incorrect) don’t land people in jail. Especially so if the person has already apologised for the remarks. Really think time has come to move towards a more equal play for all citizens and groups in this nation. This is 2013 AD.

     

    ***

     

    PS: An amazing 3-D hoarding mounted in Chicago. This is for a brand of rum (in India it would be playing cards, haha). Wonderful use of 3-D to attract attention, and one wonders why we don’t get to see such creativity in our cities. It’s not really costly to execute, and we have the contractors to do it.

     

     

  • I strongly believe movies and ads have a very limited role to play in influencing social behavior. Think about this: If movies could affect people, we would have been a nation of a billion noble citizens, as films almost always tell us that good wins over evil

    Anil Thakraney: Movies & ads don’t create rapists

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    I was watching Justice Verma’s press conference with both, enthusiasm and amusement. Enthusiasm, obviously because we were all keen to know what the committee had in store for desi women. And I was amused because the Justice and his team members reminded me of my strict school principal and teachers. A whole lot of nice theoretical lessons being belted out, with no road map on implementation. This is India for you. A nation of great thinkers and ideators, but a nation of very poor executors. Anyway, let’s see how the recommendations play out on the ground, though I suspect we shall see very little real change.

     

    However, I am glad that in the 360 degree approach taken by the committee to protect Indian women, the use of ‘item songs’ in Bollywood flicks and the ‘objectification’ of women in advertising was left out of the menu. These two issues have been discussed to death on TV chat shows, post the Delhi gang rape, so I was expecting the committee to issue an edict on these too. Happy they ignored the heated telly debates.

     

    This is because I strongly believe movies and ads have a very limited role to play in influencing social behavior. Think about this: If movies could affect people, we would have been a nation of a billion noble citizens, as films almost always tell us that good wins over evil. Clearly, no one believes that after the butter popcorn is done. By the same logic, item songs and semi-nude hotties can’t be contributing to rape. Cinema is an entertainment medium, and that’s how it’s viewed by the masses. Today’s blockbuster is tomorrow’s cheap, street DVD.

     

    Ditto for ads. TV commercials and press ads have been featuring beautiful women for years and years. And these gals attract attention to the product, and that’s all they do, nothing more, nothing less. Nobody wants to buy from ugly people. Again, if ads were contributing to rapes, the all pervasive nature of this medium would have turned millions of us men into rapists and molesters. And that’s not happened.

     

    The problem of crimes against women and children finds its roots in two factors: The way sons are brought up in India. And a weak law enforcement machinery. These are the things that need to be sorted out. And am happy the Verma committee mainly focused on them. Meanwhile, please let’s continue with the beauties in cinema and ads. Without them, the nation will become a very boring place.

     

    ***

     

    PS: The memorable Lance Armstrong/Nike ad. And to think it was an anti-doping commercial! Must say the words have turned out to be quite prophetic. There should be a case study done on how the champ’s confession damages Nike, the brand, because of their powerful association.

     

    [youtube width=”400″ height=”220″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIl5RxhLZ5U[/youtube]

     

  • This case involves more than the tragedy of one individual. The incident deals with the systematic failure of the state, the police and the aam aadmi at large… all the more reason the media needs to have access to the daily proceedings

    Anil Thakraney: Media needs access to rape trial

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    With due respect to the honourable magistrate who ordered in-camera trial of the Delhi gang rape and murder case, and to the judiciary in general, I have to say one is quite disappointed with the decision to keep the media out of the courtroom. Am sure the concerned magistrate had valid reasons for taking this decision, but the junta does have the right to be informed on the legal proceedings in this horrific case. Here we are, demanding transparency in all walks of life, and in the case of a crime that jolted the entire nation, there is a media blackout! It does appear rather odd.

     

    I suppose the in-camera trial decision was taken because of the likely overcrowding inside the court premises, and a possible ‘law and order’ problem. Well, it’s the job of the cops on duty to handle these issues. Sure, the Delhi cops can’t seem to be able to do much to help women in distress, but surely they can ensure discipline inside a courtroom. And in this case, there’s no question of ‘protecting’ the rape victim from prying eyes, as, sadly, the unfortunate girl has passed away. So these explanations don’t convince me much.

     

    Truth is, the public has every right to know the details of the arguments being put out by the prosecution and the defence lawyers, as also testimonies being filed by the various witnesses. We also need to be made aware of the remarks and observations by the judge. Not only because this trial means a lot to a whole lot of people, this case involves more than the tragedy of one individual. The incident deals with the systematic failure of the state, the police and the aam aadmi at large… all the more reason the media needs to have access to the daily proceedings. Media scrutiny will also ensure the case doesn’t slow down, as it usually happens in India.

     

    If there is a concern that news channel anchors will conduct their own ‘trial’ each evening based on the media reports (and this is quite possible), the magistrate can easily declare a ban on such frivolous discussions. But factual reports from inside the courtroom are important.

     

    Anyway, as I said earlier, this is simply my own point of view, and there’s no disrespect meant to the judiciary. Whatever happens, let’s just hope justice is awarded to the victim’s family as soon as possible.

     

    ***

     

    PS: Haha. Fun, sarcastic posters on movies nominated for the Oscar awards this year. Really wish someone did a similar exercise on the ‘100 Crore Club’ drivel that’s been winning awards at multiple Bollywood fests.

     

    Link: http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/feature/if-2013s-oscar-nominated-movie-posters-told-the-truth.php

     

  • The last thing a troubled soul wants is to be judged by the interviewer. And there's a lesson in this for our aggressive, judgmental, in-your-face TV anchors and interviewers. Sadly, we don't have a single TV person out here in Oprah's league

    Anil Thakraney: We need an Oprah in India

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Why do top celebs like speaking to Oprah? Especially so when they desire to come clean on their sins? One obvious reason is the penetration of her show. You are assured of reaching millions of people at one go, so it’s a big bang for the buck. There are also nasty rumours going around in the case of the Lance Armstrong interview, suggesting that Oprah’s company and the TV channel paid major bucks to the cycling champ to ‘confess’ on their show. I suspect this is loose talk from Oprah’s envious rivals, so this reasoning is best left ignored.

     

    The other reason why Oprah gets preferred is that she’s a wonderful television interviewer. She brings in a healthy combination of curiosity and compassion to the interview. So, even as she fires tough questions, her eyes seem to suggest she does feel a tad sorry for the celebrity, for the trauma he/she is going through. This makes Oprah’s guests comfortable, and that’s critical for a good interview. Another good thing about Oprah is that she’s non-judgmental, she leaves that part of the deal to her audiences. This, again, is another reason why she’s favoured by celebs; the last thing a troubled soul wants is to be judged by the interviewer. And there’s a lesson in this for our aggressive, judgmental, in-your-face TV anchors and interviewers. Sadly, we don’t have a single TV person out here in Oprah’s league.

     

    About her much publicized two-part interview with Lance Armstrong, which the entire world watched, I have to say the disgraced champ blew an opportunity to win a little public sympathy. Even though he freely pleaded guilty to the doping charges, his mannerism and his body language told us the man isn’t really sorry for what he’s done, and it was also clear this TV interview was an exercise in currying favour with the anti-doping authorities, a desperate last ditch attempt at winning another chance to get back to the races. The key word he used is ‘flawed’. This means he’s still not taking responsibility for his actions, Armstrong seems to suggest there’s something wrong in his genetic make-up. Ergo, the cheatfest wasn’t deliberate. Complete nonsense, I say. Only the really gullible will fall for this crappy DNA logic.

     

    But full marks to Ms Winfrey for a good job done. In a way I feel bad for our desi celebs. Even when they decide to come clean, there’s not a single TV host they can go to without feeling edgy and nervy.

     

    ***

     

    PS: Disruptive advertising at its best. That too from a direct television brand. Also, super use of movie star Charlie Sheen. A good example of how to be crazy in advertising while remaining focused on the product/service on offer.

     

    [youtube width=”400″ height=”220″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2ZYIdmdx14[/youtube]

     

  • If the team desires a continued, healthy run of this Big Brother clone, they need to be very picky in their choice of housemates, writes Anil Thakraney

    Anil Thakraney: Gh***a Alag Chhe!

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    I cannot claim ownership of the headline to this article, though wish I could. This is the crisp and to-the-point response from my tapori pal from Colaba, when asked of his views on Bigg Boss Season 6, which (mercifully) ended last week. Yes, it was that bad.

     

    Now, I am aware the show is targeted at the low brow audiences, but that’s no excuse for packing in ultra dull people inside the madhouse. This season’s collection was an all-time low, a group of completely uninteresting and unappealing participants. My guess is the producer and the channel suspected this to be the case along the way, and in a desperate last act, dispatched the totally lunatic Imam Siddiqui to this horrible party, to salvage some viewership. In fact, had it not been for this loon, the show would have been a complete disaster.

     

    If the team desires a continued, healthy run of this Big Brother clone, they need to make one big change for the future. They need to be very picky in their choice of housemates, as the viewing junta gets stuck with these sods for months together. I think there should be only one yardstick in the selection process: Either the person is highly engaging or he/she is fabulous to look at. Or is a really funny individual. Anyone who does not pass this criteria must be kicked out of the reckoning immediately.

     

    The complete flop show that was the ‘Grand Finale’ aired last weekend told me another thing: Mr Salman Khan is the real Bigg Boss of this show. Although I have no proof of this, I strongly suspect it’s the hunk, more than the voters, who decides the eliminations and the choice of the winner. The absolute power vested in the man means there’s no one from the team who has the guts to blow the whistle when things aren’t working. The finale was such a grand bore, it was a real challenge just to stay in. Yes, Salman Khan brings in his charisma to the proceedings, but his role should be restricted to anchoring it.

     

    Finally, to return to my tapori pal’s cutting-edge feedback, the ‘Alag Chhe’ promise was a blatant lie. It was back to street fights, juvenile tasks and a bunch of failed TV actors. If they had at least called it ‘Same Chhe’, my tapori friend might have been a tad kinder in his analysis.

     

    ***

     

    PS: Fantastic marketing innovation for an air conditioner brand. Very smart way to get the public enthused, and the media excited. Millions of dollars of free publicity using a simple device: Big Nose. Superb!

     

    [youtube width=”400″ height=”220″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElmEcfPEw2Y[/youtube]

     

    Anil Thakraney is a senior journalist and commentator. He is also Editor-at-Large, MxMIndia. The views expressed here are his own

     

  • In this depressing scenario, all the fury in the media is indeed required. The viewing public feels a little vindicated. And the army jawans might feel their own anger getting vented

    Anil Thakraney: Rage on, Arnab!

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Arnab Goswami is Indian television media’s all-season angry middle-aged man. That we all know. But when it comes to issues on Indo/Pak conflict, his anger turns into savage fury. As we are currently witnessing in the case of the mutilated bodies of Indian soldiers, the deed allegedly done by Pak soldiers. And Arnab’s anger very quickly becomes contagious; anchors on other channels, who start out rather calmly, switch to the anger mode. And for days it becomes a lot of shouting and heckling on all the news channels.

     

    My first thoughts: It’s a complete waste of time and energy. The Pakistani government gives a rat’s arse about all the drama inside Indian TV studios, and will continue with what they want to do. For example, all the rage over 26/11 has yielded zero results so far. It’s also quite possible that the Pak netas and indeed their army generals had no role to play in the mutilation of the soldiers’ bodies. This cowardly act may well have been carried out by a few barbaric, retarded Pak soldiers of their own volition; therefore it would be difficult for even Pak to get to the truth. In short, a pointless exercise, a needless diversion from the anti-rape campaign.

     

    However, on second thoughts, I do believe we need the anger going on Pakistani issues. Simply because we are a proven soft state, we have a Prime Minster for whom even opening the mouth becomes a challenging task. As usual, all we are hearing is the same old useless political reactions: We will lodge a protest, we will take suitable action, we will not allow this, etc. And this can and will have a negative effect on the morale of the army. Why fight for a nation when it doesn’t care if you die, and if the head from your body is chopped off?

     

    In this depressing scenario, all the fury in the media is indeed required. The viewing public feels a little vindicated. And the army jawans might feel their own anger getting vented. This venting is very important to maintain status quo.

     

    So rage on guys! Keep insulting and humiliating the Paki spokespersons. We are right behind you!

     

    ***

     

    PS: Speaking of the Indo/Pak conflict at the LOC, here’s a stunning commercial from a music company. It’s set on Christmas Eve of 1914, when the Allies were at war with the Germans. Notice the honour code enemies dutifully follow in the zone of conflict. Wish the barbaric elements of Pakistan would learn something from this.

     

    [youtube width=”400″ height=”220″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aRLGwsafTM[/youtube]

     

  • How long will we allow ourselves to get fooled by these frauds? How long will we allow the world to laugh at our expense? How long will we let these charlatans use us?

    Anil Thakraney: Block the gas bags

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Every second day, since the Delhi rape and murder, a deranged neta or a phony baba rears his ugly head. And lets off a wind blast that smells pretty foul. It’s okay, I guess. The Constitution allows every individual the right to free speech, and that includes farting, one might presume. The problem is: I am now beginning to suspect these dolts aren’t really crazy, they are using the gassy opportunity to acquire instant infamy. And notoriety sells too, we know that. It’s much more valuable than oblivion.

     

    So, the familiar pattern unfolds: The man farts. The social media goes into a tizzy. The news channels go ballistic. Arnab Goswami and gang find juicy fodder to feed on. Screaming and jostling happens on TV debates. Next day, the newspapers do cover stories on it. The international media now gets interested; anything that makes Indians look like medieval fools sells like hot cakes in the west. On the weekend, the news mags dutifully carry forward this trash. And Mr Gas Bag, within a single week, turns into a huge celebrity. Phony babas acquire more followers. And opportunistic netas get quick OTS. And this sequence repeats itself.

     

    How long will we allow ourselves to get fooled by these frauds? How long will we allow the world to laugh at our expense? How long will we let these charlatans use us? In fact, I must add here that some of the farts belted out by these buggers are criminal in nature, they abet rape. The media needs to ponder on this subject. My own view is that it’s time to put a stop to this crap. These gas bags must be banned from the mass media. Not able to air their stink, these sods will quit farting. As simple as that. That indeed might be the best way to stop this weekly nonsense.

     

    And all the media time and space must be devoted to the rape trial itself. Even if it’s being held in-camera. We take our eyes off the ball, and the rotten system will slowdown once again.

     

    ***

     

    PS: I couldn’t stop sniggering at this one. It appears the western world has decided to ape our desi ad guys. This is Brad Pitt endorsing Chanel No 5. Don’t miss the usual ad clichés, the ultra boring script and zero brand relevance. We get to watch this sort of rubbish celeb advertising all the time. People, our ‘talent’ is spreading far and wide.

     

    [youtube width=”400″ height=”220″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF8NAyqxGfk[/youtube]

     

  • I am fully with the rest of the journalists who believe that Zee did the right thing. Even if the case is in court, the janata has every right to hear the man's version

    Anil Thakraney: Zee News’s coup

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    There are two distinct points of view on whether Zee News did the right thing with their one-on-one interview with the Delhi rape victim’s friend, who accompanied her on the bus. The Delhi cops are naturally pissed off and have threatened legal action against the channel. That’s because the cops came out quite pathetically in the said interview.

     

    Some media folks believe that Zee should not have carried this story. One, because the case is sub-judice and the friend’s (he’s the key witness) testimony in public may affect the trial. Two, they believe it wasn’t morally correct to exploit an injured victim for TRPs and make him relive the tragedy all over again, that too just a few weeks after it happened. While there might be a point in this line of thinking, I smell something burning out here. Because this was a journalistic coup for the channel.

     

    I am fully with the rest of the journalists who believe that Zee did the right thing. Even if the case is in court, the janata has every right to hear the man’s version. Because he had lived that very unfortunate situation, he knows better than anyone else on what exactly transpired that night. And what he said is pretty alarming. It was not just the criminals who did the rape victim wrong, the hangers-on who stood and did nothing and the cops who took their sweet time to react are also party to the girl’s death. These issues have to be exposed and discussed in public, because only then will real change happen. It won’t happen just by punishing the culprits.

     

    I also liked the way the anchor handled the interview. It was professional and to the point, minus the hysteria (unusual for a Hindi news channel). And the anchor very rightly kept away from the rape itself. In fact, the victim wasn’t discussed much, and this we must appreciate. All in all, full marks to Zee News. This was a much needed effort after the channel’s senior personnel had been accused of trading news for money on another story.

     

    And Zee News should ignore the nay-sayers. Every single media brand in this nation would have killed for this interview.

     

    ***

     

    PS: I am a little confused on why the media chose to keep the rape victim’s identity a secret long after she had passed away. This not only doesn’t make sense, it’s unfair to Pratibha Murthy, Nayana Pujari, Jyotikumari Choudhary and many others. And if you are wondering who these girls are, then that saddens me. It is the loss of public memory that one finds most depressing.

     

  • The Delhi tragedy should serve as a major turning point for us in the media. Despite all the good work, one thing we have lacked in so far is doggedness. We must demonstrate it this time

    Anil Thakraney: Media’s New Year resolution: Not to move on

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Make no mistake about this: Had the crowds not revolted and had the media not kept up the pressure, for sure the horrific Delhi rape case would have become just another sad statistic. The case would have languished in the courts for years and years, exactly what happens in most rape cases. In fact, the cops wouldn’t have demonstrated the urgency to nab the culprits.

     

    However, the real struggle begins now. As the crowds thin out, as other stories take centre stage, the rape case will turn into one more story to be covered. That is in the nature of the media. This must not be allowed to happen. Each one of us journalists, whatever be our field of specialization, must take a solemn oath to not take our eyes off this tragedy, and to keep the relentless pressure on till justice has been delivered to the dead girl and till real change happens in the laws and, more importantly, in their implementation. Till special courts are created all over the nation and till all rape cases get dealt with inside six months. This is going to be a long struggle and we must be prepared for it.

     

    In that sense, the Delhi tragedy should serve as a major turning point for us in the media. Despite all the good work, one thing we have lacked in so far is doggedness. We must demonstrate it this time, and it will become a precedent for the future. The government’s desire has and will always be that the media will forget about stories with time. We must show them that it will not happen on this occasion.

     

    What’s the fear? That the viewers and the readers will get bored with the continuous coverage of the same story? Well, let’s give it a shot to check if that will indeed happen, or if that’s an unfounded notion we in the media harbour. Perhaps the problem lies in our heads. To my mind, the Delhi rape must be used as a lesson to change the way we function. It should not be business as usual. We owe it to the women and to the children of this nation.

     

    Every single one of us in the media must make this change our New Year resolution. Personally, I have taken an oath not to ever move on from this issue. Even at the risk of boring you to death.

     

    ***

     

    PS: Yesss! Exactly my feelings, because India is swarming with stinky, sweaty people. Partly because of the weather, partly because of the over-crowding and partly because of poor self-hygiene. This is one desi ad accidently created abroad.

     

     

  • Here's what I would like to see happen in the New Year

    Anil Thakraney: Badly mangta in 2013 – TV reporters who report, not incite. Freshness in papers. Controversy-free TV measurement. Fewer celebs in ads….

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Here’s what I would like to see happen in the New Year. These are random demands, in no particular order:

     

    1. Innovations and freshness in newspapers and magazines. For their own healthy future, editors need to stop recycling content already put out by the internet and television.

     

    2. Less juvenile chatter by radio jocks, and more music. Also, a limit on ads. Don’t kill the goose that already lays very few golden eggs.

     

    3. A little more objectivity in television debates. Is that too much to ask for? Perhaps it is.

     

    4. And some new voices, please? Quite tired of the same thakela faces, night after night.

     

    5. Less hysteria in the Hindi news channels. A pipe dream, but one lives in hope.

     

    6. No more stories of journos caught demanding money for news. Or canoodling with fixers and agents. Not ever again.

     

    7. TV reporters will report. Not incite mobs. Repeat. Report. Not incite mobs.

     

    8. A strong No 2 at Times Now.

     

    9. Unity amongst ad agencies. No bitching, only constructive meetings.

     

    10. More public service work from creative directors. Anti-rape campaign, anyone?

     

    11. Better creative work in the digital domain. It’s high time this happened.

     

    12. Controversy-free television viewership measurement study.

     

    13. No more hit-and-run journalism. Let’s leave that to Arvind Kejriwal. Hoping for sustained coverage of important stories.

     

    14. Scam-free ad award fests.

     

    15. Self-censorship in the media coverage. No one wants an external monitor.

     

    16. TV soaps will move at a quicker pace. And Bigg Boss will feature at least a few intelligent participants.

     

    17. At least a couple of reasonably good press ads.

     

    18. Fewer number of misleading ads. They give the entire ad world a bad name.

     

    19. Fewer celebrities in ads. More impetus on the idea.

     

    20. To break the monotony of political news, female news anchors to sex up. To get nicely ‘dented and painted’, as that moronic son of Pranabda would put it.

     

    Happy New Year! Cheers!

     

  • The question on everyone’s mind is this: How will his retirement from ODIs affect the champ’s advertising career?

    Anil Thakraney: The challenge for Brand Sachin

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Okay, so Tendlya has finally decided to hang up his large boots. At least from the limited overs format of the game (though am certain his IPL ‘career’ will rock on, too much moolah at stake to let that one go). However, he still seems keen to play test cricket, though many (including me) believe he ought to have resigned from that too.

     

    Anyway, the question on everyone’s mind is this: How will his retirement from ODIs affect the champ’s advertising career? I think it will get hit big-time. For the simple reason that one-day cricket is where the crowds come in, it also allows a player to play a blazing inning. Advertisers would therefore be keener on this particular format. In any case I seriously doubt if at this old age Sachin will be able do anything spectacular in test cricket. All this therefore means there’s very little chance of bagging endorsement deals from here on. So then what can Sachin do to extend his brand franchise?

     

    Well, if he opts for the commentary box or if he turns into a cricket coach, that wouldn’t interest the advertisers one bit. Brand managers like to put their monies only on active players. This is the reason why ex-cricketers like Dravid, Ganguly and others have disappeared from the ads. Sachin’s role model therefore has to be Amitabh Bachchan. He needs to find a path which will either help him remain in the public eye, or the man is able to directly change lives. Just as Bachchan discovered KBC, Sachin needs to explore opportunities in that space. Or, since he’s already an MP, the newly minted politician can dive right into social work. As an example: The anti-rape campaign, which is on top of the agenda for the nation. That would help build the image of a hero who cares for the aam aadmi. That could also result in certain advertisers getting interested.

     

    The point is: Who’s advising the man these days? The right adviser will help Sachin extend his career for many more years (just like Big B). The wrong adviser will ensure Sachin becomes history as far as endorsement deals go. What is of no doubt here is that we are about to witness a terrific case study in human brand marketing.

     

    ***

     

    PS: Yet another cool ad from Nike. In my books, amongst brands that have managed to captivate the junta’s hearts and minds by selling powerful attitude, Nike ranks tops.

    [youtube width=”400″ height=”220″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hEzW1WRFTg[/youtube]
  • So if the battle of 2014 is going to be fought between these two brands, simple marketing logic tells us who's the favourite one to win

    Anil Thakraney: Brand Modi versus Brand Rahul

    By Anil Thakraney

     

    Human beings are brands too. The same principles of product quality, marketing effort, positioning and consumer image apply. Which is why we must evaluate them in terms of pure marketing logic. Today, let’s take up the case of Brand Gandhi Junior and Brand Narendra Modi.

     

    Brand Modi is a powerful brand, and we already know that. Consumers are crystal clear on the positioning, and the brand consistently delivers what it promises. Brand Modi primarily appeals to the emotion, and backs that up with rational logic. The ‘Hindu Fighter’ image appeals to the majority in the state of Gujarat. And for the fence-sitters, it’s the ‘development’ platform that works. In that sense, Brand Modi is perceived to be a complete brand. Therefore even if the rest of India does not favour the primary image of this brand, the saleability increases on account of the secondary promise. This dual positioning will be of immense value for Brand Modi in 2014. What makes this brand even stronger is its charismatic personality, which is supported by aggressive marketing and promotion. Consumers like to be associated with the brand, and this further strengthens saliency.

     

    In short, a clear market positioning, consistent delivery, powerful brand values and a huge consumer connect. Clear winner.

     

    The case of Brand Rahul is the exact opposite. There is no perceptible brand positioning, therefore the consumer is unclear on what it stands for. What makes things worse is that the house from which this brand emanates, its USP, has lost saliency over the years. In addition, Brand Rahul seldom gets promoted in the market place, therefore consumers are kept in the dark on its efficacy. And no one puts money on an ‘enigmatic’ brand, unless it’s a top-end perfume. In addition, on the few occasions Brand Rahul has been made visible in the market, its performance has been a disaster. Therefore, the brand connotes negative values.

     

    In short, vague brand imagery, lack of product performance and poor marketing effort. Clear loser.

     

    So if the battle of 2014 is going to be fought between these two brands, simple marketing logic tells us who’s the favourite one to win. Unless, of course, Brand Rahul does a complete turnaround in the coming period, and I doubt that’s going to happen. It’s a hopeless brand.

     

    ***

     

    PS: Incredible stuff. It’s impossible to believe these are illustrations, not photographs. Now this is art I truly adore. Hope to find such talent in India… imagine the millions of rupees advertisers can save by avoiding over-paid photographers.

     

    Link: http://www.creativebloq.com/illustration/realistic-pencil-drawings-11121172