In Response to Aislynn Sherry...

Which campaign do you think is more successful? Or will be more successful? Do you think these ads are useful and preventative at all?

The Above The Influence advertisements have always been a campaign that is most certainly out of the ordinary. While watching television channels such as MTV and other of the sort, viewers tend to be of a certain young age. This is when demographics come into play. These viewers are used to getting nailed with advertisements promoting sex, drugs and all other variations of the party scene. So, it is definitely influential to promote abstinence to these viewers since it gives off the complete opposite lifestyle they are used to. I personally have seen multiple Above The Influence advertisements and if at the very least they get me thinking. 

With this being said I definitely think that the Above The Influence advertisement campaign is more effective. They have successfully marketed their cause by creating a genius marketing strategy. It is definitely concentrated towards teenagers and young adults. They took advantage of what all the other companies were advertising on these programs by taking a completely different angle. By catching their consumers off guard, they are able to plant the images of their ad in their minds. Some of the advertisements even make the viewer feel guilty for having done certain activities under the influence. Although they seem to have been successful, there are some flaws. 


Above The Influence can tend to advertise situations that are fairly unrealistic. Sometimes they try and give off the persona that things are so simplistic and healthy if you stay above the influence. But, I believe that if they created real world situations showing that things can be okay, but in moderation, it would be much more beneficial. Personally speaking, if I saw an Above The Influence ad that was corny and childish, I would disregard it. People our age know that getting a bunch of people together for a pizza party on a Friday night wouldn't fly with your peers. But, if us consumers were able to see that instead of "blacking out" on the weekends, there are ways that you can have just as much, if not more fun by taking things in moderation. These ads would in fact have to physically show a portrayal of these events. 


Is my view towards advertising wise for Above The Influence? Would you feel more inclined to make a slight change in your partying habits if the ads were not blaming you for your past substance abuse but rather simply encourage a less drastic form of partying?

Pick Up Your Phone, Your Tattoo is Vibrating.

Ever think there is just no way that mobile phone companies can innovate anymore? Well, think again. Nokia has begun making moves towards a new type of personal interaction with your cell phones. The answer is tattoo's. Within the article, Mary Papenfuss writes how Nokia would do this. It is shown that Nokia would create tattoos with "ferromagnetic" material. So, this material would be able to vibrate when you received a call or message. It is said that eventually it could have different pulse patterns to indicate different things. So, there would be no need to constantly check your phone, your tattoo would simply tell you when you needed to.

This whole idea seems very futuristic and quite impressive. But, the marketing aspects to this is what is really going to make or break this new idea. How can Nokia create a broad enough target market to actually make money off of this? Nokia would have to thoroughly examine demographics and psychographics to reach the proper market. Afterall, tattoos are definitely something that not everyone has and is also not accepted by a lot of the older generations. The market for this product would definitely be homogenous meaning that it would be marketed towards individuals or organizations with one product need. Since having tattoos is something that only relates to people that have tattoos or have interest in getting tattoos, their target strategy would have to be very concentrated.

It seems that technology as innovative as this would require a high price. If this is true Nokia may be setting themselves up with a disaster. If a concentrated target strategy is necessary then you already have limited possible consumers. Then, you have to realize that is a homogenous product so it only has one use. With these two set backs you also have to take into account the fact that a lot of people simply do not want tattoos of any kind. Could this actually become something successful for Nokia?