Marketing Phrases, How Important Are They?

When you hear phrases like, “March Madness,” or “Win or Go Home,” most people know exactly what you’re referring to. This media technique is not only used for sporting events but in product marketing as well. When you hear things like, “where’s the beef,” you automatically think, Wendy’s restaurant! You “think” Wendy’s restaurant but does it actually make you want to go out and have Wendy’s? How important is phrase marketing to corporations or events involving corporations? I would say it is very important. Simply because you may not run out and buy the item at this moment but every time you hear a certain phrase, these companies know you’re thinking about them. Slogans have the ability to incite many emotions in the life of the consumer. Whether it’s fear, humor or love, they all have the same objectives and goals. The slogan calls your attention, hopefully all of your attention, to one company or organization. For example, the phrase, “click it or ticket,” is designed to invoke fear of being killed if you do not wear your seatbelt or at the very least, a pretty expensive ticket. Whereas the slogan, “stay thirsty my friends,” invokes a fantasy of being part of an elite group who live life by their own terms.

Slogans and marketing phrases have limitless possibilities if they capture the essence of the event or organization. In other words, a marketing specialist should consider the company’s goals, the nature of the event, and the audience they are trying to attract. In marketing to older generations it may be wise to use a phrase that represents some type of nostalgia for them. On the other hand, if your audience were mostly teenagers it would be wise to consider more tech savvy phrases. One great example is the phrase Apple used when introducing its IPod. "A thousand songs in your pocket," wasn’t just a catch phrase but a literal statement that caught the attention of millions of consumers. Another example is the phrase "grown folks music." Every time my mother hears this phrase she knows this is music she can listen to, and according to her, “actually understand what they’re saying!”

Slogans, catch phrases and cliché’ quotes; whatever marketing technique and strategy works for your organization will be an investment worth perfecting. The ability to reside in the minds of your consumers every time they hear your phrase is one of the most important and profitable aspects to marketing your brand. Trust me, “Just Do It.” I bet you didn’t think of your business when I wrote that, you thought about Nike, if only for a moment. 

Are You Being Watched?

Have you ever had the feeling that you are being watched?  If you have, it's probably because you are.  Most people are aware that their activity online is being monitored by companies looking to advertise their products to interested parties, but what about at sporting events?  Advancements in technology is making it more probable that companies can monitor the facial expressions and behaviors of fans while they're watching their favorite teams play. According to Sean Gregory, arenas are already armed with cameras that allow teams to know the strengths and weaknesses of their players, prospects and opponents, but what happens when you turn the camera towards the fans?

Imagine having the capability to read the behaviors of each and every fan and then cater your marketing  strategies to those behaviors. The possibilities would be endless. In other words, different sports organizations will have the ability to increase every level of fan engagement.  Die hard fans will have the ability to interact with their favorite teams while opportunistic fans can be entertained through social media and picture sharing of their sporting event. In essence this is exactly how marketing executives use information gathered online to market certain products to different individuals.

According to Marlene Cimons, advertising agencies have already adopted the concept of studying human behavior in order to market their products directly to their target audience. They may not be monitoring behavior through hidden cameras but they are definitely "watching" the different websites visited to monitor the interests of future consumers.  I have definitely noticed the similarities in ads that seem to "pop up" whenever I'm browsing the Internet.  It's almost as if they know the items I've bought and the sites I frequent, regardless of whether I buy anything or not.

It is not unreasonable to think that sports organizations are doing the same things online with the addition of using cameras to monitor fan behavior in the actual arenas.  Now, if I decide to go to a football game, it would be pretty obvious that I have no idea what is happening during the game.  Usually, I'm on Facebook or posting pictures on Instagram showing I'm at the game but not necessarily into the game.  Those behaviors would not be hard to read, whereas if I was at a Miami Heat game, my behavior is completely different and I am fully engaged in the entire game.  Having the ability to read fan behavior gives the sports organization vital information on what and who to market to.

Aaron Kahlow suggests in his blog that organizations should be more adept to ask consumers what they want rather than telling them what they want.  Kahlow also suggests tailoring emails to target a specific fan base. I agree with this statement because most people don't want or need news letters and will usually delete the email before it's opened.  You definitely want to avoid sending so much junk to the fans that they also begin to skip over deals and promotions because they're deleting emails before opening them.

As consumers, we are definitely being watched.  I just hope corporations, organizations and even the government understand that there is a fine line between monitoring behavior for marketing purposes and infringing on consumer privacy.

Press Credentials....Denied!

In the world of Professional Sports, the media is considered a friend. After all, how would they distribute their victories and defeats to millions of fans all over the world? This only becomes a problem when certain members of the media are deemed detrimental to the reputation of different sports entities, right?  If so, who makes this determination and what would cause a sports owner to go so far as to deny credentials to the press? If it were as easy as avoiding negative press or trying to control what viewers see, the owners would simply form alliances with media personalities and limit their coverage to them. Unfortunately, it’s not that easy.  Whether it’s a sports fan, owner or sponsor, in most cases they want the coverage of their association to be as objective and fair as possible. So what warrants the denial of press credentials?

In an article written by Glenn Davis, he suggests that a denied press pass is justified in certain instances, such as in the case of the Miami Heat and Scott Raab. Scott Raab wasn’t denied a press-pass simply because of his hatred of LeBron James, but it was his lack of decorum when expressing that hatred toward the super star on twitter. After all, Adrian Wojnarowski wasn’t denied a press pass and he has also been extremely critical of LeBron James. I guess the old saying is true, “It’s not what you say, but how you say it.”

In the case of Josh Gross, Loretta Hunt and Jeff Sherwood, the lack of decorum was definitely on the other foot. Despite the tumultuous history between Dana White and Gross, Hunt and Sherwood, the denying of their press credentials seemed unwarranted. It seems as if the denial was based more on personal reasons rather than questionable media coverage. Here’s the video of the attack on Loretta Hunt and nothing about it gives any reason why her press credentials were denied except the fact the he definitely does not like Loretta Hunt. I guess with anything concerning the media, the facts have to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. It is also imperative to think before you speak or react, because anger has a way of lowering your Intelligence Quotient (IQ) and making you look incredibly ignorant.

Hostility or Passion? Who Decides?

Have you ever worked in a hostile work environment?  If you have, you can understand the stress and mental anguish it can cause.  Not just on your mental abilities but how you perform your job physically as well.  The players under the coaching style of Mike Rice know a hostile work environment first-hand, or do they?  Basketball is not your typical nine to five corporate job, so who decides when a coach has taken his tactics too far and how fine is the line that separates abuse from passion?  According to an article on CBS Sports, former player Austin Johnson states, “at this level, some of that is to be expected.”  This comment suggests there may be some un-written rule to what it takes to be a college player potentially trained for the road to the NBA. 

According to Rutgers contract with Rice, a breach of contract may be subject to perception of Rice’s coaching practices.  An article written by Terrence Payne offers a portion of the contract between Rutgers and Rice and it states:

“Material breach of this contract (won-loss record shall not constitute material breach), neglect of duty, willful misconduct, act(s) of moral turpitude, conduct tending to bring shame or disgrace to the University as determined in good faith by the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics, violation of University regulations, policies, procedures or directives not remedied after thirty (30) days written notice,…criminal conviction, or unapproved absence from duty, other than for a bona fide use of sick leave in accordance with University policy, without the consent of the director.”

When you compare the comments of Austin Johnson to the terms of Rice’s contract, it seems as if this behavior is normal when a student wants to play on a collegiate level.  How do we decipher Rice’s actions to kick his players while coaching them as abuse but accept the occasional “butt pat” of a player as a sign the player has done a good job.  To an outside on-looker, the “butt pat” can be perceived as inappropriate touching but it’s acceptable because we do not associate it with misconduct or acts of moral turpitude.

I am not writing this blog to condone the behavior of Mike Rice but this is just another case in which perception has more ground than what is actually right.  As I try to remain objective in my posts, I cannot help but wonder would Mike Rice still be employed if the coaching video had not gone viral.  Also, what was it that kept the players from seeking some type of justices for themselves?  Maybe, they didn’t realize they were victims of physical and verbal abuse and that’s when perception becomes dangerous.

Copyright Infringement or Fair Use?

This is a logo drawn by Frederick Bouchat in 1995 and submitted to the Baltimore Ravens as a potential logo for their team. In return, Mr. Bouchat wanted a letter giving him credit for the logo design and an autographed team helmet.  This didn’t seem like much to ask considering he was the designer of the logo.

Now, this is the design used by the Baltimore Ravens in their first three seasons as well as a documentary film following the team.  Do you see any similarities?  Absolutely, there is no question that this is an almost duplicate version of the logo designed by Frederick Bouchat in 1995.  Now, despite the fact that he was not credited with the design nor did he receive his autographed team helmet, does he have a legal right to sue for copyright infringement?  Not only does he have the right, but also he has actually tried to sue the Baltimore Ravens numerous times since 1995 over copyright infringement.  Yet, my most pressing question is, why does Hollywood care?  Why are they involved or have any say in this matter whatsoever? 

If you ever find yourself wondering what is the root cause of most lawsuits, or why such a large entity such as Hollywood gets involved in anything, follow the money!  The only interest Hollywood has in this case is the fact that if Bouchat happens to win this case, it will cause problems, financial in nature, for every Hollywood film using logos and other copyrighted material in their films.  Fair use, which is the ability to use copyrighted material in non-profit, educational purposes, is the defense mechanism being used against Frederick Bouchat in order to avoid repercussions from a lost lawsuit.

According to an article posted on Stanford.edu, a win for Bouchat concerning the copyright materials in the documentary film could pose a real threat to documentary filmmakers, news organizations and public broadcasters.  This certainly is true as fair use allows certain copyrighted material to be used when educating or discussing historic events.  Regardless of my opinion, or what anyone thinks the outcome should be, Bouchat feels as if his copyright infringement rights have been violated but he may have to settle for the fact that the Baltimore Ravens have changed their logo and they are no longer using his version of the logo in their advertisements or documentaries.

Although Bouchat has received recognition for his version of the Baltimore Ravens logo, he never received monetary compensation.  As a filmmaker and a student currently studying Sports Management, I agree with both sides of the case.  I agree that Bouchat should have received his recognition in the beginning and when he wasn’t, he should have received monetary compensation after winning his lawsuit.  I also agree with the Baltimore Ravens and the MPAA, this case shouldn’t allow Bouchat to dictate whether or not the logo appears in the documentary or video games because it could change the entire dynamic of Fair Use when it comes to copyrighted materials used correctly under this law.

Business or Personal?

There was a time in the NBA when winning the ultimate prize, The Ring, fueled the competitiveness among the players.  It was the ultimate accomplishment in the NBA.  It allowed the winners to show the world that we, as a team, are the best in the world.  The team would then prepare to maintain that status the next year during the season and again during the playoffs.  This is what made the LeBron James’ decision to move to Miami such a strange but interesting move on his part.  I mean, have you ever heard of Michael Jordan leaving the bulls to play with Charles Barkley so he could win a championship?  No, if Barkley was standing in the way of Jordan winning the championship, he did what he had to do to beat him.

My question is why did LeBron leave Cleveland to join Miami?  Did he want to win a championship so badly that he believed he could not do it with the team he was presently with?  Also, what will this mean for his name and the rest of his career?  According to Darren Rovell of CNBC, LeBron’s decision continues to be a blemish on his marketability.  Yet, people’s trust concerning LeBron is up from 49 percent at the end of last season and 53 percent after “The Decision,” according to Rovell.  

Regardless of the personal feelings fans may have against James, it’s hard to bring down an individual as valuable as the LeBron James franchise.  Mike Ozanian of Forbes, states LeBron’s decision affected the profitability of two NBA team owners.  A year after losing James to Miami, the value of the Cavaliers fell 26% and television ratings plummeted 55%.  Miami’s value increased by 17% and their television ratings doubled.  Dan Gilbert (Cavalier Team Owner) is worth $1.5 Billion but Micky Arison (Miami Team Owner) is worth $4.7 Billion and this fact alone speaks volumes.  This proves that LeBron is not only a star on the court but is highly capable of becoming one of the worlds most successful Business Moguls as well. 

LeBron James is happy in Miami despite reports of having difficulties with Pat Riley (Miami’s team President).  I believe LeBron is a determined athlete who works hard and has the ability to succeed at whatever he puts his mind to.  Right now, his mind is on the Miami Heat.  Who knows what the future holds for the Heat or LeBron James, I say we sit back and enjoy the show, for however long it lasts.