According to the Law of Attraction, you get what you think about (Watch the Michael Losier video below).

So if you say to someone “don’t slam the door”, they will slam the door. But if you ask them to “close the door quietly” they will close the door quietly.

The premise is, think more about what you DO want and less about what you DON’T.

I thought it would be interesting to look at how this law of attraction rule would affect advertising campaigns, which tell us what NOT to do.

Would they work if they told us what TO do instead?

Let’s take a look at this anti binge drinking advert as an example…

The strapline in the advert includes the term “Don’t Be A Drinkhead”. Going by the previous example this would be a akin to the “don’t slam the door” approach rather than “close the door quietly”.

If the main text

“Every night, binge drinkers put themselves at risk getting into illegal taxis”

was rewritten concentrating on the positive, i.e. how the government DOES want us to act, it could read somthing like this…

“Drink safely. Call for a licensed taxi to get home”

But surely by the law of attraction, Drink safely would encourage people to drink.

“Enjoy yourself. Call for a licensed taxi to get home.” would be another option which encourages enjoyment, and safety, without mentioning alcohol.

Basically there would be more focus on what IS wanted (to keep safe) and less on the behaviour that ISN’T (to put yourself at risk).

Government organisations seem to resort to advertising from the negative. Do “Don’t Drink and Drive” and “Stop Smoking” ads really work, or do they actually glamourise and create more drink drivers and smokers?

Comment on this article ...

According to The Sun she will be back with a new reality show.

See my article The Return of Jade Goody

Comment on this article ...

In my last study Cheryl Cole beat her Girls Aloud bandmates hands down and was rated the most talked about Girls Aloud star on the internet.

Now I have analysed who is the most talked about royal couple online, Prince William and Kate Middleton or Prince Harry and Chelsy Davy.

Google Search Results
Kate Middleton - 1,220,000
Chelsy Davy - 269,000
Prince William - 6,890,000
Prince Harry - 1,090,000
Winner: Prince William & Kate Middleton by 84%

Yahoo Images
Kate Middleton - 3,802
Chelsy Davy - 269
Prince William - 112,869
Prince Harry - 12,384
Winner: Prince William & Kate Middleton by 90%

Wikipedia Activity
Kate Middleton - 6 edits so far this month
Chelsy Davy - 9 edits so far this month
Prince William - 45 edits so far this month
Prince Harry - 15 edits so far this month
Winner: Prince William & Kate Middleton

Hellomagazine.com profiles
Kate Middleton - 567 words
Chelsy Davy - 464 words
Prince William - 759 words
Prince Harry - 757 words
Winner: Prince William & Kate Middleton by 8%

Blog mentions in May 2008
Kate Middleton - 1,168
Chelsy Davy - 1,002
Prince William - 11,544
Prince Harry - 3,022
Winner: Prince William & Kate Middleton by 69%

News mentions in the past week
Prince William & Kate Middleton - 743
Prince Harry & Chelsy Davy - 601
Winner: Prince William & Kate Middleton by 19%

OVERALL WINNER: William & Kate

Comments (1)

Two parties. One night. Second stop: The BT PodShow launch party at Shoreditch House.

Shoreditch House is erm… very Shoreditch. Too cool for school, rough around the edges but glam enough for the most fabulous glamonistas.

The perfect place then for BT to launch it’s PodShow website BTPodshow.com.

Who would have thought that one of the UK’s most boring corporate brands would align itself to such a trendy London hang out?

Party goers were “treated” to a collection of video podcasts from the website. The sound of the videos was muted and we listened to the tones of the resident DJ.

Zoe and I missed Alexa Chung’s set as we were too busy people watching at The Hoxton Pony launch, but we did spot a very crazy Alice Dellal and her very EC1 crowd out-trendying (is that a word?) everyone and being the epitome of Hoxton cool.

Visit the BT Podshow website.

Click here to read about The Hoxton Pony launch party

Comments (9)

Bad publicity offline has positive effects online.

By reporting ITV’s record fine from Ofcom, the BBC News website has helped ITV.com’s online rating by linking to it.

Every link to ITV.com that Google finds across the web makes ITV.com more important.

And there’s no stronger link than one from one of the UK’s most respected and high profile websites - BBC News.

with every cloud there’s a silver lining, and ITV’s silver lining in this phone scandal debacle, is a web link from the BBC.

(No link is worth a £5.68m fine, but you get my drift)

Comment on this article ...

This week Tom Cruise launched his new website and appeard on Oprah to celebrate twenty five years of movies.

Apparently all part of a PR campaign to focus Brand Cruise on his acting and away from Scientology.

Tom has to deal with the fact that when you type ‘Tom Cruise’ into Google the third result, after his IMDB and Wikipedia profiles, is the Tom Cruise is Nuts website.

The hate site hasn’t been updated since September 2006, but it’s still up and terribly damaging for Tom’s online reputation.

The internet’s a free world so to speak, and although he could sue or have his lawyers send stern letters, it would be better for Tom’s PR machine to hire the expertise of an SEO (search engine optimisation) expert or Online PR specialist to bury anti-Tom websites.

An SEO/online PR specialist - like moi - has the know how to bury the Tom Cruise is Nuts website by elevating pro-Tom websites to the top of Google’s search results.

Tom’s people need to start linking to Pro-Tom websites from his official website. It kind of works like this…

Blogs and websites, like this one, make tomcruise.com popular by linking to it
Which means...
tomcruise.com becomes popular
So then...
Google will think websites that are featured on tomcruise.com should be popular too
This means that...
It will start to rank websites that are linked to from tomcruise.com higher in the search results than those that aren’t
Which ultimately leads to...
The Tom Cruise is Nuts website, which obviously won’t be linked to from tomcruise.com, disappearing from the top of the search results

That’s the simple version of how to stop Tom Cruise from appearing “nuts” but if you want to know more detail about the dark world of SEO I suggest you read up on it at Wikipedia!

Don’t say I never teach you anything.

Tom on Oprah

Comments (2)

Cheryl Cole IS the most famous Girls Aloud member on the internet.

I analysed everything from how many search results each girl attracted on Google and YouTube, the amount of mentions they have on blogs and how many threads they have dedicated to them on their official message board and the popular Digital Spy.

Measuring online popularity adds a different dimension to the commonly tracked newspaper and magazine column inches.

Online popularity measures what individuals are publishing (on blogs and forums) as well as what the major newspapers and magazines are printing.

But if Cheryl came top, who came bottom? Read on…

RESULTS:
1. Cheryl Cole
Cheryl won all but one of the tests hands down. Cheryl’s marriage to Ashley Cole and feature on Will.I.Am’s Heartbreaker has pushed Cheryl’s online fame above that of her Girls Aloud bandmates.

2. Sarah Harding
Photoshoots for OK! Magazine have paid off. Sarah scored particularly well on the Digital Spy Showbiz forum, proving her popularity with celebrity culture vultures is high.

3. Nadine Coyle
Nadine has a high blog mention score, indicating her relationship with Jesse Metcalfe has increased her awareness on American celebrity gossip blogs.

4. Nicola Roberts
Somehow Nicole scored highest on the QDOS test. QDOS uses a number of measures to analyse the digital status of individuals.

5. Kimberley Walsh
Kimberley scored badly when analysing conversations on the official Girls Aloud messageboard.

Winner of each test in italics

Google Search Results
Cheryl Cole - 734,000
Kimberley Walsh - 149,000
Nadine Coyle - 273,000
Nicola Roberts - 234,000
Sarah Harding - 618,000

YouTube Video Tags
Cheryl Cole - 942
Kimberley Walsh - 581
Nadine Coyle - 488
Nicola Roberts - 441
Sarah Harding - 545

Blog mentions
Cheryl Cole - 276,457
Kimberley Walsh - 3,154
Nadine Coyle - 8,584
Nicola Roberts - 3,430
Sarah Harding - 8,405

QDOS Rating
Cheryl Cole - 6331
Kimberley Walsh - 6575
Nadine Coyle - 6684
Nicola Roberts - 6733
Sarah Harding - 6371

Digital Spy Showbiz Forum
Cheryl Cole - 155
Kimberley Walsh - 27
Nadine Coyle - 53
Nicola Roberts - 26
Sarah Harding - 107

Girls Aloud Forum
Cheryl Cole - 6463
Kimberley Walsh - 2845
Nadine Coyle - 4787
Nicola Roberts - 3208
Sarah Harding - 5073

Comments (7)

There’s a famous saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. And isn’t OK! magazine sticking to the rule. Jordan (Katie Price) and Kerry Katona practically own the front cover of OK! magazine, with the pair appearing on the front almost most of the time.

The formula of using Katie Price and Kerry Katona to sell magazines works. It’s worked well for OK! magazine, which seems to have exclusive deals with the pair, since they appeared on ITV1’s I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here in 2004.

Everyone’s a winner. Katie and Kerry get the publicity and an avenue for their version of the “truth” sorrounding press rumours, OK! magazine gets the sales and advertisers grab the eyeballs of their target market.

But how vulnerable is this business model for all parties concerened?

OK! Magazine
There’s no such thing as loyalty in the business world, and certainly not in the land of celebdom. Katie and Kerry give their exclusives (weddings, new births, pregnancy announcements, post surgery pics) to OK! but they’re still free to talk to rival celeb weeklies.

If either of the pair decided to take their exclusives elsewhere it could mean a dip in sales for OK! magazine. They would then have to presumably spend four years building up another reality TV celebrity that it could exploit.

Why are they not doing this already with Michelle Heaton? Although covers with Michelle would sell less than Katie and Kerry now, the magazine could help generate interest in Michelle and build Brand Heaton up to become their next big seller.

This would leave them in a less vulnerable position, should either of the Ks decide to share their latest heartache, nightmare, hell and baby photos to another weekly mag.

Katie and Kerry
What happens when readers get bored of Katie and Kerry?

There will probably always be some sort of interest in Katie Price and Kerry Katona, but they could stop appealing to OK! magazine’s demographic. Their popularity, or noteriety, may shift from the type of popularity that sells magazines.

There is also a risk that these constant magazine “exclusives” could hurt sales of their many autobiographies. Some would say it helps promote them, but really, how much more can they possibly have to tell in a book that hasn’t been published in a weekly mag?

Advertisers
Many beauty brands will be aiming to target a demographic of women interested in celebrity culture.

They may not be looking for the kind of reader who may find someone like Kerry Katona a role model or an aspirational figure. If this is the case they may not want their brand associated with a magazine brand that is heavily associated with her.

However, it must be said that there are many brands that will want to attract Katona idolisers.

What do you think of Kerry and Jordan on OK! Magazine? Have your say below.

Comments (6)

So Friends Reunited is free and hoping to take on Facebook. Many would say it’s taken ITV, owners of Friends Reunited, far too long to drop the subscription model.

With 19 million registered users the website doesn’t fall into the niche/specialist social network category. Instead it’s hoping to take on the broader networks like Facebook.

Here are five things Friends Reunited has to its advantage over Facebook…

1. The Privacy Debate
Trust in some social networks is decreasing because of debates sorrounding how private data is collected and used for advertising purposes. Friends Reunited as a brand has so far managed not to fall foul of such negative PR.

2. Audience Age
The older audience, who are more likely to worry about their privacy, will have more money to spend, and more free time to use the internet. This means extra revenue driving opportunities and more advertisers seeking [older] people with higher disposable incomes.

3. ITV Network
With ITV.com’s Catch Up service becoming more popular it’s the perfect time to showcase the new Friends Reunited with in-house promotion.

4. Genes Reunited
Genealogy is big business. If they can successfully use genealogy as a hook into the main website they’re onto a winner.

5. It’s British
Nowt wrong with a bit of national pride!

My take is that, although it’s unlikely to rule the social networking world, there is a definitely a market for Friends Reunited.

PS - If you’re impressed with the new Timeline feature on Friends Reunited, I suggest you check out miomi.com

Comment on this article ...

So ASOS, formerly As Seen on Screen, has announced a 90% increase in year-on-year sales (£81m).

Does this mean they’ve got the market sewn up? Have they created a product/brand/service that fashionistas just can’t live without? And is this a web business that is simply untouchable?

Figures, numbers and a four pence increase in the company’s share price would suggest so.

Although ASOS is a business that has so far understood how web works and constantly adapts its brand, I would say there needs to be some caution when celebrating its success.

Yes, it has virtually come from nowhere to compete with bricks and mortar brands. Yes, it has picked up on a niche (celebrity fashion) at the right time and yes, it has grown into a beast that has fashion brands dying to be a part of it. But how long will it last?

I reckon ASOS is in danger of becoming the Yahoo! of the online fashion world. Not that Yahoo!, which is worth $44bn, is a failure, but it’s hardly Google - the first name in search.

Online fashion is still a growing market (as was search), and ASOS seems to be one of the first online only beneficiaries (as was Yahoo). But then will come along a product that’s bigger and better (just like Google).

Comment on this article ...

The size zero debate has been done to death, and eco fashion on the catwalk is yesterday’s news.

It looks as if the focus is going to be on models of colour. Or the distinct lack of models of colour.

Naomi Campbell and Diddy on the cover of Vogue October 2001

I was pleased (so to speak) when Naomi Capbell first spoke out about black models rarely being chosen for advertising.

According to The Independent on Sunday Carole White from the Premier Model Agency has said she has received briefs from clients stating “no ethnics”. Can you believe this happens in this day and age?!

Whilst many commentators will conclude the fashion industry is racist, should we not instead look to why they are - if such allegations are true - doing it?

Money makes the world go round. Advertisers want people to spend, spend and spend. If they’re finding that only white models inspire people to spend would we not then lay the ‘racism’ tag at the general public?

Afterall, if people were equally inspired to spend a product modelled by a black model as much as a white model surely fashion brands wouldn’t engage in a “no ethnics” practice.

Wherever the root cause of this problem exists there is undoubtedly a problem. Hopefully, this debate will lead people to think “do I only react to advertising which uses people that look like me?”

I would guess the honest answer would be uncomfortable for most, if not all, of us.

Comments (4)

Seth Godin recently published the five step brand lifecycle.

Does the cycle really end at ‘Who is Brad Pitt?’. I don’t think so. Nostalgia culture extends the brand lifecycle.

The music industry, using band reunions (Take That, New Kids on the Block) and cover versions to make money, and the fashion industry, which has seen an increase in sales of vintage clothing, both rely on nostalgia and the old.

Many of these brands never die, they just sleep.

So after ‘Who is Brad Pitt?’ it would be…

- I wonder what happened to Brad Pitt.

- Get Brad Pitt back.

- Get me someone like Brad Pitt, who was around the same time as Brad Pitt.

Comments (3)

As well as a directory enquiries service, you can now call or text 118 118 to answer a question on anything with their ‘Ask us Anything’ service.

I decided to try this out by texting…

What are the three most popular fashion websites in the UK?

To which 22 minutes later I received the response…

According to the BBC, Marks and Spencer’s website has topped the fashion retail along with rivals Next and Top Shop. Thanks for texting the 118 Team.

I suspect they got the answer from this BBC News report on website usability.

Before I had time to finish reading the answer I had another text from 118 118…

The 118118 text team felt that the last answer took us longer to answer than we’d like. So this time we haven’t charged you. Please text 118118 again soon.

But I suppose my vague question warranted a vague, and slow, response. Perhaps I should have been more specific and asked “what are the top three fashion etailers in the UK by sales?”

Answer: Marks and Spencer, Next, ASOS

Comment on this article ...

I’ve just come back from the launch party of Project Catwalk judge, Nick Ede, and Clothes Show presenter Brendan Courtney’s new personal styling service I Hate My Look at Punk nightclub, hang out of celebs like Peaches Geldof and Agyness Deyn.

I spotted the guys from the Daily Mail and OK! magazine there snapping all the celebrities (one of whom came, had her photo taken, then left - she shall remain nameless).

Check out Nick and Brendan’s website www.ihatemylook.com

As I was leaving the event Anna Krahn, from Tara Palmer-Tompkinson’s website 3sacrowd.com, ran up the stairs to stop me to say hello (she’s a fab writer who goes to lots of parties and premieres).

I didn’t get a goody bag as I left early, but I will make it my mission to find out what was inside and let you know!

Tonight was an early one, as I’m saving myself for something exciting that’s happening tomorrow night.

Comments (1)

Here are a couple of photos from Alison Jackson’s new collection, which I saw last week at the private viewing at Hamilton’s Gallery.

Amy in Bed, 2008

Photographs Copyright Alison Jackson. Hair by Runar at Cobella, Kensington, London.

Cowell’s Workout, 2008

Comments (1)