Morning Update: Oct 3 – Burger King’s temporary rebrand; CMOs should live their brands; How the NYT describes Twitter
This is Morning Update, our overnight wrap up of the international media and marketing news.
Ad Week: Burger King’s name change to Fries King is making people hungry and confused – the burger chain has rebranded in a stunt to promote its new low fat fries.
“(Burger King) is taking this obsession a step further by pretending to change its name to Fries King—and posting a load of photos to Facebook showing the unveiling of a new corporate identity.
“There are a few downsides to this. First, it implies the burgers are probably not very good. And second, it confuses people—many of whom on Twitter clearly don’t know how to respond. On the plus side, it does appear to be making people hungry.”
Ad Age: CMOs, Agencies: It’s time to live your brands – marketers need to be more engaged with their brands.
“When an unhappy British Airways passenger can pay Twitter to show his complaint to tens of thousands of potentially interested people, it’s safe to say something profound has changed.”
“A consumer’s megaphone is now, sometimes at least, more powerful than a brand’s. Individuals can bring a huge company to its knees — or help launch a small brand to national recognition simply by sharing their experiences and opinions on Facebook, Yelp, Twitter, Instagram or other social forums.”
Quartz: The complete history of Twitter as told through tortured descriptions of it in the New York Times – a website has tracked the descriptions of the social media platform.
“I’ve culled some of the many thousands of times Twitter has appeared in the New York Times, from its first year in 2006 to the wall-to-wall coverage that accompanied its announcement of a planned IPO last month. Along the way, Times wordsmiths grappled with exactly how to explain an entirely new form of media to the American populace.”
Jim Romensko: Washington Post releases the confidential information – the newspaper accidentally releases the names of the journalists who received stock options.
“About three weeks ago, the Washington Post Co. sent an email to 63 newsroom employees who have received stock-option bonuses. “The options were apparently awarded over the past three years as a reward for work that top editors liked and/or as a way to keep people from leaving the paper,” my source writes.”
