The first essentially calls me a criminal while the second effectively raises awareness and gets you thinking. Now tell me, which do you prefer?
Perhaps in a few months we’ll see audio options to wipe out Skype and finally video options to bin ooVoo?
Perhaps this video isn’t too inaccurate..?
I’ve always found the bottled water market interesting. I never thought I’d find myself purchasing something you could just as easily get for free but now I do.
Apparently it’s a very competitive market. So competitive in fact, particularly in the flavoured water market, that… well… you can see for yourself…
Two complete difference brands, Nutrient Water and Vitamin Water, yet so similar. The one thing I do like is the creative copy, although its not as clever as Another Bloody Water, which I’ve already blogged about.
But what I find most interesting about the bottled water market is the brand Evian. It’s either incredibly creative or just plain stupid, but if you spell Evian backwards you get… Naive. Perhaps I should reconsider my decision to purchase bottled water in future.
And on a side note, Stan, note the use of reflections in the first image.
On one hand, the promotion is far better. They’ve been using Hamish and Andy by asking contestants to do things that make you go “Grr” for $1,000. One contestant had to get home wearing just his underwear. Another had to listen to the same song for two hours. I’ve also seen some clever print ads.
On the other hand, I’m failing to see the brand tie in. There is a small Optus logo on the website but I’m really not seeing the connection. Perhaps its a shampaign with more to come soon… perhaps not.
I’ll be interested to see where this goes.
And on a side note, the thing that makes me go “Grr” at the moment is Connex.
The group has generated a lot of interest lately, so much so that people have been organising their own stunts in their own countries. Check out their Ning site here to sign up.
Melbourne’s very own freeze is happening on the 29th of April at Federation Square. Do you think more than five people will turn up? If so, is this something the media will jump on?
For those of you unfamiliar with the Harvard Referencing System, the title refers to an intext reference. However you would never see a reference from Wikipedia because it is not an legitimately recognised source. This is of course ignoring the fact that Wikipedia now has over two million articles making it the largest ever encyclopedia. This is also forgetting that this is the most contributed to with over two hundred million edits, creating the most unbiased source of information on the Interweb.
So why can’t this be used as a credible source? To further establish their credibility, Wikipedia has recently implemented a mandatory referencing system, particularly on theory based articles. We’ve also seen Google launch Google Scholar allowing the search for academic based journals and articles.
The way in which we seek information has changed. I am a University student who has never been into the library. So why isn’t it possible to reference the biggest source of information on the Internet? Or a blog? Or a podcast? The Internet is no longer a source people can’t trust.
The academics of today are not living in today’s world where the way in which we communicate has changed.
It seems to blog about marketing means you have to make some occasional prediction, usually about a future trend. I don’t have much to offer today but here is a small insight of mine.
will be replaced by while will be replaced by .
And we can only hope that the use of is made illegal.