Brand Busting

A number of companies, mostly major, but also smaller, fulfil their need to shape a public profile by adopting a slogan or some form of mission statement which can be a very strong part of, if not the entire, overall brand.

If it’s strong, relevant, and pertinent to their operations it often works; the degree to which it succeeds depends on the credibility of that group’s image perceived by the market.

But this is helpful only when that message is true, and the brand is strong. When such a truth is stretched, or undermined just a little, then the entire credibility of that organisation becomes suspect to a discerning person. The branding is blown.

Serious and large on-air dismantling of the brand is what I suggest is happening at present to one radio station in Sydney.

The group, which serves this spot on the FM dial, also runs a similar outlet in Melbourne. So far, I have not listened to it, but suspect that their image would be the same as that of Sydney.

The format niche in the radio audiences occupied by this station, that of a simple, focused music concept that would appeal to the 35-54 audience would appear to be valid, with research showing that broadcasters in similar global markets where thiskind of format exists, Magic in London, Coast FM in Auckland, and Lite FM in New York, are number one or two in their respective markets.

The company’s policy is to present relaxed, smooth listening with the claim of “more music, less talk”, and the slogan “your easy place to relax”.

They underscore their strategy reasonably clearly with their media statement: “When you live in world class cities like Sydney and Melbourne, life can be pretty hectic. With a playlist including the greatest hits and contemporary easy listening music, the station will be a place for listeners to tune in, and forget the hassles of the day, a great place to relax and unwind.”

That claim seems to be executed well in a presentation style where the on-air personalities have a manner, which flows gently to suit the nature of the music played, music which avoids extremes at either end of the excitement spectrum.

I believe that music, as an entertainment and an art form, is accepted readily because, among other things, it triggers various feelings, memories, and emotional responses; it can evoke a wide range of moods ranging through stirring, dramatic, scenic, comedy, sorrow, love, intensity or lightness.

The music played on this station certainly is what is claimed to be – a soft, adult contemporary style, although perhaps bordering on the saccharine at times. I choose to listen to it rather than programme my own player, because its breadth of variety is wide and the repertoire less predictable, although the playlist could be a bit less repetitious.

For these reasons I find the site suited ideally as a background for when I am relaxing and walking, or else working. Depending on my mood at the time, it can stimulate close attention, or else be simply musical wallpaper, but it’s always calming. Most of the time.

Then, the entire concept of the station’s being an ‘easy place to relax’ is often blown by a burst of raucous advertising. I am assaulted by shrieking declamatory exhortations from a couple of home furnishing or accessory chains. This so-called ‘easy place to relax’ ceases to exist on a station whose advertising content is biased more towards retail, than brand.

One of those advertisers prides himself on running highly successful ‘category killer’ stores.

Gerry, the only category you’re killing for me is that of relaxation! You appear to be running commercial sound tracks designed for airing on more down-market TV stations, on a station totally unsuited to that ultra hard-sell approach. Those for your wife’s chain are no better.

It is a paradox that your retail group’s current profitability is very strong, but I would suggest that this is not due purely to its presence on the station in question, but to campaigns on those which appeal to a different demographic.

On that basis, advertising on an easy place to relax probably does no harm except to make a bigger dint in your budget, and a massive annoyance to listeners who were duped into believing that they had found a haven of more music and less, or at least calmer, talk.

There is certainly a place for a gross hard-sell advertising manner. I noticed that approach work effectively in my initial media days in radio, then later in television.

When I moved into advertising, I produced some of the most offensive and complained-about television retail food commercials ever, but knew the demographic my agency was targeting - not a discerning, affluent, cultural elite, but what one Sydney radio presenter refers to as “struggle street”, folk for whom every dollar they spent had to give the maximum outcome and return – better value for money.

The driving pointers of this campaign were price, and product sourcing – amazingly low prices for strong food and drink brands, often loss-leaders, at numerous readily-visited locations and stores. Our client enjoyed massive sales because of the agency owner’s advertising savvy and sheer bravado, and was a winner in that notoriously competitive and difficult marketplace. His participants’ cash registers proved the correctness of the sales strategy after every burst of this humorously offensive advertising.

But this kind of promotion was always placed skilfully within or around popular TV programmes nationally which suited that style, never in upmarket, quality shows where it would have been completely out of place.

The reason for my writing is to draw attention to the corporate danger of suggesting one image, yet creating the opposite: the conscious decision to downgrade the characteristic of a brand.  

It causes me to ask when, or if, that station’s management would ever have the guts to decide whether they want their image to remain solidly credible by refusing to broadcast advertising which does not reflect the station’s style, or else fall prey, gullibly, to the advertising revenue bait dangled at them.

Programming sensitivity and promotional believability crumbles further when, after a break which sometimes contains recorded rushed bellowed busking, the presenter switches to full smarm, and invites the listeners warmly to continue enjoying “your easy place to relax”.

To be fair, a vast amount of this station’s advertising is just that - gentle and friendly, believable in keeping with the brand, and probably produced in-house to suit the format, but this just raises a greater credibility gap when those screamers bust the branding.

I wonder if the cliché “horses for courses” has ever entered the corporate mind of this broadcaster? If not, then it’s time to saddle up, and ride off into the field of image credibility.