Toyota Apology-athon

All this press over the Toyota recalls made me think of 1982 Tylenol crisis where people were reported dead after taking extra-strength Tylenol capsules. On of Johnson and Johnson’s crisis management techniques was its quick  and total response. J & J made it clear right from the start that they put people over profit through an immediate sincere apology and aggressive recall action.

Toyota has sent the opposite signal. They were slow to apologize and slow to react. At first they the press couldn’t even track down CEO Toyoda. Not thinking the crisis was important enough he remained at a World Economic summit in Switzerland where he only made a brief comment because the press forced him right before he sped off in an Audi.

He made his first official public appearance only after two weeks of the company facing a growing crisis over the safety and quality of its vehicles. At the press conference he apologized for the problems that led to the company’s recall of more than 8 million cars, but did not announce any solution for brake problems of its popular Prius hybrid. At a later date Toyota ended up announcing additional recalls on the Prius.

Then Mr. Toyoda apologized again but said he was not going to testify before congress. He delegated that responsibility down to the heads of the U.S. operations. But then later he apologized again saying he changed his mind and would testify. If decisiveness builds confidence Mr. Toyoda is doing the opposite.

Instead of acting quickly and aggressive to show that they put public safety first Toyota has taken a wait and see approach every step of the way giving the public the impression that they will only do what the public forces them to do to protect every bit of profit it can.

Instead of Toyota affirming their company’s concern for their customer’s safety with immediate apology from the company’s leader and aggressive action they now have that president testifying before Congress defending his company’s reaction to the crisis and trying to convince the public that his repeated apologies are sincere. But I don’t think the public is fooled. Actions speak louder than words (“Toyota Chief Hammered by Lawmakers Despite Apology” 2010).

How much money and time did the company invest to get Five Star Crash Ratings? What is it worth now?

Can Direct Response Be Creative?

You’ve seen this kind of ad – huge logo, direct no frills headline, star burst and a lot of information and photos packed together. Does direct response have to be this way?

In Adweek a couple of years ago a direct marketing practitioner John Livengood talk about the perception that direct marketing creative is not very creative compared to general advertising. Cost cuts in direct marketing resulted in low production values, creatives with poor conceptual skills, bad design sense and copy that feels like a used car pitch. But times are changing as brand/awareness advertising is feeling pressure to become more accountable while direct marketing agencies are being pressured to deliver more conceptual thinking and brand-building work

But others say stick to the basics. Professor John Philip Jones’ says that direct response creative should not use the puns, plays on words, jingles and jokes of general advertising. Direct response advertising can’t take a chance in not being understood in an effort to be humorous or entertaining. It must have simple, straightforward statements. Go for the “no-brainer” creative solution instead of reinventing the wheel. Direct response is more of a science where you use the words that have worked in the past like “free,” “announcing,” “new,” “now,” and “you.”

GEICO Direct is an example of a direct response success story. It uses humorous ad appeals and innovative television media buys to sell car insurance direct. The campaign was created by general advertising agency the Martin Agency and won many creative awards while selling a lot of car insurance. Maybe being different and trying new things can really pay off. What is your viewpoint on direct response creative?