Well, dress me up in a three-piece suit and call me a Rotman School of Management professor! According to a Star editorial today by RSM marketing prof David Dunne, I am exactly on the same page as MBA-trainers when it comes to those dismal Toronto: Live with Culture ads. (Spacing’s own Shawn Micallef critiqued these on the Wire yesterday; you can scroll down a couple posts down for his thoughts.)
Dunne says, “Great brands must be clear, distinctive, and stand for something.” Exactly. While the developers of those sad recent ads aimed (and the aim is honorable) at “edginess,” it was through a branding strategy of civic self-deprecation. They failed to recognize that you can’t self-deprecate (or in any way play off, even positively) of something that doesn’t freakin’ have an identifiable external image, and certainly not one that is based around low self-esteem.
Personally, I never associated low self-esteem (one of the key components of these ads) with Toronto until I arrived here after living across the country and also for a time in the States. You go to Miami, or San Francisco, or New York and say “what do you think of Toronto?” and I predict that rarely will it be something along the lines of “compares itself to other ‘world-class’ cities too much” or “has got an inferiority complex”. More likely it will be “cold,” “nice,” “clean,” or “yeah, I know someone in Canada, in Regina… do you know them?” To try and encourage inferences that go far beyond these existing tropes into civic neurosis observable only from within is ridiculous.
Also, simply as an ad-project critique, there’s a massive thought process demanded of the consumer, even for those aware of Toronto’s self-esteem problem. I seriously shudder to think about the series of logistical leaps required for an outside, non-Torontonian consumer to even decipher the “joke” at the heart of these ads. Like, hm, woman thinks her boobs are too big. But they’re small. And this has something to do with… Toronto. And film. And Hollywood. Do women have small boobs in Toronto? In Hollywood? Oh, right boob jobs are popular in Hollywood. Where they make films. And maybe people need more boob jobs in Toronto? No, they just want smaller boobs. Do they make films there? I think there’s a festival.
(It’s also extremely angrifying, as hinted at above, to see the anti-woman angle presented in this whole series of ads, from the pregnant woman being denied a cab, to the boob-conscious woman, to the middle-aged lady being romantically rebuffed, to the acting out of cliched French maid fantasy. Did anyone with ovaries vet these ads, or find them remotely funny?)
Back to Dunne: “The most famous tourism campaigns… usually tap into existing beliefs, building on what people already believe to be true about the destination…. [also] those who live in the destination have to buy into the campaign and get behind it.”
In line with Dunne’s thoughts, I want to give props to the already-existing and then-jettisoned campaign that I believe, as someone who has and has not lived here, could reach to that level of emotional buy-in. And that is the “Toronto: You belong here” campaign.
First, it’s got an emotional pull. When I first moved to Smogville, seeing those “Toronto: You belong here” bumper stickers on local cabs helped the chaos of moving feel more worth it. In a dystopia of transience, it made me feel utopian. And that’s key, especially in a city where so many people come from other places.
Second, it references something that we, and and a lot of outsiders, actually know about the city — that it’s incredibly diverse. It’s diverse culturally, with communities and citizens from all over the world. But it’s diverse subculturally as well, with everything from opera and fine art to basketball and hip-hop to baseball and classic rock (I’m using broad stereotypes and sort of implying that opera is a sport here, but roll with me for a second) all in one place. And both of those kinds of diversity mean that “Toronto: You belong here” applies to almost any viewer/consumer.
Third, it’s broad enough to be applied to targeted campaigns across different markets. (This is part of what the City was aiming at with “Toronto Unlimited,” but only blandly manifested.) Like you could place ads in sports mags, music mags, alt-weeklies, major dailies, food mags, and overseas media using this same tagline with slightly differing copy.
What I’m thinking about specifically is a bit of a rip of those Mastercard ads; but what about seeing the following in SPIN (all numbers completely fudged at this point): “200 Pitchfork-praised bands. 23 independent record stores. 80 live music concerts every night of the week. Toronto: You belong here. [Small print] For more information about NXNE packages, check www.torontoyoubelonghere.com.” Or maybe this in the Times literary supplement: “50 independent book publishers. 300 award-winning authors. 897 editors. 3 premier literary festivals. Toronto: You belong here. [Small print] For information about IFOA packages, check www.torontoyoubelonghere.com.” Or even, to get back to that Toronto Unlimited corporati segment, how about seeing this in the Wall Street Journal? “342 head offices. 108 Fortune 500 companies. 517 varieties of scotch. One of the world’s largest stock exchanges. Toronto: You belong here. [Small print] For information on business advantages in Toronto check www.torontoyoubelonghere.com.”
OK, I’ve gone on long enough. And yes, I have heard that this Lastman-era, post-SARS tagline gives a lot of City bureaus the shivers. But it’s still got plenty of marketing goodness that can be milked from it. Would you support its reinstatement?
16 comments
yes yes yes!
I gotta say that I was put off by Shawn’s statement yesterday that “This campaign has already received flack from the usual nattering nabobs of negativity in media circles,” implying that those who were disappointed by it reacted as such because of a predisposition towards “negativity.”
I wonder if Shawn considers you a downer for making observations about the sexism and convolutedness of the ads.
Hey, I think Shawn actually did a good job in critiquing the ads from his own perspective — I don’t think I made that completely clear at first. Though I’m obviously in love with “Toronto: You Belong Here” I also think an ad campaign based on individual “Toronto stories,” which he alluded to, could be viable.
Still, yeah, women being the butt of the jokes riles me, not to mention the complete lack of visible minorities. Not to mention the heterosexism. So much for “diversity our strength” on that campaign, I guess!
I agree that “Toronto: You Belong Here†is/was a great slogan. It’s still great to see the bumper sticker on the back of some taxi cabs.
I also think telling people things they don’t know about the city is a great strategy, effectively employed by the country of Botswana! Did you know there are more diamonds in Botswana than have ever been pulled out of South Africa? Or that the country is the size of France but has only 1.7 million people? Or that they have enough anthracite to power Africa for 100 years?
Botswana is a surprising place. And so is Toronto!
Good analysis!
The ideas of where to go with a campaign are good. Listing companies might be interesting. Doesn’t Calgary do that? I don’t want to go to Calgary though.
But as for these ads, that’s a big over analysis of what are just fun, one-off ads! Everything is horrible and sexist or not-understandable or whatever when you deconstruct it through a particular view. It’s just a cute ad. I got them. Hollywood = boob jobs. Everybody knows Toronto is hollywood north. They talk about it at the Oscars. Jack Valenti rants about Toronto and “runaway” productions. Gov. Arnold threatens to sue for his state’s industry.
I’m happy Toronto did this.
While I kind of like the recent ads in question, I agree that the “Toronto: you belong here” campaign was a perfect slogan for Toronto. I’m at a loss as to why, with such an appropriate and popular campaign, the tourism people felt the need to go off and spend a good chunk of money finding a different campaign — which resulted in the dire and generic “Toronto Unlimited”. Does anyone know why official bureaus didn’t like the “You belong here” slogan?
The lesson from the very successful “I Heart NY” campaign is that, if you come up with a good slogan, stick with it for a very long time (decades) until it becomes synonymous with the city. That’s how you create a brand. That’s what we need to do with the “You belong here” slogan. And, as Leah so nicely demonstrates, it’s a fantastically versatile slogan that can be adapted for a wide range of purposes and approaches, so that the ad campaigns can be changed and refreshed even while sticking with the core slogan. And, as Leah suggests, it’s a slogan that works both to boost our own, internal civic pride as well as to draw in outsiders.
The other good thing about “You belong here” is that while it incorporates our multicultural diversity, which a lot of Torontonians think of as our best identifying feature, it goes beyond that and can encompass a lot of other attractive features as well. Diversity might be good for getting people to come from Buffalo and Cleveland, but it’s hardly going to draw people from Chicago or New York, who have plenty of diverse communities of their own.
Thanks for more comments, all. I guess I’ll admit that I’m not speaking for all women when I say the ads are offensive to all women. Not all women feel that way. But I sure do. Maybe if they had thrown in a penis enlargement, prostate cancer, or thinning hair joke I’d feel differently…. But further, if this is such a creative “one-off,” why must the cliches used feel so uncreative and tired? Further, it’s well known that advertising works through repetition, so planning anything as simply a “one-off” is a waste of my money and yours. I’d like to be able to buy myself another pint at the bar, thank you, rather than pay for ads like this.
As for friendly jibing about the idea of presenting factual information about Toronto, well, given the “fact” that Toronto does actually have a lot to offer, why not give it a try? Left field, much as I love to live and work there, ain’t always the most effective approach when you’re trying to reach a wide range of people.
I really appreciate that you pointed out that these ads are anti-woman. When I first read about this campaign in the Toronto Star last week, the first thing that made my blood boil was the misogyny, which I personally find utterly unacceptable. It disturbs me greatly that this campaign will probably be ineffective as a tool to increase tourism, but will be very successful at promoting already existing attitudes towards women that (I would hope) most women would find insulting and disturbing.
At this point many people would say, “hey, feminist, get a sense of humour!” Well, if this type of sexism is supposed to be a joke, I stopped laughing years ago. The same joke has been told way, way, way too many times for me to laugh anymore.
Bring back “You Belong Here”.
I don’t think they’re as sexist as you think they are. Maybe I just have a different tolerance.
I actually kinda like them: they are self-depricating AND cocky. We’re as good as Italy at Opera, but we’re cold fish and polite. To the rest of Canada that’s hogwash, but to Americans, I think that’s their perception of Canada, so therefore Toronto too. But I don’t think any ad campaign can do the “feel” of a city justice — you just can’t please people by throwing labels and perceptions on them. They get their backs up.
I also think these ads are not about Toronto in its entirety, so comparing them to You Belong Here and Toronto Unlimited is not the best method.
That’s not to say I don’t like you suggestions. I think you got some neat ideas. I love You Belong Here, too and I like the idea of it being the ENTIRE CITY’S ad campaign, but I just feel the anger in your piece, and I don’t think it deserves it.
To be honest, I think the lack of diversity is the biggest issue, if you want to *really* want to break down the intentions of the ad agency.
I strongly agree that we ought to bring back the “you belong here” statement, for exactly the reasons that Leah outlines. Catchy, meaningful, welcoming and appropriate.
Great post. I see those old “You belong here” bumper stickers on the cabs and get wistful… Toronto Unlimited is so sterile and generic. Bring back YBH!
They didn’t strike me particularly as misogynist, although now that it’s been pointed out, they do rely excessively on sex and women.
I think with the pregnant woman, the point is on her more vulnerable state, not that she’s a woman. It could have been someone with a broken leg, or someone carrying a stack of heavy parcels, or anyone who needs a seat in a cab first. Why not any of them? But then why not a pregnant woman? The joke relies on people’s expectations of courtesy and decorum being turned on its head, and maybe the selection of a pregnant woman just means its writers believed people are likelier to be sympathetic towards her than someone with a broken leg, so the shock of her being held back is greater.
The rebuffed woman ad isn’t funny because she’s middle-aged so her sexually aggressive attitude is to be laughed at, but because the man is giving up an opportunity for a liaison, relying on a stereotype of men as naturally unfaithful. That rather strikes me as anti-male, since lots of men are happy monogamous and don’t need being ridiculed for their choice, just like women shouldn’t be ridiculed for being promiscuous instead of demure.
Thanks for all the new thoughts and of course, continued props for Toronto You Belong Here. Hooray!
While some of the anger in my post, which Jen pointed out, does derive from what I perceive as consistent slights towards women in these advertisements, a good deal of anger also comes from frustration with the city on the count of, as Dunne pointed out, simply not having a basic grasp of fundamental marketing principles such as brand consistency and consideration of both internal and external audiences.
I’d also like to point out, from a marketing perspective, natch, that alt-weekly readers — of whom I am one — are generally left-leaning, with a good dose of women- and queer-positive politic, however soft. As the ever-popular (um, at least with me) Dan Savage demonstrates, it’s possible to address alt-weekly readers in a fun, sexy, witty way without boob neurosis jokes. And hell, with maybe a few erectile neurosis jokes thrown in to boot!
Gloria, while you’re right that these ads play off (tired) stereotypes of men as well, I still think the ads would be considered “offensive” rather than “hilarious” if gender roles in each of the images were reversed.
All that, said, Jen, I also appreciate your push on the lack of ethnic diversity in the ads as a place to start. Whitewashing of our city’s image is a) unnecessary and b) unacceptable.
Wow. Please count me as one queer woman (who took the requisite woman’s studies courses in undergrad at York, and had the same righeous anger back then that his post has now) who finds these ads amusing, and not NOT NOT anti-queer just because there are no queer identified people in them. Jee wiz! It’s just a light hearted ad, not the cold fist of the patriarchy slamming down. Heterocentric even! Oh my.
I’m temped to over analyize your posts as you did to the ads … so, just because a woman is pregnant in the ad, she’s somehow being oppressed by being depicted as being in a state of pregnancy? … but I’ll avoid that, as other commentors have shown there are a variety of not so narrow interpretations. If you go looking for something, you will find it, and you did. I’ll just reiterate my first line, and continue to enjoy the ads for what they are.