Dien Rice
April 25, 2003, 11:40 PM
Hi Gordon,
I think you've raised a very important issue.... You mentioned the "backlash" created by some who are (or were) opposed to the war. Such as Susan Sarandon and the Dixie Chicks.
Someone emailed me an interesting article by Michael Moore about this. Michael Moore points out that, even though he was both cheered and booed for his speech against the war on Oscars night, attendances to "Bowling for Columbine" (his film) skyrocketed after the incident.
I don't really want to talk about politics, but I want to focus on business. Controversy can - sometimes - be good for business.
Michael Moore is certainly someone who knows this. He's essentially built his whole career out of it.
Madonna is another who has built a whole career from refining the art of marketing through controversy. Some people even say that the latest "incident" over her most recent music video - the one she "pulled" due to controversy - was in fact completely intended. Let's think about it.
She made (so the story goes) a music video for her latest song, "American Life." As part of the music video, it's claimed that Madonna throws a grenade to a George Bush look-alike, who proceeds to flip the top, and uses it as a lighter. Because of this, various music video cable TV stations said they wouldn't play it, and in the end, Madonna pulled the video.
But was this intended? Knowing Madonna's history, I'm sure this is what she had planned all along. She knew that all the publicity would push thoughts about her new single and her new album to the forefront of people's minds, and it would create sales. (It would break through the bubble of preoccupation, in the language of "Remote Influence".) She is without a doubt, one of the modern masters of using this method of marketing.
Now, it's said that the Dixie Chicks lost sales due to their comments about being ashamed that George W. Bush is from Texas like they are. Michael Moore claims otherwise - he claims their sales increased. I don't know what the situation is....
My feeling is that, for MOST people, controversy might help more than hurt. Though it probably depends what the controversy is about, specifically. I think you need a certain group of people behind you for it to be profitable.
For example, Michael Moore can succeed, as he is controversial by pushing a certain point of view - one that many people agree with - in a very strong way. Those who agree with him will flock to become his "customers". On the other side of the political fence, Rush Limbaugh does something similar. But what if these two were pushing points of view that few people agreed with? I think that then, the result could be different, and it might hurt them more than help them. I think you need to be controversial in a way that at least part of the public will find agreeable.
I think you need at least a percentage of the population in your favor. Madonna was very clever with her latest "controversy", since she was able to make the news without alienating hardly anyone.
Anyone have any thoughts on this topic?
- Dien Rice
Here's Michael Moore's article - read the "business" part, from about halfway through the article (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2003-04-08)
I think you've raised a very important issue.... You mentioned the "backlash" created by some who are (or were) opposed to the war. Such as Susan Sarandon and the Dixie Chicks.
Someone emailed me an interesting article by Michael Moore about this. Michael Moore points out that, even though he was both cheered and booed for his speech against the war on Oscars night, attendances to "Bowling for Columbine" (his film) skyrocketed after the incident.
I don't really want to talk about politics, but I want to focus on business. Controversy can - sometimes - be good for business.
Michael Moore is certainly someone who knows this. He's essentially built his whole career out of it.
Madonna is another who has built a whole career from refining the art of marketing through controversy. Some people even say that the latest "incident" over her most recent music video - the one she "pulled" due to controversy - was in fact completely intended. Let's think about it.
She made (so the story goes) a music video for her latest song, "American Life." As part of the music video, it's claimed that Madonna throws a grenade to a George Bush look-alike, who proceeds to flip the top, and uses it as a lighter. Because of this, various music video cable TV stations said they wouldn't play it, and in the end, Madonna pulled the video.
But was this intended? Knowing Madonna's history, I'm sure this is what she had planned all along. She knew that all the publicity would push thoughts about her new single and her new album to the forefront of people's minds, and it would create sales. (It would break through the bubble of preoccupation, in the language of "Remote Influence".) She is without a doubt, one of the modern masters of using this method of marketing.
Now, it's said that the Dixie Chicks lost sales due to their comments about being ashamed that George W. Bush is from Texas like they are. Michael Moore claims otherwise - he claims their sales increased. I don't know what the situation is....
My feeling is that, for MOST people, controversy might help more than hurt. Though it probably depends what the controversy is about, specifically. I think you need a certain group of people behind you for it to be profitable.
For example, Michael Moore can succeed, as he is controversial by pushing a certain point of view - one that many people agree with - in a very strong way. Those who agree with him will flock to become his "customers". On the other side of the political fence, Rush Limbaugh does something similar. But what if these two were pushing points of view that few people agreed with? I think that then, the result could be different, and it might hurt them more than help them. I think you need to be controversial in a way that at least part of the public will find agreeable.
I think you need at least a percentage of the population in your favor. Madonna was very clever with her latest "controversy", since she was able to make the news without alienating hardly anyone.
Anyone have any thoughts on this topic?
- Dien Rice
Here's Michael Moore's article - read the "business" part, from about halfway through the article (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2003-04-08)
