Election debates? Who needs the X factor!

Well, what a disappointing result for the Liberal party! How did it go so badly wrong? For me it was all about celebrity and the power of surface over content. The discrepancy between the public’s response to the Party leaders after the debates and the Election result really exposes how influenced we can be by ambiguous marketing. The slickness of a presentation, the colour of a tie, the sharp way a question is responded to and charisma; abundance or lack of. How impressed we all were to see Nick Clegg, previously seeming a bit of a lightweight actually standing up to the 'Big Boys'. The fact that these debates were in fact set pieces, planned by marketeers (as I still insist on calling them- spin doctor is meaningless) taught us very little. Our choices? Nick Clegg the best looking and most sincere- the sort of chap you'd like to teach your children? David Cameron trying really hard to appear statesman-like and failing? Or Gordon Brown still in ill fitting collars wearing his badly manufactured smile; albeit strangely being the only one who looked and sounded like a politician. Still the vibrant young bloods came out on top, how they handled themselves being more important than what they said. Interesting how the panel on the BBC News responded with their push buttons as debates ran their course- the single most pronounced dip in ratings for all three leaders being the point when running opponents down became more important than passing on an informative message.

I am no political guru; I barely understand the electoral process and know of Proportional representation as much as the 'Off side' rule. However it seems to me that watching a Political debate on channels that offer X factor-has talent-on Ice-In the kitchen-Over the Rainbow could not be more derisory. Unreality TV is the popular choice for the Great British Public so why would politicians be judged any differently to contestants on a talent show? Viewers vote for the would be Star they like best- often because of where they come from and who can make the most emotional appeals about how badly they want to win.
When it came to walking in to the polling station, standing at the booth with pen in hand did you vote for the men in smart suits, those more familiar you can identify with or to whom you will deliver the tactical blow? Maybe it's encouraging to know that when it actually comes to the real voting the electorate vote for politics, even if in a barely concealed state of confusion?
I will really be worried if Simon Cowell decides to make a talent show out of Politics!

Who Markets the Marketeers?

It seems to me, trust in public life is almost as rare at the moment as young women under the age of 25 without an orange spray tan.

Through their own ineptitude and lack of conscience the banks have scarred themselves for life, mind you it doesn’t seem to have had the effect of making them more sympathetic to customers. I had to wait 25 minutes in a local city centre bank at peak lunchtime as there was only 1 cashier. Anyway, I digress. Pensions, banking, insurance, all institutions that many of us are wary of now, I don’t know about you but it makes me nervous not being able to trust these bastions of security.

Then to our Politicians, those beacons of hope for the beleaguered constituents. Those who fight the good fight for the good of the country. Well yes they do sometimes do so but it appears at the same time will happily work within the sloppy rules of a system that allows the Tax payer to cover the cost of their pet food for example. That actually angers me more than the moat cleaning which was of course beyond ridiculous. Another large institutional chunk removed from the Jenga that is modern life; waiting to see when it will all topple over.

Marketing is understood by many to play an inevitable role in how things operate both commercially and in any sphere of contemporary public life. In politics we call it ‘spin-doctoring’ but it is marketing none the less. The trouble is we are now learning not to trust the marketeers as well. A really informative documentary on BBC1 this week was an eye opener for many revealing as it did the troubling standards that are set for food labelling in this country. The report was illuminating, as many of us had assumed that there was sufficient legislated transparency in food labelling due to exposure of bad practice in the past. The manufacturers and retailers (mentioned on the program) weren’t breaking the law. The laws or guidelines are at fault so the clever marketing agencies are covered, technically. However, I find it is even more objectionable to be able to market a pie as a product with heritage and home made values,which was filled with pork fat, as was shown on the program, than it is to pay for a luxury pad for an MP’s ducks.

Legal eagles having to put a case for an individual guilty of actually breaking the law have no option but to present a strong case for at the very least leniency, no matter how much we may not like it. The Marketeers are not at fault as such nor have they broken the law but issues such as this do them no credit. It is morally wrong for products to be cynically marketed in this way, regardless of the law. If nobody believes what it says on the packet then the Marketing departments have failed in their mission, leaving the industry itself in dire need of its own services. The definition of marketing of course being

‘The means by which goods or services are sold’. That doesn’t mean misleading the public.

My first heart throb. Cynics need not apply!

So, Michael Jackson is dead. Only 2 years older than me, so, ouch that hurts, hugely talented, a real loss to the world of 'pop' but all the harder for me as he was my first heart throb. The first posters of a famous person on my bedroom wall, first time of watching ANYTHING that he appeared on and sighing dreamily.
I watched the memorial service this evening and shed far too many tears, my own recent loss being so keenly felt. Was it over the top? Undoubtedly. Too much evangelical stomping? Definitely for my taste. Musical performances that in many cases were lavished with well groomed pseudo emotion, so a cynic’s feast really. A musical genius and a gossip columnist’s meal ticket, an icon of our age and prime target for the celebrity bounty hunters, role model for two generations of young people and weirdo ‘Wacko’ leading a curious life in Never never land. Well maybe he was all these things.
The music has come back to life; it seems we all forgot, other than the diehard fans. Some never knew anything other than the bizarre stories so have seen the videos and heard the music for the first time. The reality is that we will probably never know the reality. A family closing ranks is completely normal and our saintly media will now respond to his sudden death with endless admiration for his genius. Shame they weren’t doing so when he hit the tough times; let’s face it, it wouldn’t be the first time a person’s wealth and fame has exposed them to false accusations- trial by media should not be a part of any culture, even the crazy world of the pop star.
The culture of celebrity may well be a fact in the modern world but truly we need to find some humanity in all the madness. There is I believe a parallel to be drawn in public life. Opposing Political parties will present entirely their own position, all claiming to have the true solutions, asking us to buy into their beliefs and manifesto. The opposing parties in the media with exposures of the frailties (real or otherwise) of our modern icons countered by support and stout denials from Family, peers and friends. I watch Question time to help form my opinions on politics and current affairs. With the diverse panellists covering areas including but not exclusively politics I am able to find the balance that makes some sense. How to do so in that mad, bad old world of showbiz?
No matter what was said, sung or shown the most revealing, poignant and real moment in tonight’s memorial? When a little girl stood and spoke about her Dad, the best father a person could have ever had, tears of real grief for a real person. Bet the media hounds never thought of that one did they?

So, did Sir Alan choose the right Apprentice?

What a tough decision the boss man had to make, both finalists being the best from a good crop it seems.
Interesting too from my perspective as one who ponders the thought process behind many product launches. What were we offered? A top quality product with a real point of difference pitched at a high-end mass market price, against a cheaper option, bang on the money and well presented. A tough one but were I sitting in Sir Alan's leather chair I would probably have picked Yasmina too, she is let's face it an entrepreneur already. Are there lessons to be learnt for a business of any size though? I believe so.

Choc d'Amour (ghastly name- can't you just tell it was thought up in 3 minutes?) was an example of how a product is no more likely to be a winner just on the basis of superior quality, if the spec is higher than it needs to be for the acceptable price of the chosen market.

Any retail price over £10 is irrelevant up to £15, so £13 or £14 makes barely, if any, difference. £9.99 is the psychological barrier so once you've passed that, no man's land awaits. It looks as if maybe Kate got the price wrong.

The project also illustrated another important issue when looking at product development. Was the product positioned by its standards or it’s price? It is rarely, if ever, the case that a product can be all things to all people, so you really have to know which mast you are sticking your flag on.

Was it worthwhile using the ingredients that made the chocolates so good, in the face of the fact that it moved them to a whole different market place and with no recognised branding to support the offer? Perhaps a little less Marc de Champagne and a little more Cava?

Kate's presentation though crisp efficient and assured did not include some of the vital information that reinforced Choc d’Amour’s U.S.P. Nothing of the superiority of the ingredients, no mention of the extremely interesting box even deemed by one of the industry experts a very interesting and unique concept. It should have been a winner. Another tip to be learned, make sure your U.S.P. is flagged up in GREAT BIG LETTERS, buyers aren’t mind readers!

Now, to Choc Electric. Fabulous box, the price was right, the styling was bang on-sharp, contemporary and a real eye catcher on the shelf. The tone of the presentation although not as crisp as Kate's was warm, friendly and very approachable. I would query whether the £5 box of chocolate market is ready for a ‘shock’ of fusion flavours, after all Quality Street can sell for a fiver, but a brave thought process nonetheless.

So far so good. Yasmina knew her costs, gave the impression of understanding the product, was able to put the message of the concept over well and that's what won her the big pay cheque in the end. So where’s the problem? Sadly they tasted awful, I mean who would EVER put Strawberry and Basil together? The fusions didn’t work, certainly wouldn’t appeal to the target market and the quality was considered poor. Her grasp of the project won in the end however and deservedly so given the task in hand.

Another successful series ends with this last episode flagging up some very fundamental mistakes.

The product may be terrific but if the pricing is set too high, in the event of poor sales you will never know if it was too expensive or just not good enough. Your market should manage your development process.

An offer with spot on pricing purchased by the consumer for the price point but a really not very good product, you can guarantee will never be bought again.

Whatever your product or service the need to be absolutely sure who is buying into your offer and what they expect from it is paramount.

With a plastic bucket for example it may not matter, but chocolate? Oh yes, take it from a chocolate gourmet, with chocolate it matters!

Julie Dachey

The_Apprentice_Series_5_Episode_12/