Misleading advertising...

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:03 am

Well, if you visit MOTU's site today, you have this big Fortune 500 banner and on first look, it appears that MOTU has arrived.

http://www.motu.com/

NOT! A user is quoted in the mag and that user uses some MOTU stuff. Very cool for HIM, but how MOTU spins this to appear that THEY are a Fortune 500 company is (IMO) a bit misleading on first glance. And it is, after all, first impressions that people tend to remember.

Clicking on the link (below) brings you to an extended "interview" with the artist. It is clear that it is MOTU interviewing him, but again, for the fast reading person who tends to 'scan' such things quickly, it could also appear that these quotes are from Fortune 500 mag. That too, I find a bit misleading and certainly self-serving.

If you are going to honor your users (which I embrace) then do so in a way that both honors them from the splash page onward.

I'm not saying it is bad that they posted this. But HOW they posted it is questionable to me. The featured item for MOTU is the artist, NOT Fortune 500. Personally, I would MUCH rather MOTU get off the bowl and post something on their splash page like "MachFive Version 2 to release on July 13." Now THAT would be good advertising - if that is still the release date...
http://www.motu.com/newsitems/brian-banks-interview

OK. Start flaming me for being over sensitive, overly critical and just a plain old PITA.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:22 am

Sorry, I don't see it. It doesn't make me think MOTU is in the Fortune 500 but exactly what they say it means immediately. They interview a guy who has scored for lots of Fortune 500 corporations and apparently he was mentioned in Fortune magazine. It really doesn't bother me.

(P.S. Can't find my blowtorch today.)

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:41 am

Maybe it's me... I tend to look at things critically (even myself).

MM

rcannonp · Post by **rcannonp** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:41 am

They might could have chosen a different pic for the homepage, but I don't get any kind of feeling that MOTU is claiming Fortune 500 status. A guy uses their stuff in his work for Fortune 500 companies. That's all that I got out of it.

It's their website. Of course it's self serving. Until you get to the support pages, it's just a big ad for MOTU. I've never seen Apple, NI, Propellerheads or any other company give bug lists or glitches in their user stories.

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:49 am

rcannonp wrote:They might could have chosen a different pic for the homepage, but I don't get any kind of feeling that MOTU is claiming Fortune 500 status. A guy uses their stuff in his work for Fortune 500 companies. That's all that I got out of it.

It's their website. Of course it's self serving. Until you get to the support pages, it's just a big ad for MOTU. I've never seen Apple, NI, Propellerheads or any other company give bug lists or glitches in their user stories.

They do not directly give the impression they are a Fortune 500 company. But again, their marketing guys know first impressions are lasting impressions, even when they are later found out to be something they are not. I think that is the case here.

Heck, MY website is self-serving! That's sort of the point of many websites, isn't it? Again, my objection is placing the very bold looking Fortune 500 mag top and front of the page INSTEAD of the artist who they are praising (and praise he truly deserves!) In my world, it would be like posting an Oscar on my splash page - giving the impression that I had actually won one. I have not. I do a lot of work for the Academy, and I could try to capitalize on that. But I don't.

Frodo · Post by **Frodo** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:21 pm

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:[They do not directly give the impression they are a Fortune 500 company. But again, their marketing guys know first impressions are lasting impressions, even when they are later found out to be something they are not. I think that is the case here.

Those who do marketing are probably also aware that there are discerning people out there who know how to read between the lines one way or another. It's the ones who aren't discerning enough who often get taken. There's a reason why infomercials and spam, for example, are still so popular and on the increase!! Some people are easier to convince than others.

As long as advertising *could be interpreted* one way, it follows that it *could be interpreted* some other way. Proving specific intent is tricker where misleading advertising is concerned. I've even read the DP manual and interpreted instructions in more than one way until such time I sorted out just what the wording really meant or didn't mean. That doesn't make it any less misleading, however.

But we all know what advertising is all about: separating you from your money. Whether or not it can be said in this particular case is another matter, but advertisers will indeed push the limits of ethics to achieve their desired end result.

It's all about perception. In some cases there can be a sinister subtext. In other cases it's much ado about nothing.

blue · Post by **blue** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:31 pm

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:Maybe it's me... I tend to look at things critically (even myself).

MM

I do too, but I gave up on the concept of noble advertising a long time ago. I just assume it's all unscrupulous and then I'm not offended or surprised anymore when it actually is. Ads that mislead are usually pretty obvious to spot, and the burden falls on the consumer to make the right choice. May not be an ideal world, but it's one we have to adapt to nonetheless.

I didn't see the MOTU ad as being particularly misleading. I saw it as MOTU promoting themselves by being somehow associated with a Fortune 500 company. Of course they are going to use the magazine logo image. It sticks out visually and says Prestige. That is sort of the goal in advertising, is it not?

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:56 pm

Perhaps the more disturbing thing is this is NOT an ad! It is (IMO) an excuse to place that mag's logo prominently on MOTU's site.

OK, let's get real. What does it really matter in the big picture? Not a hell of a lot. Where it starts to matter to me is the pattern that emerges from the marketing people.

Like: Here's comes MachFive Ver 2 (how many years ago did they say that at NAMM?)

Then the "latest"post (prior to today's) announcing DP 5.12 is now shipping. Timed, strangely, just a few days BEFORE they placed this banner on the top slot. When in fact, that version was released months ago.

Coincidence? Perhaps. Strategy? Maybe. Make it look like they're something that maybe they're not? Ah! THAT is where my ire gets up. The HYPE of what they are appearing to do, and what they are ACTUALLY doing are two different things. There's another GREAT example of this I could make here. But we aren't supposed to talk politics...

(Can we infer politics?

rcannonp · Post by **rcannonp** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:32 pm

It may not be an ad in the traditional sense, but it is totally advertising. It's an interview by MOTU on their commercial site with all of their product names in bold. They probably didn't pay the guy and didn't have to buy space, but it's pretty much a testimonial ad.

If it was running in SOS without a disclaimer then it would bother me.

carrythebanner · Post by **carrythebanner** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:36 pm

I'm pretty critical and suspicious of just about everything, but methinks you're overanalyzing this one. I think it was just a nice, flashy graphic to go with a story about how cool MOTU is and how big-shot their users are -- I don't think being underhanded or misleading was the intention.

blue · Post by **blue** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:37 pm

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:Perhaps the more disturbing thing is this is NOT an ad!

An ad doesn't have to sell a product or service directly to be considered an ad. It can be promotional, which in this case it is. So, the art director has a choice of which image to use. Another shot of another unrecognizable composer leaning over yet another giant console, or a simple, bold and eye catching logo. Hmm, tough call.

Dude, the MO here is to get your attention. Which they did. When you read the text, there is no doubt left as to what MOTU's involvement is. If you have a problem with images that don't literally represent the product being promoted, then you have a problem with advertising in general. Look around. It's everywhere. The girl doesn't come with the beer.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:59 pm

blue wrote:The girl doesn't come with the beer.

Pity, that.

Frodo · Post by **Frodo** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:16 pm

blue wrote:Dude, the MO here is to get your attention. Which they did.

Spot on!

It certainly has generated an extended and lively discussion. If that was its goal, then it succeded.

Do they care if it upsets anyone along the way? Probably not, but I saw it as fairly harmless, myself. We often wonder who uses MOTU products, and here is but one other person on the list with the rest of us Fortune 5-centers.

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:57 pm

Not to put too fine a point on it, I guess if the Fortune mag article mentions MOTU, then there is a good reason to use that particular logo in the splash page - however peripheral the mention. If they DON'T mention MOTU at all, then I am 'disappointed' in the use of that logo. If I were the artist in question (Finale featured me in a similar way back in 1996) I would be a bit put off that the lead-in image was the logo of a client with no relationship to MOTU directly. THAT is what I find objectionable.

blue · Post by **blue** » Thu Jun 28, 2007 3:15 pm

So, by that token, you also have a problem with the M:i:lll poster used to announce the article about Michael Giacchino?

Your argument seems a bit naive to me. Do you think MOTU would even print an article about you or any other composer were you not involved in a high profile gig? It's the prestigious tie-in that's selling the product here, not the composer. Why not put that ahead?