Learning Process

Visual experiments ad continuum – the majority of the logomarks to which the target audience associated themselves to, as gathered from the Brand Index 2011, were red, continuing from the previous discussion on colour psychology, to further this, the red logos were complimented with yellow, to signify both speed and happiness. When the logomarks were overlaid on top of each other, it simply became a “visual noise”, where little to no information can be interpreted from the result. I then repeated with the characters and mascots of the brands; there used to be more characters, but in recent years, many corporations decided to retire the majority of them, notably Ronald McDonald, one of the most recognised brand mascots of all time, due to their link and the glorification of unhealthy eating and fast food.

This most certainly reflects upon the situation of the modern world of communication, let alone in the land of advertising; ridiculous amounts of noise is generated from the bombardment of constructed media messages telling everyone to do this, do that, eat this, don’t eat that. Where does it stop?

Speaking of the yellow character, or the colour yellow itself, I read a very interesting article regarding the semiotics of The Simpsons, and how the messages behind the animation itself does not challenge the audience that watch the animation to be able to read the sign behind the animation itself; the purpose of entertainment, particularly for this show, “does not require viewers to have background knowledge of the culture, nor does it require them to really think while watching the show…” (Fakhoury, N et al.)
   
Spent an interesting day exploring the concrete jungle with a visual communication graduate, now flight attendant. His mix of knowledge of travelling to different places, soaking in many diverse cultures, combined with his knowledge of visual communication had meant that he provided some great insight onto the placement and interaction of an idea. One interesting insight he provided was a window; it acts as a barrier between the interaction of the view between the viewer and the outside. When one sits from a different position, for example, below the window ledge, the interaction between the viewer and the view is obstructed by the window’s bars, whereas, if you sit up close to the window, the interaction is more complete, and you become more in sync with your surroundings and the nature; when people look at properties they look for ones with large windows. This was an interesting insight because I started to ponder whether this concept can be applied to television screens and the media being displayed.
   
We also visited WHAT_architecture, who had previously completed a project with a school in North London involving LEGO bricks; the exterior of the school was created with LEGO walls, decorated and built by students, parents and architects in a collaborative project. The semiotics of this type of product placement revolves around using LEGO signifying nostalgia for the adults, and as its tagline suggests, “serious play” for the child; the children that aid in the construction of the school, to them, it is creativity and a chance to add a piece of themselves, to become part of the school as a contribution. For the adults, it retains an infatuation of childhood that altogether contributes towards a positive brand image for both old and young audiences.
   
This is where it brings me to gather all my previous weeks of progress reports and consider what the final outcome of this project shall be, and the intention of the project; the two main questions that I have been asking throughout are:
   

• Can positive brand images be implanted into children through product placement?
• What are the impact of brands on childhood?

   
The second question can effectively be answered visually by one of my original ideas from reading Elizabeth Tucker’s Dramatization of Children’s Narratives, and where ideas derive from. I’ve been interested in the idea of fairytales and how it provides a platform for children’s narratives for awhile. So it is more than likely that it’ll be related to such; a brand can present itself with an emotional attachment for the child in the form of a character to build the initial relationship between the audience and the brand. It can be placed from the perspective if I was to say that the signifier became the television screen, children who become raised in a room with a television may develop unrealistic emotional relationships with the bombardment of stories, through television shows. All media messages are constructed with the aid of language, as Alfred North Whitehead once said "Language foists on us exact concepts as though they represented the immediate deliverance of experience." (Whitehead as cited by Chandler, 2000)

Bibliography
Chandler, D. (2000) [Online] Biases of the Ear and Eye. Available at: <http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/litoral/litoral4.html> (accessed 2 September 2011)
Michaels, S. (2011) [Online] A Conversation With JR, Intrepid French Street Artist. The Atlantic. Available at: <http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/09/a-conversation-with-jr-intrepid-french-street-artist/244518/> (Accessed 6 September 2011)
Lyons, J.; Fakhoury, N.; Hsieh, T. and Jahazi, H. [no date] [Online] Reading Television?: The Simpsons. Available at: <http://www.yorku.ca/mlc/4318/projects/simp.html>(Accessed 5 September 2011)
http://www.prweek.com/go/kidsbrandindex/ (Accessed 28 August 2011)

This week, I managed to also get in touch with members of mumsnet, the online community for parents, by parents; Sharna Jackson of Tate Kids, as well as some raw data on the public’s acknowledgement of product placement from OFCOM, all of which will add great data towards my research. The main problem that I have been experiencing with this subject is that, due to the nature of this subject, and the fact that this is still relatively new, it is hard to gather raw data to create visualisations to show the flow of process.
   
Definitions of the three main keywords/phrases so far as gathered from my research:
   
Product placement is about implanting an idea of purchasing purposes within media; a communication tool that is integrated into the media
Branding is about providing the terminal values for the consumer to build the ultimate brand loyalty relationship between themselves and the brand
Childhood is a period their mentalities are still in development, and therefore should be a period where any form of communication exposed to them should allow to continue to grow; the idea of childhood nowadays is more about consumption and consumerism rather than a process of developing their own identities; their own brand.
   
Carrying on from the previous week on fairytales and fables; the main objective of these stories was to provide a sense of morals for the reader, and to allow them to develop a sense of morals on their own accord. Fairytales and fables are not much different from branding, where both stem from the idea of storytelling, and to create a relationship between the narrative and the reader themselves; to create an emotional link, and to allow the children to relate themselves to the appropriate characters.
   
We, as designers/creative thinkers/design philosophers/all of the above, have objectives, one of those perhaps, is to improve society with future changing concepts, wanting to add some meaning to the society. These life-changing decisions? They are adult concepts. They were influenced by what we were exposed to ourselves, or other ideas. So can it be said that ideas are also adult concepts? If so, how about starting from where we began ourselves? Childhood. 
   
As previously said, childhood nowadays has become a term that is associated with materialistic values, where children grow up surrounded by brands, and are branded themselves, this categorising by sub-culture creates an tidal wave effect of wanting to seek out the latest gadgetry to fit within their evocative values that the children themselves want to see themselves become associated with.
   
By influencing perceptions from a young age, we can change the future from the beginning.  An idea of influencing perceptions is where this final major project was stemmed from; the recent lift of the product placement ban to its essentials, is about the placement of ideas or a concept. On the discovery that children are becoming increasingly obsessive about consumption, this can be interpreted in different ways; whether in food or other products, we are becoming increasingly materialistic in our values, and the age of desiring and obtaining materialistic luxuries are getting younger. Why? One thing is clear; advertising. 
   
Advertising’s role in brands are important in their own right, as advertising becomes the first point of contact in establishing a link between the consumer and the brand itself. How about the products that are targeted towards children? The juxtaposition of promoting a product for children with an advertising campaign that is an adult concept, what effect would this have on children psychologically?
   
The stressful lifestyle that the majority face in this metropolis are beginning to show strains and their children are also noticing too, as the gradual increase of both parents having a full-time job, the amount of time that can be devoted to their children has decreased significantly; “working mothers in Britain spend just 81 minutes each day looking after their children – including mealtimes.” (Donnelly, 2011)
The parents’ role to their children are supposed to be setting an example on growing up and providing a positive mental attitude towards their developing, but as adults begin to go through the routine of wake up, eat sleep and work, and less time is being spent with children; bills to pay, mouths to feed, their children will also begin to be exposed to the routine of becoming slaves to the clock.

Upon reading more on the origins of fairytales, and its psychologies, it provided the most wonderful insight that very much links my research on how ideas and implanted in the first place, with the impacts and function of branding. This is a crucial turning point within the project, as this is about gaining an understanding of the metaphors that became idealised, or branded, and its utilisation of them in today’s society within many contexts.

Combining this with the strategic methods of advertising, particularly, product placement and the overload of information everywhere; on billboards, television, on the internet, that even we, ourselves, as young adults, are being influenced, sometimes unconsciously in light of product placement, where this project began. There seems to be nowhere to hide, and we are being brought up in an environment where advertising is the norm that one probably gets exposed to more than their homework or more time spent with advertising than their own parents; branding is no longer child's play, but  rather, a materialistic maturity for the growing youth in the way that this can be classified coined as a brand terrorism; where brands bombard so much that they dictate our own lifestyle and we inherently lose our freedom of choice.
   
So has branding become the modern adulthood to the modern childhood?

   
Bibliography
Donnelly, L. (2011) Working mothers send 81 minutes a day looking after their children The Guardian [ONLINE] Available at: <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8408503/Working-mothers-spend-81-minut...> [Accessed 22 August, 2011]

Interview questions have been sent to designers and professors, one of whom has replied with a little feedback on the questions -  current insight on the questions sent are that there are good questions, but some others are perhaps too general for him to answer them succinctly in words. So before next week, the questions can be looked at again and filter them down to keywords to construct questions that will offer succinct and precise answers which will help towards visually developing on the project. The skype interview is very much looked forward to, as it would be better for the interviewee to express themselves verbally, nevertheless, we are due for a skype interview next week.

For the past 2 weeks, I have gathered newspapers to demonstrate media’s emphasis on negativity rather than the positive to round up the questioning of experiences brands can offer from both negative and positive experiences; out of the articles from Evening Standard that were collected, 4 out of 5 articles on average of each spread emphasised on negativity, based on the rhetoric and the content of the article. What does this mean for us readers? Do we succumb to the fearful society that media and police sirens (that are, coincidentally, passing by right now) that it is a ‘big, bad world’ out there?

In light of the London riots, the media has provided us, the audience, with footage and news coverage that looters during the London Riots were as young as 10, whom were also being arrested. This sparked the debate on how the development of children today were being affected as a result of different aspects of society. But for the sake of my project, I am focussing on the impact of children’s development through advertising, media and communications.

What about children? The majority of children do not read newspapers; that, too, is a rather adult concept of being able to keep in touch with the world’s current affairs. How do children grow into us, young adults, adults etc. whilst developing negativity in their mental capacity during development?

There was an excellent snippet on BBC Radio 4 (2011) which the presenter commented on that

Children are deemed to be innocent and asexual, but the necessity to conform to the society, and also research into contemporary childhood shows the move towards a sexualised society…Online space, virtual space has now become a social, and also, sexual space for children.

Returning to the main design problem of product placement; it was lifted earlier this year in February, albeit children’s programmes are still restricted with such placement. This is a loophole within product placements’ legislation as children’s viewing choices are not limited to just children’s channels unless their parents impose strict rules in their households. Can brands therefore take hold of children’s values before their basic morals and etiquette is fully developed?

Both analytical and propositional visual research are being implemented as a response to the research progress; I have begun to re-evaluate the design objectives for this final major project; and the few questions which I had began asking are as follows:

• Can people improve lifestyles with the aid of branding?
• Can negative and positive experiences for children be branded?
• How were the ideas implanted into a child's mind in the first place?
• Can positive aspects help children improve by making them attractive?
• Can I brand the ideals of childhood?

Morals have typically been more obvious in children's literature, sometimes even being introduced with the phrase: "The moral of the story is …". Such explicit techniques have grown increasingly out of fashion in modern storytelling, and are now usually only included for ironic purposes. [wikipedia]

I became particularly intrigued by the last question which had come up throughout my research, media’s heavy influence on childhood has caused children to become increasingly materialistic in terms of their values, valuing brands and luxury goods over basic morals and ethics that are normally taught from fables and fairytales, such as not judging a book by its cover, or rather aptly, vices are their own punishment; the notions of childhood have very much changed since the days of fairytales and fables.

Bibliography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral

Midnight News. (2011). BBC Radio 4. Sunday 14th August

From 28th July:

Why do we have to keep explaining everything to death? A need to justify and contextualise design is increasingly letting daylight in on magic and typically makes the design in question look less, rather than, more impressive. Propping up design with explanation suggests it cannot speak for itself, that there is a ‘trick’ being played. The best design simply ‘is’. But the PR industry just won’t or can’t stop. [Amos, 2011]

The juxtaposition of positivity and negativity can be reduced to the most simple marks known: + and -. They are very simple, and minimal visually, but their context is vast in many different aspects – take, for example, a juxtaposition of colour – cultures signify black and white in different ways; black is the default colour for a traditional funeral in the Western society, whereas Eastern cultures are usually white. Black, in English history, represented dignity, respect and of spiritual reflection; Queen Victoria wore black for the majority of her reign to mourn for the loss of her beloved husband Prince Albert.

Who is to know whether culture of bad and evilness, who knows that black = evil? Or white = evil? Death = black in british culture, and white in Chinese culture – why is Chinese culture white? Or rather more specifically, who was to discover the meaning of ‘bad’, and ‘evil’, differentiating between ‘good’ in the first place? In a religious sense, it would be the Bible.

The Bible, essentially, is an archaic storybook that tells the life of Christ throughout the centuries, passed down by many different generations, told to children and adults alike, making it accessible for all ages to understand (and perhaps embrace) religion. In Elizabeth Tucker’s report The Dramatization of Children’s Narratives, Tucker explains that  (1980, p.184)

Most stories are told in the single dimension of the human voice. Through the young narrator’s blending of traditional and creative elements, the story gradually unfolds and comes to life for its listeners.

The modern-day influence of narrative is no different, with copywriters, marketers and advertisers loitering around the sweet and innocent vocabulary, we are influenced everyday to buy their products by being dictated to with the product, and combined with our increasingly materialistic culture,  our associations between the brands and ourselves (how we will be portrayed if we used this brand), we are sold.

Summary of findings and questions so far before the Summer Break:

• Product placement is an adult invention, perhaps something which may be too advanced for children, whom are still developing mentally
• A  new materialistic culture has been produced as a result of the adult concept of product placement and advertising; the increase in commercialisation of childhood has dynamically changed the development of children
• How is an idea implanted into a child's mind? Can be begin to implant brands as necessities, as the power of choice is beginning to develop in childrens’ minds?
• Can negative/positive experiences for children be branded?
• What is the difference between the media ‘idea’ and the cultural ‘idea’. Is an idea therefore, the driving force for all communications? If so, what drives the idea?

Bibliography
Amos, S. (2011) jkr: Design Gazette [online] <available at:http://www.jkr.co.uk/design-gazette/2012-olympic-medals-silver-for-design-a-bronze-for-pr-speak/> [accessed 27 July]
Tucker, E. (1980) The Dramatization of Children’s Narratives. [Online] Western Folklore, Vol. 39, No. 3, Children’s Folklore pp. 184-197 <available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1499800> [accessed 16 July]

From 7/7 – Tutorial Feedback on 2.3 & 2.4

• Justify imagery within Visual Summary and provide narratives
• Consider the legibility of imagery and text critically

The feedback was extremely useful in providing different ideas and further progress for research; the initial worry before the tutorial was that there may not have been enough cope for visual experimentation. This progress report will deconstruct the ideas that were discussed during the tutorial.

The main topic of discussion that during the tutorial was the main starting point to this post-Major Project Proposal: where product placement can be found, by concentrating on one aspect, such as the legislation imposed on this controversial issue, further investigations can be found. One such extension would be to question the 9pm watershed that has been imposed on television shows, and its real impact on the ones that the watershed is aimed towards, and also the main audience for my Major Project; 7-12 year olds. Do social classes affect children’s choice (or restrictions) on media access after that time? With the availability of technology, doesn’t it simply mean that they can have access to the same material online even if they are in their rooms with their devices other than a television? By stating considerations such as social class, the restrictions imposed by parents are very much different between, for example, a middle-class family, than a working class family; bedtimes may actually be imposed on children from 7-12 years old within the middle-class family, but such may not exist for a working class family. With such points in mind, then is the watershed a time-sensitive issue or simply a red herring?

Product placement is about the placement of an idea within media, not just television anymore, so if a programme were to have an idea already embedded, i.e. having a purpose within the show, would this also be considered product placement, and would this mean that United Kingdom, or sometimes politically known as a ‘Nanny State’ be considered manipulative towards its inhabitants? What is considered positive and what is considered negative?

Campaigns such as Jamie Oliver’s ‘Jamie’s School Dinners’ or ‘Jamie’s Dream School’ aimed to improve children’s lives by promoting healthy eating and also to learn the importance of education – by showing both the negatives and positives of each aspect. By negative points, one means that, for example, in ‘Jamie’s School Dinners’, scenes of school dinners where foods that lack in nutrition are showcased in canteens, with overweight children munching away. The show then shows the alternative by suggesting different healthier foods being served that is packed with nutrition, followed by footage of smiling school children tucking into their healthy school meals, as improved by Chef Jamie Oliver. The positives and negatives are emphasised by editing the right footage for emphasis, followed by colours used within the film filters to further influence the viewer unconsciously; as Alvin Schechter says that “Color isn’t the most important thing; it’s the only thing…color goes immediately to the psyche and can be a direct sales stimulus.” (cite from Alsop, D. 1984, p.37)

By having such a celebrity endorsing such a campaign, it would be natural that more people would watch it for the celebrity factor, the connection with a well-known human being, rather than for the main objective of the programme, in “Jamie’s School Dinners”’s case, to market the idea of healthy eating, and such a celebrity involvement would help to raise awareness on the issue. So would it mean that positive things can help people improve by making them attractive? If so, can be the same done for brands?

If campaigns are strong enough to create an impact in one’s long-term memory, the idea of the campaign will eventually become a brand. From this, it can be said that anything can be considered as a brand nowadays; products, companies, people, even metaphors and gestures. Gestures such as the ‘thumbs up’, ‘thumbs down’, ‘OK’, the Crucifix and their behaviours as a result of the usage are well-known internationally, can we therefore brand with gestures due to the known significance of them?

Bibliography
Alsop, D. “Color Grows More Important in Catching Consumers’ Eyes” Wall Street Journal, 29 November 1984, 37.

From June 30 –

When asking the specific question whether or not product placement can have a positive brand exposure towards children, there are several points which have to clarified first before delving into something as specific as this;

• What is product placement?
• Why do we need product placement?
• How do we, as consumers perceive targeted advertising?
• Advertising’s role for brands
• What products are targeted towards children?
• How does product placement benefit / damage brands?
• Current situation in the UK with product placement legislation

   
As Twitter extraordinaire and founder of Alltop Guy Kawasaki once said “If you make meaning, you make money”, how do brands create meaning for the consumers, particularly through advertising?
   
From the vast amounts of reading written by media and advertising specialists, the vast world of media is a forever evolving spectrum that allows advertisers to play with consumers’ minds with the growing list of outlets for exposure. Advertisers have to continuously find new and innovative ways to tap into those markets with something new to try and gain attention from the overload of information and advertising ‘noise’; it almost seems that the “purpose of advertising is to cut through other people’s advertising…” (Niinimäki, 2009)
   
Within the reading so far, the majority of the authors seem to describe the power of image manipulation and advertising with negativity, so would the readers that absorb all this information gathered by the authors also not begin to accept the idea that advertising, as a whole, can only be a evil cog within this giant media machine? In this case, can these ‘findings’ really be said to be findings when they appear to be more of biased reports on advertising and image manipulation? Even when one searches for the keyword ‘brand exposure’, the first page links to a product placement agency named Brand Exposure, which (Brand Exposure, 2011) “offers a comprehensive and proactive product placement service for a range of high-end consumer products”.
   
From a brand’s perspective, the image immediately received by consumers by these outlets must therefore be attention-grabbing and almost as immediate as recognising a colour of the packaging, for example.
   
With the above points in mind, then how do children perceive the brand images when they are exposed to them on television? If it is as subtle and quiet as the first product placement in the UK since the ban was lifted in February 2011, then would they have even noticed or known it was a specific targeted advertising?
   
For consumers to even realise product placement was present in a programme (besides the regulated display of the Product Placement logo before and after the programme in which product placement was present was shown), consumers would have to have the knowledge of a product first; the first product shown in the UK was a Nescafe Coffee Machine during a popular daytime show This Morning. This programme is aired every morning at 10:30am, will aim to display products towards the target audience group that will most likely be in front of the television at this time of the day; mothers who may have just sent their children to school. This group of audience will also be the most likely group to be making the main purchasing decisions when buying products. Combining this knowledge and also wanting to have a morning cup of coffee after a hectic start to the morning, mothers will have certain knowledge of the products on display, perhaps from advertising campaigns outside and on screen during ad breaks, and the majority would be able to recognise the product.
   
    “Color isn’t the most important thing; it’s the only thing…color goes immediately to the psyche and can be a direct sales stimulus.” – Alvin Schechter
    (cited from Alsop, D. 1984, p37)
   
For children, since their senses are still developing, are more likely to be attracted to bright colours, this is why products aimed towards children always contain more than two colour palettes, and are very bright and lively to encourage play. For marketers that have to target products towards children, they must first understand, or even decide, what products should be targeted towards children in the first place. This can be done with insight from market research on aspects such as the most marketed products or the most purchased products in supermarkets or toy stores. Importantly, to control the research scope further, an age group of children has to be specified.
   
On the other hand, the marketers also have to understand the mindsets of parents when they make their purchasing decisions, as they are the users within a family that generate the income, and therefore providing their children with the products. It appears seemingly more so from media coverage that product placement is always emphasised negatively in advertising towards children.

As an advertiser said:

I disagree with the way that advertising has infiltrated my life such that I can’t choose when to view it…I don’t think there’s anything wrong with buying commercial time if it’s going to be offered…it has to do being able to have a choice when I receive the messages and when I don’t, and I feel that I’ve lost that choice. (Niinimäki, 2009)

Children, already considered to be incapable of making purchasing decisions, utilises a method called “pester power” in order to persuade those with power, i.e. their parents, to purchase a product.

   
Bibliography

Alsop, D. “Color Grows More Important in Catching Consumers’ Eyes” Wall Street Journal, 29 November 1984, 37.   

Niinimäki, M. (2009) Product Placement. [video] Available at: <http://vimeo.com/4056231>
   
This Morning, 2011. [TV programme] ITV, 28 February 2011 10.30.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Nescafe-Coffee-Machine-Is-First-Prod...
http://www.brand-exposure.co.uk/

"Be postive, my friend." Guy Kawasaki, y agrega "If you make meaning, you make money" #branding

— Andy Stalman (@AndyStalman) June 30, 2011