Ren And Stimpy Creator Explains Why Entertainers Should Make Ads (And Make Them Entertaining)

from the catching-on dept

Our stance on the TV commercial industry is well known. Despite research analysts coming out with dire reports about the state of the ad market, people don’t really hate all advertising — they just hate annoying, irrelevant and intrusive advertising. Unfortunately, that still remains the bulk of much of the advertising you come across today. The answer, of course, is nothing new around these parts, where many people have tried to remind the industry repeatedly to stop viewing advertisements as advertisements, but to recognize that they’re content. With media proliferation over the last decade, there’s no more captive audience, and the way you get people to see your ads is by making them worth watching. Brands need to attract viewers, rather than pummel them with a message. It seems like entertainers are catching on. Andrew Bromage writes in to let us know that "John Kricfalusi, cartoonist and creator of such classics as Ren and Stimpy and The Goddamn George Liquor Show, writes about making direct sponsorship work. His advice is something we should all know by now: People hate commercials, so let entertainers make commercials that people like." As Andrew also notes, John has clearly been ahead of his time, as he started making commercials with that intent back in 1998.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Ren And Stimpy Creator Explains Why Entertainers Should Make Ads (And Make Them Entertaining)”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
TriZz says:

Burger King

Burger King has caught on quite well with they’re recent events. Now with the XBox 360 games for $4 with purchase of a meal, and the rumored movie. People are paying Burger King to advertise in their lives.

– Sure, I’ll pay $4 to play a burger king advertisement on my xbox.
– Sure, I’ll pay $10 to go watch a 90 minute burger king advertisement.
– Sure, I’ll spend my precious time at work downloading burger king advertisements so I can forward them to my co-workers.

Burger King gets my kudos.

Tom (profile) says:

Re: Imbedded Advertising

I sing the Log song to my kids often (12 weeks and 3 years).

I gave my nephew (2nd grade) a log and he got more excited about it then any of his other toys. Of course, he knew it was a joke 🙂

IMO the whole point of the Log song is make you realize just because the advertising is good, doesn’t mean the product is. If you push it right, kids will want it. My nephew wants to buy anything “As seen on TV”.

thecaptain says:

They just hate annoying, irrelevant and intrusive advertising.

You forgot deceptive. Which includes a LOT of the marketing out there today, like the PSP flap Sony tried to pull.

So, making ads entertaining is a huge step, but I’d like to able to trust that what I see isn’t an elaborate deception skirting truth in advertising laws designed to trick my wallet into giving some huge bloodsucking corp free access to my income.

Chronno S. Trigger says:

Re: Re: Head On, Head On, Head On, Head On, ARG!

Yeah I remember seeing the commercial but I don’t remember what it was.

I do remember that its “Powdered Toast” not toast on a stick. See make it interesting and people will remember.

I do like how Burger King is making an experience out of there advertising and only selling the game for $3.99 instead of the standard $60 that most 360 games are. (And still include annoying advertising)

As Morgan Web said on G4 If you put advertising in my game than make the game half price.

MedBob says:

Why have

Why do we need commercials? In real life, we don’t take a 60 second break to think about shaving cream, or sodas, or which brand of undies we will buy. It’s just an integrated part of life that you drop by the store and purchase something. It’s an integrated part of your life that you use products. It’s very telling the effort that goes into keeping brand names from appearing in programming. I put forth that there will be a higher number of folks thinking about Pepsi from a famous actor making that his/her favorite drink. This also brings entertainment back around to it’s original roots again, that of patronage. Entertainment gets made because a big company sponsors and offers the whole thing gratis to the public. By intertwining the product in the content, you get the talented people to approach the whole subject in a creative way, and the artificial barrier between the creative and the commercial is removed. It would take a while to get the balance right, but I think that this idea would revolutionize the industry for the better.

Anonymous Coward says:

You know, it’s not just the in-your-face attitude that’s annoying. Sometimes it’s just normal advertising that is too repetitive. The other night I was trying to enjoy a Christmas movie, and J.C.Penneys was airing a commercial during it. The problem was, not only did the commercial have one of the MOST ANNOYING jingles ever, but the commercial aired during every single commercial break, sometimes twice during one break, I kid you not. And during a 2.5 hour movie, there’s a lot of commercial break. I got to the point where I wanted to puke every time I heard that jingle, thus ruining my enjoyment of the movie. And the even dumber thing was that I could swear it’s the exact same Christmas commercial that JCPenney has aired last year or before. The least they could have done is come up with a little variety. Believe me, I was not enticed to buy ANYTHING at JCPenney this year. Kohl’s has a much better product selection, great sales all the time, and I don’t see them bombarding us with pathetic TV commercials all the time, so that’s the place that gets my money now.

David Tirpack says:


You’re confusing entertaining advertising with effective advertising. Enjoyable advertising is a waste of money if it doesn’t get people to buy the product. Annoying advertising is a waste of money, too, if it doesn’t do that job. The rarest form of advertising is the one that entertains AND sells. And that, dear sir, takes someone more than an entertainer.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...