Some of these aren’t the full spots, some are only ‘teasers’, but I couldn’t find this anywhere else, so I thought I’d put it together.

If you find ones I didn’t, add them in the comments, and I’ll add them to the list.

For now, bookmark this post, and check back frequently for updates.

Anheuser-Busch





Audi
Nothing online yet. Just news.

Bridgestone/Firestone


Cars.com


CareerBuilder.com


Coca-Cola
Nothing yet.

Dell
Nothing yet. But here’s a promo:



eTrade
Nothing yet.

FedEx
Nothing yet.

Frito-Lay
“Winning band” not named yet.

Gatorade

Find more videos like this on AdGabber


Garmin

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

General Motors
Nothing yet.

GoDaddy


Hershey/Ice Breakers


Hyundai

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

Kraft/Planters
Nothing yet.

NFL
Nothing yet.

New Line Cinema/Semi Pro
Nothing yet, but here’s the music video.


Paramount/Iron Man
Nothing yet.

Pepsi



P&G/Tide to Go
Nothing yet.

Salesgenie.com

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

Sony/You Don’t Mess With the Zohan
Nothing yet.

Taco Bell


T-Mobile
Nothing yet.

Toshiba
Nothing yet.

Toyota
Nothing yet.

Unilever/Sunsilk


Universal Pictures
Nothing yet.

Under Armour




Victoria’s Secret


Warner Bros.
Nothing yet.

Walt Disney Co.
Nothing yet.

White House Office of National Drug Control Policy

Share on Facebook

According to a recent study published by BIGResearch, only 5.5% of television viewers actually pay attention to commercials regularly.

That certainly does not qualify as efficient.

Of course, the same can be said for online advertising in many cases. But the difference is that interactions with online ads can lead to experiences. Heck, exposures to some (read: the best) online marketing can be experiences in their own right.

How low does attention to commercials have to drop before TV doesn’t become the first stop on the budget train?

Thanks go to Joe Jaffe for pointing this out.

Share on Facebook

Keith Richman is a guy that really gets it. Up until a few months ago, that was only evident in the success of Break.com. Now, Break’s got a slew of sites, targeted to men, like CagePotato, HolyTaco, and Chickipedia.

Watch Rafat Ali’s (PaidContent) interview with Keith at NATPE, where if I had a doppelganger, would be where I would be right now.

Share on Facebook

I got this email today, and I just have to share it with you all. If anyone wants to share in my fortune, please just say so in the comments. Congratulations to all of you!

FROM: MR. Patrick K. W. Chan
(Executive Director & Chief financial Officer)
Hang Seng Bank Limited
83 Des Voeux Road, Central
Hong Kong SAR

FOR YOUR ATTENTION

It is understandable that you might be a little bit apprehensive because
you do not know me but I have a lucrative business proposal of mutual
interest to share with you. I got your reference in my search for someone
who suits my proposed business relationship.

I am Mr. Patrick K. W. Chan Executive Director & Chief financial Officer of
Hang Seng Bank Ltd. I have an obscured business suggestion for you. I will
need you to assist me in executing a business project from Hong Kong to your
country. It involves the transfer of a large sum of money. Everything
concerning this transaction shall be legally done without hitch. Please
endeavour to observe utmost discretion in all matters concerning this issue.

Once the funds have been successfully transferred into your account, we
shall share in the ratio to be agreed by both of us

I will prefer you reach me on my private email address below (
pcchanwk1@yahoo.com.hk ) and finally after that I shall furnish you with
more information’s about this operation.

Please if you are not interested delete this email and do not hunt me
because I am putting my career and the life of my family at stake with this
venture. Although nothing ventured is nothing gained.

Your earliest response to this letter will be appreciated.

Kind Regards,
Mr. Patrick Chan

Share on Facebook

Catharine Taylor over at Adverganza has posted her takeaways from an interview with the new CEOs of the 4As, Nancy Hill.

I know Nancy, and I’m confident that she will bring a breath of fresh air to an organization that sorely needs it. As digital moves more and more towards the forefront of overall strategy, and as more agencies put digital execs in as leaders of their organizations, the 4As need to refocus their own leadership on helping its member organizations innovate, and on bringing in new organizations that can help take this industry where it needs to go.

And we’re still so far away. But hopefully we’re about to get a step closer.

Share on Facebook

Omar Minaya, you’re my hero. Yes, I know this has nothing to do with marketing or advertising, but as far as I’m concerned it’s the biggest news of the week.

And how did I find out? By SMS. And Facebook. And via blogs. So maybe it does have to do with digital media after all. As a matter of fact, what I’d love to hear is if (and how) social media actually impacted this decision by either the Minnesota Twins or the New York Mets by putting pressure on the involved parties.

There. I made it about digital media.

Share on Facebook

Here is my prediction for this year’s crop of Super Bowl TV spots.

While chatter will certainly big about the stalwarts of Super Bowl advertising (e.g. Budweiser), the biggest internet buzz may very well turn out to be skeptical consumers who have had enough of corporate cause-mongering. Companies that need to spend $4 million to tell consumers how green, pink, yellow, or red they are will be scrutizined and skewered by online audiences. Broad claims will be made, and crowds will poke holes in them, ultimately leading to a complete backfire.

At least I think that will happen. I also think the Giants will win, so I’m hoping for at least a 50% success rate here.

Share on Facebook

A group of internet users (some call them hackers) known as ‘Anonymous’, have basically launched denial-of-service (DoS) attacks against the Church of Scientology, and have gotten their hands on, and subsequently released confidential, highly-sensitive Scientology documents.

A great recap of the story can be found here.

My contemporary, Tom Hespos weighs in on this via his blog, and calls it a ‘crowdwar’, that it will prepare us for cyberwarfare, and that ‘we will be talking about this for years to come’. AdRants commented on this issue as well.

And I agree.

But I will also add that while there are bits and pieces of this effort that have the air of what we traditionally think of as ‘cyberterrorism’, e.g. DoS attacks, we can not underestimate how the internet can be used for propagandism and the spread of (dis)information.

In addition to attacks targeting servers, cyberwarfare can also make use of web properties and communities, specifically, various forms of social media, like blogs, social networks, and social news aggregators. All of these tools can be — and have been — used for the spread of love, hate, patriotism, jingoism, rhetoric, dissemination of facts, and the manipulation of the truth.

Lets take a look at what Anonymous has done:

* YouTube
Almost 400 videos mentioning Anonymous + Scientology. Here’s Anonymous’ ‘coming out’ video…

* News Aggregators
Numerous ‘Dugg’ stories on Digg, each with an average of about 4,000 ‘diggs’. And thousands of comments in total, with each one making the prized ‘front page’ of Digg.

* File Sharing Services
I won’t link to them here, but if you reference the aforementioned Digg search results, you can see how Anonymous is disseminating all the top-secret Scientology documents they can get their hands on, using outlets like BitTorrent (via PirateBay) and MediaFire.

If you are a user that frequents any of the social media sites referenced above, you have no doubt been exposed to the ways that these properties (and utilities) have been used to spread both factual information and propaganda. But don’t think this is just the realm of Scientology-haters. It’s the realm of Ron Paul supporters, Hilary Clinton bashers, war crime accusers, environmental crusaders, and liberals, independents, and conservatives alike.

Just as social media is a wonderful tool to find like-minded peers with similar beliefs, it’s also a way to convince others to share our beliefs. As marketers and advertisers, we’re trying to figure out how do this ourselves, albeit usually with less serious consequences.

Anti-terrorism experts learn from the volume of ‘chatter’ on message boards and communities. Presidential fund-raising can reach record one-day levels via social mediab. Two polar extremes, both using similar methods.

What social media allows groups from Al-Qaeda, to Anonymous, from Democrats, to Republicans, to do is provide supporters and potential converts unprecedented access to information. It has never before been easier to get access to hour-long videos or 300-page documents. What used to be underground rallies in clandestine locations have become groups on Facebook, channels on YouTube, and comment threads on Digg. Heck you can even use social media to facilitate those same in-person clandestine meetings (Meetup).

Social media, as wonderful a tool as it can be, can also be used to wage war, spread propaganda, or liberate information. What ‘Anonymous’ is doing is probably a combination of all three. And as Tom Hespos stated, yes — we will be talking about this for a long time, because this war is nowhere near over.

But it should be noted that social media doesn’t fight wars. People do. And it’s what people do with social media that matters. People, by nature, are joiners. Joiners of causes, groups, movements, lifestyles. Social media facilitates it all. In a way, it makes us hyper-joiners.

What this particular ‘cyberwar’ can teach us is that as marketers, we must remember this propensity to join, and figure out how to use social media to better galvanize audiences. As consumers, we need to remember just how easy it is to join something — and determine what is propaganda, what is noise, and what we believe in.

Information and disinformation are equally as easily spread via social media, but it is up to us, as individuals, to determine which one is which. What is a malicious ‘hacker’ to one can be the exposing and enlightening bearer of truth to another.

Which one is ‘Anonymous’? That’s up to you to decide. But what we can all agree upon is that social media represents part of the evolution of communication. Free communication should never be limited — but we must thoroughly understand all methods of communication if we expect to be able to separate information from disinformation.

And social media is no exception.

Heck, most advertising can usually be defined as propaganda. Consumers choose which advertising to believe hundreds of times a day. But hmmmmm…If social media makes the spread of propaganda so easy, why are advertisers having such a tough time figuring it out?

Maybe we need to become better propagandists. Or maybe we need to stop spreading disinformation.

Share on Facebook

First, Rupert Murdoch nixed plans to make WSJ.com free.

Now, I can’t even log in.

This is not the way to build an audience.

Share on Facebook

It appears that more Super Bowl ads than ever will be using some kind of cause to jar viewers into paying attention to who is paying for the ads.

Good strategy or thinly-veiled attempt at altruism? We all know companies don’t buy a Super Bowl spot to make a difference in the world, right? Right?

Evidence mounting here and here.

Share on Facebook