So, you’re an Oreo addict. You’re someone so passionate about Oreo cookies that you have your own special way of dunking them in milk or twisting them apart. You share your system with everyone - from those who don’t care AT ALL, to fellow Oreo enthusiasts. Maybe you blog about it…
Why? – because you just love them!
I understand, and so does Kraft foods – the parent company of the Nabisco brand to which the Oreo cookie belongs. That’s why in a 2013 Superbowl Commercial (instant classic), they set out to resolve an “ongoing debate”: whether the cookie or cream portion is the best part of an Oreo. This was genius.
Firstly, the ad was an entertaining one. A Superbowl ad is generally ineffective if it isn’t entertaining in some way. Secondly, it included a call for action; it asked the consumer to engage in the debate (no matter how passionate he/she was about Oreos). This brought the product a ton of immediate attention, and required almost no time for participants.
What’s lost in all this, however, is the true value of the debate results. If the numbers heavily favored one side over the other, perhaps Nabisco would see an opportunity to create new products or somehow modify their current ones: a cookie with a bigger crunch to please the cookie lovers, or a cookie with more cream for those on the other side of the debate (remember Double-Stuffed Oreos?)
This ad was an example of real-time marketing, which in this case refers to a marketing action done in real time by a brand in reaction to an event (was aired during the Superbowl blackout in New Orleans that year). In doing so, a company is attempting to somehow benefit from social media buzz. The 17,000 [relatively immediate] re-tweets (give or take) is proof that Oreo achieved that.
For the record: an Oreo is nothing without the cream - which must be licked (not licked off) after the 2 sides of the cookie are twisted apart, and eaten with at least one side of the cookie. Milk optional.
Keys to the effectiveness of this ad:
The call to action