While listening to NPR in the car yesterday, I heard a report about how a bunch of people in the general public are angry at Men's Wearhouse for severing their ties with the founder with regard to their advertising campaign, for which he had been the spokesman and pitchman. But why are people up-in-arms over this? Ad campaigns end and get changed all the time. This guy is rich as heck, so it's not like he's going to be destitute and living on the streets, you know. It's just an ad campaign, for God's sake! And we don't even know what the new ad campaign is going to be like, so why get all angry when you don't even know what's coming next? (If the new ad campaign is lame and does poorly for the company, then fine, complain then; but until we even know what the new one is, how about giving it a chance first?)
Seriously, does everyone get all angry and contrarian whenever there's a new ad campaign, slogan, or pitchman? Did everyone get mad when Coca-Cola ended their "Coke Is It" campaign, saying stuff like: "Hey, if Coke isn't it, then what is it?", "What is "it" anyway? We don't know anymore! We're so confused!", "Please, bring "it" back!", "If Coke isn't it, then I don't want it anymore!"? I don't think so, but maybe I wasn't paying attention enough back then.
Oh, and remember the old campaign for milk using the slogan: "Milk is a natural"? When milk went with "Got Milk?", did people get mad and say: "Oh, milk isn't natural anymore?", "Milk is un-natural now!", etc.? And when they stopped using the "Milk: It does a body good" slogan, did everyone get angry and accuse milk of being bad for our bodies? I wouldn't be surprised.
Only joking about that stuff, but seriously: people should give the new campaign a chance first before they decide they hate it. I don't know why we all feel such a blind loyalty to the "You're going to love the way you look: I guarantee it" guy. After all, I'm sure there have been occasions that despite buying and looking nice in clothes from Men's Wearhouse, people who don't like their own face still don't like the way they look, and when has that ad slogan guy ever paid for their plastic surgery? He said they'd like the way they looked, he guaranteed it, and so for everyone who has ever shopped at his store and then not liked the way they looked afterwards, he has betrayed them and engaged in false advertising! Why, the cad: that guarantee is just rubbing it in to people who think they're unattractive, essentially saying: "I dare you to sue me over this!" Why, it's inhuman! (Okay, I'm only joking about that too.)
But I see a similar analogy to bands who have had members leave: often the new replacements get abused, often badly, by fans who are mad the original member is not there anymore (CJ Ramone famously had this problem when Dee Dee left the band because he wanted to do other stuff: should the Ramones have just toured without a bass player? No, they really needed one, and it wasn't CJ's fault Dee Dee wanted to leave. It's not like the Ramones were cheating on Dee Dee behind his back and betrayed him. But even if they had, is it the new replacement's fault?); but that's not the new guy's fault: he's just there to fill a vacancy that's not even his doing. Should nobody ever fill in anymore, and bands have to break up when one member leaves? No, they keep going because people want to go see them; and products will keep advertising stuff after the end of a well-loved campaign or pitchperson's departure, for whatever reason. So unless you hate the product anyway, just let's all give the new ad campaign a chance before we all say it sucks. (But once we see it, feel free to says: "It sucks", even if it's great.)
