JetBlue is considered a budget-friendly value brand when it comes to air travel.  Automatically we think of equating low-cost airfare with less creature comforts, the usual price of cost-savings.  Sometimes even the quality of customer service is sacrificed in order to provide cost-savings to customers.  JetBlue Airways is a brand that aims to buck the trend.  In my opinion, a company’s corporate culture has a lot of influence on the eventual end product, whether that be a product or a service.  With JetBlue being in the service industry, prioritizing customer relationships should be a main focus.  JetBlue is aiming an initiative not only at maintaining customer relationships, but building their value with general goodwill.  JetBlue has declared the month of November as their “Philanthropy Month”.  

JetBlue has a history of combining general goodwill along with creativity to present their brand value as something more than cost savings.  

“FlyBabies”

A thank you video to JetBlue crew members.

JetBlue in-short, aims to please, at least that’s the way they aim to present the brand.  Although the videos might only showcase one instance of giving or appreciating the service of others, the overall image of the JetBlue’s brand is that of a brand that caters to the actual realities that common folk’s face.  JetBlue is not about the first-class jet-setting lifestyle that most airline brands tend to cater to.  By dubbing November as a month of philanthropic activity JetBlue continues to cater to us common people.  

Exactly what is the initiative behind JetBlue’s “Philanthropy Month?”  JetBlue is encouraging both their employees and customers to upload photos and/or videos of their volunteer efforts to JetBlueForGood.com, and for each day of November an employee and a customer will be awarded by JetBlue a one thousand dollar donation on their behalf to a charity of their own choosing.  

From a marketer’s perspective it’s easy to see how acts of charitable giving can easily translate into social currency.  What better way for JetBlue to look good than by painting other individuals in a positive light, especially when negativity is everywhere.  It’s easy to talk about feel-good stories and to share them as they tend to affect everyone’s emotions.  Doing good for the sake of others seems boring, but it does have an impact both on the giving individual  and the beneficiary and simple acts of giving can hopefully trigger a domino effect of other acts of giving or philanthropic activity.  By making this initiative public, JetBlue is able to influence other’s outside of their inner-circle.  The impact of this campaign can be seen by others outside of their employees and dedicated customer base and the chances of what is hopefully a  large outpouring of philanthropic activity and charitable giving can trickle down from the general public as well.  This campaign couldn’t come at a much more appropriate and practical time.  The holiday season tend to show how much more people out there are in need of the most basic of things, while those who are privileged to have things tend to want even more frivolous things.  Most individuals have the ability to volunteer and contribute their time for the sake of others, no one has to be an expert, but maybe being the one person to have done something good other than buying things, might hold a special value.  A random act of kindness doesn’t have to cost anything, but certainly has credible value.  Hopefully from this campaign, JetBlue can can generate and highlight stories, that not only showcases their brand, but also the general goodness that hopefully lies within all of humanity.  

JetBlue JFK Airport Terminal 5 Roof-top Garden

http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/most-horrifying-psa-portrays-addiction-one-worlds-deadliest-drugs-174138

In my previous post, it was mentioned that advertising is a new powerhouse industry that instead of harvesting crops, it harvests attention.   With the idea of harvesting attention in mind, where does advertising, regardless of medium, lose its intention?  Can something too pretty or too ugly, become a distraction?  With content being driven towards inciting emotions or driving triggers, is there  a risk for things being lost in translation or transmission?  

A film titled “Krokodil Requiem” is making its rounds in Europe as an anti-drug PSA.  The lengthy six minute video places the viewer inside the mind of a drug addict.  Most are familiar with the endless loop that an addict faces, but the video directed by Romain Demongeot  and Sonia Presne, places the audience in a surrealist landscape fueled by a drug known for its ill effects: rotting flesh and heavy psychosis.  

This ad is being circulated as a PSA overall of Europe.  This is suppose to be an anti-drug message against a cheap heroin alternative that is a derivative of codeine.  However, in my opinion, I find myself questioning the value of this ad as a true representative of an anti-drug campaign.  Just like the author of the article from adweek.com, Gabriel Beltrone, I too find the video to be more like a promotional work showcasing the skills of the two directors.  It’s a music video.  I understand the intention of highlighting the ill effects of the drug, both through the animation and the narration.  However, are these not the similar concepts found on some of the most popular music videos?  For example...

A$AP Rocky - L$D (LOVE x $EX x DREAMS)