You can promote a show with a single voice. Don’t believe me? Well, if you’re a Doctor Who fan (or a Jessica Jones fan, or Broadchurch, or many others) I think you’ll suddenly find some interest in the new Disney reboot of DuckTales when I tell you one of the main characters is voiced by David Tenant.

This is not a new trick. This is not an uncommon trick. But it works. Oh, yes, it works. And that’s why animation companies use it so much for movies. Animated movies find a huge amount of marketing power and ways to promote through the voice actors—if they are famous for other things.

Like, if you’re an older non-kid individual planning on watching DreamWorks Animation’s The Boss Baby in Countryside Mall’s theaters, I have to imagine it’s partially because you like Alec Baldwin. And, because I am a fan and a promoter of animation, I and others like me should be (and I personally am) okay with this, if it keeps animation as an artform going forward.

From The Secret Life of Pets to Bee Movie this is a tactic using name recognition. But also has a new wrinkle, because lately, and The Boss Baby works as an example of this, some voice roles go rather well to certain actors.

Marvel, as I’ve covered before, can tie an actor to a character, and make them a forever connection, and though this is more temporary, you can do the same with these kinds of animated roles.

The Emperor’s New Groove (and I am aware I am dating myself a little by choosing that movie) is a perfect example of having the right famous person for the right voice. Patrick Warburton, despite playing smarter characters than Kronk, lent a certain level of lovable almost deadpan goofiness to the character, that I think that specific actor pulls off well.

And the methods to promote don’t stop there. Because, yet again, I’m coming back to The Boss Baby for another example: you can use the connection from voice to face, to make a joke.

“Cookies are for closers” is a comedic reference which does not work unless you know the actor tied to the voice. Unless you know him for his live action role in Glengarry Glen Rose. Now, does that kind of joke also make the movie cheesy? Yes, quite a bit. But, it’s not a bad way to promote. It’s somewhat cheap humor, but we live in a cultural landscape that kind of loves referential jokes. Perhaps too much. But, it does work.

And, anyway, will all this said, if you want to make an animated movie, if you want to make an advertisement, if you want to promote something in an animated medium—or even live action if Farmers Insurance and J.K. Simmons have anything to say about it—you can get a real boost by attaching the recognizable voice of someone the crowds already love to a new character you want them to love.

I mean, as one last example, just to fully prove my point, if Morgan Freeman voiced an animated character, you know the movie would practically promote itself with one advertisement.

---

If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com

Sometimes marketing is simple and requires knowledge of only a few basic ideas—backed up by some smart economic decisions. Case and point, who doesn’t like to get a present? Who doesn’t like opening their door and finding a package sealed up and ready to give you a surprise—assuming the surprise is good and wanted?

Even if the gift is not that special, it’s still nice to get something, anything. Ordering a package from Amazon is like that. In fact, I think Amazon should lean heavier on that aspect of their system in their marketing—but I digress.

What I’m referring to today, is Loot Crate. A group you might know of if you are a frequent user of YouTube, as they are one of the companies that buckle down overall on the “using YouTubers as a great form of marketing” strategy I alluded to in a previous article.

And their whole shtick is that they send themed packages to you, at your door, the customer, whether you live in Tampa, Clearwater, Saint Pete, or wherever else, every month. They collect various merchandise (or “loot”) and send it to you in a “crate.” Not exactly a hard thing to comprehend.

But, still the method is genius. And is subtly different from a lot of its contemporaries. With groups like Blue Apron and Dollar Shave Club, they are in the business of making something people do anyway cheaper and more convenient: while Loot Crate, alternatively, focuses on entertainment and fandoms.

The items contained in a loot crate, unless you are in a seriously odd situation, are not necessities of life, or even often overly convenient items. But, what they are, is a collection of tie-in products. They are shirts, figurines, books, etc. which you might want if you are a fan of the associated media franchises.

For instance—and this is the main marketing hook of Loot Crate as far as I can tell—if I am a fan of the video game Fallout 3 (of which I am), and the current crate contains a piece of “loot” themed around that franchise, I might purchase a subscription.

Additionally, the system is also clever for the purveyor of the product: the franchises which they are representing. Because, even in the event I, in this hypothetical situation, am only going for this box to get a figurine of a character from Fallout 3, I might look at some other items within, and decide I like the merchandise enough to explore the related media to it.

Exposure, while not a substitute for actual money, is not useless. And the combination of convenience, value, cross-promotion, and the inherent way that getting a gift is satisfying even when you know what it is becomes a win, win, win to everyone involved.

The provider of the merchandise for Loot Crate gets a chance to hook new fans, generate exposure, either through the person who ordered, or someone around them exposed to the merchandise. And Loot Crate wins because it’s a cool enough concept to get sales—and thus survives as a business. And the consumer gets the gift of stuff they like delivered to them every month like the nerdiest of the nerdy Christmas gifts.

Sometimes effective marketing is just having a good idea and making it known and available for purchase. And in this changing world, places like Loot Crate will find more and more traction as shops in the traditional sense go out of style.

Marketing joy is always “loot” worth going for in your business. So, make sure you put it in whatever type of “crate” you might be selling.

---

If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com

Marketing yourself as an artist is fraught with issues. And the most obvious is something I’ve talked about before: the lack of time or attention available for a piece of art (or anything).

Recommending a show, movie, book, painting, album, what-have-you to someone, while a common enough practice, is not something which is pleasant a lot of the time now. It means more things a person must keep track of in their life. Keeping up with an artistic medium is like a second job.

And, so, to get out art for sale, you are fighting for attention; you are marketing—or at least trying to go about marketing—right into people’s insular bubble of media.

And there’s another hurdle. I promise at the end I will have some positive spin on this, so, don’t worry, but there are more issues. As an artist, you must somehow get into those people’s spaces—and the most obvious way is using social media.

But, as anyone who connects to largely populated artist spaces on social media can tell you, self-promo is rampant. Many (but not all) are pushing to sell copies of something—which is understandable. As a writer, I totally get it. And it’s not even always a bad experience having artists sell their wares like you are walking in an old-time, crowded open-air market.

But there are alternatives to the standard sales pitch. Or, at least, supplementary additions. People do make money making art. They really do, no matter what naysayers may say. And the other ways to do this exists on advice articles all over the internet.

But I’ll condense a few of them here. I’ll list a few ways to market art outside of the normal outflowing promotion. But, I must warn, that some of it is difficult to do, even if it is effective. If you want to see your paintings hung in houses, and your statues erected around Clearwater Beach, if you want your novels to be on the shelves of little shops like One Stoppe Shoppe: then you must play the long game.

With few exceptions, this is the truth of the matter. This marketing, perhaps the best kind, the one that is not spamming until one becomes white noise, is a slower process.

You are trying to create trust with this method. Friendly vibes. What you must do, is create a level of interest and pleasantness. Not a shill, though. Not a cash grab. Your intention matters here. Build your P.R. by interacting with the customers not as customers, but as friends. And then long-term sales can come.

Be personable. Human. Responsive.

Do anything you can to make it feel like you are a friend and not a storefront mega-corporation. Repeat customers and true-blue fans will always trump the random in and out trickle which spam methods net erratically, if at all.

Also, and this is one of the most important parts despite it coming at the end of the article: you must focus your effort on the product. Even the often punchline of fast food jokes McDonald’s makes sure that at the very least, at the absolute minimum, their food tastes good and smells good.

The most impressive marketing campaign in the world will peter out if there is not much to the product. If there is not something about it that truly endears itself to the intended buyers.

Marketing art is a must for an artist who wants to make a living making art. And while alternatives may work, you can do it by being more human. By being more creative. As sociable as you can manage.

Just like creating artwork, good marketing is a matter of the heart. And of people. So, treat it that way.

---

If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com

What we promote is sometimes not willful. Because our actions are often promoting something whether we explicitly are in favor or against the implications of the action. This has plenty of examples, spreading across moral, ethical, political, and economic subjects. But, here, in this case, I’m talking about cuteness.

Yes, cuteness. You read that right. Because, as I’ve mentioned in another article: the inherent empathic response animals cause in us when we see them can find use when trying to promote. And, in this case, they promote we do not eat them. And us not eating them before, promotes we don’t eat them currently.

Now, I do not wish to step on the toes of any other cultures. For the sake of this argument/opinion/think piece, I am referring to the culture of America only. Cultures and countries and religions all have their own opinions on what animals you can or cannot eat—and that is perfectly fine, obviously.

But when you keep it to only North America, and to only those without religious-based dietary or personal dietary choices we, as people, have an issue with eating most cute animals. Most companion creatures.

For instance, and again, I understand things might be different in other countries, you would not settle down at one of the myriad Clearwater restaurants on Gulf to Bay (I would name a specific place as an example, but I’d imagine no one local wants this scenario attached to them, even hypothetically) and order a cat, a dog, a hamster, or any other cute little fur ball with big eyes.

Sure, some people eat deer and rabbit, and, yes, even squirrel. But that is not the clear majority. We will not eat the same creatures which we like as cute little pets. Or a creature we’d point at a passing pleasant curiosity.

And, though, I do not personally promote eating the adorable little guys, as I grew up in a culture which find such an idea odd and a little saddening, I don’t see why, outside of cuteness and/or the quality of being loyal creatures, we stick so rigidly to these options.

Why, out of everything, with our technological age of modifying at whim, do we limit ourselves—barring some gourmet dishes—to the staples of beef, chicken, pork, and fish?

And, while I’m sure an ecologist could supply some sort of compelling answer to the question, perhaps dealing with availability and societal infrastructure, I think, from a purely mental and sensational level, we can bring ourselves to eat these four and not all the others because of a few select reasons.

The first is that they are all prey animals. Hunted by other predators. And as we are omnivores, we are part predator.  

But, with that said, that still does not make it clear why we would shun, or at least often frown upon, the eating of things like squirrels and gerbils and rabbits. I mean, just taking the reproduction speed of a rabbit as an example, they seem like a possible cheap food source for a world which needs more food sources.

But, we don’t. And it’s a similar reason, probably, to why we are not too keen on eating bugs—no matter the benefits. We are culturally raised, without really questioning it, to associate certain animals as food, and others as not. It’s what our parents served us. An established normal. And there is a lot of convincing power, promotional or otherwise, in an established normal.

Even if something tastes good. Even if someone is not a vegetarian. Even if we have no qualms about what the food companies do to the animals in the name of mass production, we are still picky.

A medically trained person could tell us bugs or gerbils were okay to devour, and we still wouldn’t. Even if we on some level understand it might be better for the planet, we possess deep-seated thoughts and preferences about what we ingest.

Perhaps, if I were to further speculate on the matter, I’d say it’s because eating is so tied to survival. Something hardwired into us. But, regardless, for whatever reason it is, we promote through choices, and I promote through this article, us not eating the adorable. That we don’t, unless it becomes desperate on the world’s stage, eat the cute ones.

It’s a gut feeling. And, when it comes to food, since hunger is often unmarked by anything visible on the human body’s surface, the gut is the main thing we can trust on the matter.

---

If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com

Apple’s iPhone has perhaps the most pervasive marketing in the world of technology. It’s obvious to see. From a technological standpoint, if the many people online and in real life are right, the iPhone is not more powerful than the other things on the market—and yet succeeds anyway.

But, with that said, it does have something above all the competition. Several things. The iPhone has the qualities of being comfort zone appealing, having a strong ease of use, a perceived high level of security, and, to top it off, all other manners of effective sales tactics ensuring that it has customers.

And since an iPhone, perhaps not on purpose, tends to die after around two years of use, and become a brick, it keeps those same qualities fresh in the mind.

Let me break it down: since I just rattled the qualities off and did not elaborate. Being “comfort zone appealing” is something which all products have to some degree, but the iPhone’s user interface makes those of us who grew up with smart phones (often an iPhone) need to run back to the Sprint store in Clearwater Mall for the newest model every single time we need an upgrade.

Why, you might say? Well, ask any older individual, and they have a high probability of telling you just how hard learning to use a new phone can be, so when someone already knows how to use one, they are less likely to want to rely upon a different system and relearn.

This moves right into the second part: the ease of use. Because, say whatever you want about “processing power,” the iPhone is intuitive, and always working to improve that aspect.

Also, as technology progresses, the threat of computer viruses becomes more and more frightful, and thus the perception (and good marketing can give anything a good perception) of iPhones being a safe, “naturally” virus-proof piece of tech is appealing. Easy to go about marketing something if it is safer than other tech—and whether that’s true or not becomes irrelevant to sales.

Finally, to top off my gushing list, the company levels everything it has for the sake of making you want the next device. iPhones receive some of the most stellar advertisements I’ve seen in a long time. They want to make the mouth water of any person who likes esthetics in technology. They want each new model to make your jaw drop to the floor, and your tongue hang to your knees.

Now, bringing this all together, and back to my initial point, these factors combined make for an interesting outcome. Because, sure, maybe some other device is better than the iPhone. Maybe iPhone tech is garbage compared—though I doubt it’s that big of a difference—but it doesn’t matter. Because once you’re an iPhone user, you need a herculean effort to break away.

The situation of iPhones playing nicer with other iPhones through the sheer level of exclusivity that Apple tries to give off with its devices, the prevalence of it in media, and its iconic nature, makes breaking out of the cycle like betraying a friend.

The iPhone is one of the most powerful examples of how good marketing can overcome what some may claim is a shortfall of a product. It is a shining pinnacle of what you can do with perception through marketing and PR.

It’s, for lack of knowledge of a better term, the “iPhone way,” and with it: Apple holds a stake in the world at large.

So, they do have—inarguably—the best phone.

---

If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com