I just watched the 4 minute Chipotle animation that launches their new marketing strategy. It was just posted about 2 months ago and has 7 million views. After a week, it had 4 million views.
It’s about business competitors trying to out do each other and ends as a love affair with sensible food.
Is the point of this video that marketing, advertising and promotion helps you to lose site of your values? In this video the marketing and advertising influences are portrayed as the villain in the story.
Portraying Advertising as the Cause
Marketing is demonized by plenty of people, not just this video. Is it really the fault of marketing?!?!
Is marketing the problem with the fast food industry? Marketing made them put food additives into the food?
Maybe I’m missing something, but I never thought the problems at Chipotle were about excessive advertising and marketing.
Their website outlines the outbreaks in 2015 in a very straightforward crisis communications manner. Social media has rumors of an unscrupulous conspiracy designed to give them a bad name.
Maybe I missed something. Was there a secret love affair gone bad that caused the rumors (or fact) of health problems due to food?
Are they trying to redirect and blur their story?
Is this love story actually the story of how Chipolte was founded?
What is the strategy behind this animation?
Obviouly I have more questions than answers about this subject.
I originally wrote this post a few days after the short video was released, but didn’t publish it. I waited because I thought I might figure it out. Instead, I’m throwing this out to my readers to explain it to me.
What’s the deal with this… I just don’t get it? Please leave your thoughts in the comments below.
2 thoughts on “Portraying Advertising, Marketing as the Bad Guys”
I think there’s a LOT said in this animation. First, I think you’re right about the marketing and advertising being made to be the villains in this instance, though I think it’s more of a tool used the wrong way.
I think the more underlying message here is that the two competitors are so focused on the bottom line - getting customers, making money - that they loose sight of the product itself. They’re entrancing customers to buy buy buy visually, which leads them to forget to even taste their own product because they’re overloaded with visual attraction vs. sense of taste. I’m not sure why they’d gotten as massive as they did without having edible food, but that’s a different tangent.
I think it’s a matter of Chipotle portraying other fast food places as the ones who can’t see past taste-compromising, cost-saving solutions like preservatives. They mask processed food behind a bunch of flashing lights, almost like fast food owners are blinded into tastelessness and greed over caring about the customer.
Then, they resolve the issue by making it not about dazzling competition, but about working together and putting taste and customer care first. And this seems to be the point at the end.
While I know there are many ways to advertise, I think Chipotle is knocking the companies that use dazzling glitz and glamour to attract. I don’t necessarily think Chipotle is knocking marketing and advertising as a whole, I think they’re portraying it as a misused tool instead of the cause. You’d expect this kind of advertising from an amusement park rather than a fast food chain. But in a roundabout way, I think Chipotle made their point - that glitz and glamour aren’t always in the customer’s best interest, or the company’s, for that matter.
Maybe this is a testament to the evolving customer perception of advertising and the conclusions we draw from advertisements now?
Thank you for your insightful comments. Glad that you’re looking about it as putting taste and customer care first. I appreciate you taking the time to read and comment!
Comments are closed.