Allies and Rivalry: Reebok's "Dan and Dave" Campaign
"One of the goals of marketing communication is to make the consumer, and by extension the culture, your ally. What else besides creativity can do this for you?"
-Juicing the Orange (Fallon & Senn)
The excellent new podcast 30 for 30 from ESPN starts things off with a bang: "The Trials of Dan and Dave." Dan O'Brien and Dave Johnson were track and field athletes who Reebok turned into celebrities with a $25MM ad campaign they ran before the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games. Reebok was determined to compete with Nike and be taken more seriously by athletes. They decided they would play up another rivalry no one had heard of. The resulting commercials found endearing ways to ask the nation to come together and choose between two athletes who everyone thought would be representing the U.S. as they competed for the gold in the decathlon.
For over three decades it's been common knowledge that Nike dominates when it comes to consumer-oriented marketing strategy and advertising that makes us simultaneously want to cry a little and do things a lot. And yes, in 1992, Nike ran a series of well-received commercials. And yes, some of them were even directed by Spike Lee (again) or adapted into a strange comic book.
But that same year, Reebok got our attention too: 15-second TV ads introduced us to Dan and Dave in a peculiar way. People thought it was genius. The campaign was a success. And then it wasn't. Reebok took a risk almost everyone but Nike executives hoped would work out. Dan didn't end up qualifying for the Olympics. Although cut short, the campaign is a stellar example of how a bit of media here and there can have a massive accumulative effect.
Reebok's strategy involved helping to do for Dan and Dave what they wanted consumers to do for them: to care. Dan and Dave were supreme competitors, but not recognizable personalities. In contrast to Nike, Reebok chose to make their brand a platform for cultivating recognition and opinions where few existed.
As it's put in the podcast episode, at the time Reebok was "a shoe that your mom wore to take aerobics classes in." Reebok wanted more athletic credibility. Building up Dan and Dave corresponded to the brand building Reebok was interested in. Like Dan and Dave, Reebok wanted to convey that the brand wasn't on people's radar not because Reebok wasn't a great athletic shoe, but because a story of its athleticism co-written by the public had only just begun.
One creative choice that helped viewers participate in the story was the ads' quirky, mysterious brevity. After 15-seconds viewers were left asking, "What the hell was that?" The intrigue helped people extend their participation beyond the short time-frame of the commercial. As they wove the humorous bits and pieces together they arrived at the culmination of what the campaign was about now invested in what was going to happen to Dan and Dave next.
The ads continued to feature the athletes' origin stories
As well as extend the story in the present while preparing viewers for the future
The more ads like this we're exposed to the more affectionate we feel for these two athletes, even if we end up with a favorite. Behind the scenes, something similar was happening to the athletes themselves, and the warmth between them seems to enhance the humor that makes us delightfully implicated in their rivalry.
-Juicing the Orange (Fallon & Senn)
The excellent new podcast 30 for 30 from ESPN starts things off with a bang: "The Trials of Dan and Dave." Dan O'Brien and Dave Johnson were track and field athletes who Reebok turned into celebrities with a $25MM ad campaign they ran before the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games. Reebok was determined to compete with Nike and be taken more seriously by athletes. They decided they would play up another rivalry no one had heard of. The resulting commercials found endearing ways to ask the nation to come together and choose between two athletes who everyone thought would be representing the U.S. as they competed for the gold in the decathlon.
For over three decades it's been common knowledge that Nike dominates when it comes to consumer-oriented marketing strategy and advertising that makes us simultaneously want to cry a little and do things a lot. And yes, in 1992, Nike ran a series of well-received commercials. And yes, some of them were even directed by Spike Lee (again) or adapted into a strange comic book.
But that same year, Reebok got our attention too: 15-second TV ads introduced us to Dan and Dave in a peculiar way. People thought it was genius. The campaign was a success. And then it wasn't. Reebok took a risk almost everyone but Nike executives hoped would work out. Dan didn't end up qualifying for the Olympics. Although cut short, the campaign is a stellar example of how a bit of media here and there can have a massive accumulative effect.
Reebok's strategy involved helping to do for Dan and Dave what they wanted consumers to do for them: to care. Dan and Dave were supreme competitors, but not recognizable personalities. In contrast to Nike, Reebok chose to make their brand a platform for cultivating recognition and opinions where few existed.
As it's put in the podcast episode, at the time Reebok was "a shoe that your mom wore to take aerobics classes in." Reebok wanted more athletic credibility. Building up Dan and Dave corresponded to the brand building Reebok was interested in. Like Dan and Dave, Reebok wanted to convey that the brand wasn't on people's radar not because Reebok wasn't a great athletic shoe, but because a story of its athleticism co-written by the public had only just begun.
One creative choice that helped viewers participate in the story was the ads' quirky, mysterious brevity. After 15-seconds viewers were left asking, "What the hell was that?" The intrigue helped people extend their participation beyond the short time-frame of the commercial. As they wove the humorous bits and pieces together they arrived at the culmination of what the campaign was about now invested in what was going to happen to Dan and Dave next.
The ads continued to feature the athletes' origin stories
As well as extend the story in the present while preparing viewers for the future
The more ads like this we're exposed to the more affectionate we feel for these two athletes, even if we end up with a favorite. Behind the scenes, something similar was happening to the athletes themselves, and the warmth between them seems to enhance the humor that makes us delightfully implicated in their rivalry.
Imagine a sea of these hats in Tad Gormley Stadium during the Olympic Trials in New Orleans and people shouting, "Dan!" "Dave!" Decathlons never got attention like that. People really, really cared about something they never thought they would. That's the power of advertising. That's the power of advertising when it resonates with people so much it makes them someone a little different and also more thoemselves so that they want to act on their identity in new ways.
Ultimately Reebok set the scene for allowing us to see ourselves in the simultaneous spirits of rivalry and camaraderie that sport celebrates. Dan and Dave acquired individual and cultural allies that exist to this day. Reebok and the creativity employed by their ad agency, together with consumers, made that possible. No doubt Reebok gained some allies too. I certainly won't think of them the same way.
Thank you to the amazing podcast 99% Invisible for introducing me to 30 for 30
Comments
Post a Comment