Marketing a benefit that just doesn’t sound good

I posted this article on Twitter recently, but thought I’d address it in more depth as I am still reeling from the premise of toilet paper that touts itself as so strong that “1 feulle peut suffire” – one sheet will do.  Now, I am a fan of Lotus products – I love their small tissue packs, with handkerchief-sized tissues that are nice and thick for the serious nose-blower, and a sleeve of them is often one of my main purchases in Paris on a trip to Monoprix.  However, and without probing in detail the factual bases for their advertising claim regarding one sheet, I am giving a thumbs-down on this campaign.  Adding insult to injury is the fact that the name of the product all too explicitly conveys their marketing M.O.: Just 1. 

See?  Even thinking about it makes you not want to buy it.

H/t Why Travel to France

Hooray for common sense!

The court doesn’t call it fair use, but fundamentally the appearance of a Gottlieb pinball machine in a few minutes of a movie is fair use, IMHO, under principles of both copyright and trademark law.  And plaintiff’s argument that its product’s appearance in a movie starring noted anti-Semite Mel Gibson could harm its business reputation?  Don’t embarrass yourselves, okay?

And yes, this is a topic I’ve written about before and will no doubt write about again.

H/t Marty

(You can play the game too – I copied this image from Wikipedia.  I’m using it not to suggest sponsorship or affiliation by The Who, but rather to illustrate the term pinball referenced above, in a way that will have “Pinball Wizard” running through your brain for the rest of the day.  Oops – I’ve discussed this concept before as well!)