Drew sucks!



Any marketing strategy that J&J employs must be smart for all of us, eh?

Picture_3 Apparently the folks at Johnson & Johnson thought it would be wise to adopt the best offense is a good defense mentality when it came to their product Splenda.  They’ve spent countless hours and dollars securing every possible anti-Splenda domain name they could think of.

Seriously…this is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.  This isn’t smart marketing. This is paranoia.

Surely we’ve all learned that in today’s citizen-driven communications, if people want to create a forum to say good or bad things about a company or product — they will. No matter how many domain names you own.

A hat tip and thanks to Roberta over at Copywriting Maven for calling this to my attention.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

7 comments on “Drew sucks!

  1. Andrew Clark says:

    Wow, what a slam to your ego, Drew. And seeing that I share your name, I was somewhat “paranoid” when I saw your subject line…

    Consumer driven marketing has an ugly side as well. Sometimes it’d be wiser to take the high road and support your brand with positive efforts and truth about the product/service you’re marketing.

    Thanks for the heart attack… Cheers and have a Happy St. Patrick’s day.

    Keep Cooking!

  2. I find it a simple defensive strategy; it’s their money…who cares. How much longevity does the Splenda brand carry if successful in this micro-market? Wait…I think I get your point. In this relatively small product category, negative news will still arise somehow or another and we can’t stop word of mouth.

  3. Andrew (or do you go by Drew?),

    On the one hand…I understand what J&J was trying to do. MY point is two-fold:

    1) It is futile — if someone wants to slam you badly enough, they will find a way.

    2) Isn’t there a better place for those resources?

    Sorry for giving you cause to clutch at your chest!


  4. Cam,

    J&J might be very right — people might be gunning for Splenda. But my point is more of a — why bother? If they want to take a shot at you, they are going to find a way.

    It’s a little like trying to scoop up all the water from the Pacific Ocean with a tablespoon. Sure…you can get some water out. But in the grand scheme of things, does it really matter?


  5. Mario,

    Yes, that’s my point exactly. Why bother? As I said above in my comment to Cam — it seems a bit like bailing the ocean’s water with a spoon.

    It’s not so much that there is harm done, it just seems like an incredible waste of effort and money.


  6. I agree with you Drew – this is pure paranoia. I think we all agree that buying top level domain names related to your brand is important but this is insane – which is one of the reasons I wrote the story. There is no logic to their buying either – and obviously anyone of us could sit here and come up with dozens of others applying their methodology. As I said I find it fascinating a company actually tried to forecast negative domains they thought “wackos” might potentially buy and post negative information on. I wonder if the person who came up with “victimsofsplenda.com” as a domain to buy got a raise? – rider

  7. Hey Rider,

    Thanks for stopping by. I think your story was right on. Logic would tell us they couldn’t possibly cover all the bases, so I am left wondering why bother?

    All they did was raise the issue to a much more public level. Which I cannot imagine was their goal.

    But…it is corporate America.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *