Brands don’t die suddenly; they die slowly from a thousand tiny cuts

Read the whole thing here

_____

Rupert Murdoch

  • Atm

    Have you read the interview in which one of the Doomsday Preppers accuses a Nat Geo producer of offering her $1,000 to shoot her cat on camera?

    If not, here it is:  http://freethoughtblogs.com/rockbeyondbelief/2012/02/08/how-nat-geo-misrepresented-the-foxhole-atheist-doomsday-prepper-megan-hurwitt/. 

    The Nat Geo Channel appears to be the most visible component of the brand at this point (even more so than the magazine), and it’s there that the bulk of its reputation will be earned. 

    • Atm – Thanks for your note & the tip. 

      Yes, I did see the item on Freethoughtblogs, and I actually followed up with Megan Hurwitt. See the comments section of the post you mention. My comment is #14; Megan responds in #23. She says the suggestion she shoot her cat for $1,000 was from “Sharp Entertainment’s producer.” And that “he was joking.” But I’m sure he would have kept the cameras rolling if Megan hadn’t gotten the joke. … Given all the other things to focus on at NGS (and I have a huge backlog), I decided this item might be a bit of stretch. That said, Killing Cats for Cash does sort of reflect the tenor of the whole production, so maybe it’s worth revisiting. 

      Re your comment about NGC being “the most visible component of the brand” and “it’s there the bulk of its reputation will be earned” — we’re in complete agreement. The Channel is a financial success & a branding disaster. And once Rupert & Co are finished deflowering NGS, they will move on… leaving a mess of a company in their wake. 

      Thanks again for stopping by… 
      best,
      A

      • Atm

        Alan, Thank you for finding out that it was a Sharp producer who made the offer. I appreciate the investigative  journalism. While my initial reaction was one of relief, wasn’t the Sharp producer acting in NG’s name to a great extent, as it’s an NG show? I think some of the commenters on the interview were a little too quick to let NG off the hook. How much respect does an organization deserve that allows anything to be done in it’s name? Or an organization for whom any price is the right price for its name? Makes me wonder if there are any companies out there that wanted to buy the NG name and didn’t get it. Considering the list for whom the price was right, I’m guessing not many, if any.

        • I’m sure there are companies who wanted to license the NG name who have been turned down. Or I have to believe that. But licensing isn’t Fox, it isn’t the Channel. For years, television has been a parallel universe which didn’t intersect The NGS Brand, but still threw off a lot of cash. Now, though, thanks to media convergence, NGC is barreling straight at the heart of NGS. The only thing that surprises me is that David Lyle & Howard Owens haven’t turned this corporate tug-of-war into a reality show of its own. Then again, maybe they have. After all, we’re watching, right? 🙂 

  • Guest

    Give David and Howard time.

  • Atm

    I wonder if NGS thinks that the World Wildlife Fund (aka World Wide Fund for Nature) missed a great opportunity by suing the World Wrestling Federation for the initials WWF rather than partnering with them. Would have made for some great Man vs. Grizzly wrestling matches.

    • Atm – You clearly have a future in television! 

NO NEW POSTS will be published here after February 6, 2014. THIS IS WHY.