Over the last few weeks there’s been a lot of press about IKEA. First there was the hub-bub about the change in font in the new catalogue; apparently the IKEA catalogue shift from Then came the story on CBC about an independent film maker who shot a TV series inside an IKEA store in Burbank. It was reported without any critical analysis at all.
From the perspective of a PR pro, this series is like having a press release published as hard news. Sure, the reporter said the series was shot "without the staff's knowledge" and "without permission of the management" but these are phrases that can be used honestly without divulging the fact that corporate headquarters support the project.
Even the most unseasoned reporter should have wondered how it was possible for this series to film four episodes, getting in and out of beds, sitting in displays and filming strangers, chase scenes and clinches all without attracting a ripple of attention.
I thought I sensed another campaign and so decided to ignore it and let it cycle through the web in the same way the Bridezilla and Lonelygirl 115 videos did when they appeared on YouTube. I figured people probably saw it for what it was and my mentioning it would only be restating the obvious and drawing still more attention to the series.
Then IKEA Heights appeared on my friend's Face Book page. He swallowed it whole - I think he wanted to think about the place of consumer culture in most people's lives and he may have seen it as subversive. He is a brilliant man - his intelligence is not at issue. I think what is at work here is a desire to see the possibility of subversive creativity working in the margins of corporate culture. That desire to believe in the magic of the rebel, the allure of the pirate artist, is powerful enough to trump common sense.At first glance it looks like any other ad.
The IKEA Heights logo's similarity to IKEA’s logo is unmistakeable, the blue background of the IKEA sign has been replaced by black, sure but otherwise it looks like a pretty clear trademark infringement to me. My friend believed it. That bothered me. I went to the site and looked at the series. Here is a link: http://www.ikeaheights.com/ Look at it objectively:
First the front page. Unlike the floating Face book logo the IKEA Heights web page is IKEA blue with yellow writing. Swedish flag colors - IKEA colors. The yellow on black logo is displayed to the right; a reinforcement of the link to the logo that appeared on my friend's Face book page. The web page is called ikeahights.com. And there was one more thing that should always raise suspicion on a web page; no place to leave a comment and yet there are comments listed - all positive, like the blurbs on the back of a newly published book.
This could come off looking like an attempt to make a joke about the act of filming the series, an ironic nod to IKEA’s role in the production of the series. However, IKEA is protective of their brand. On September 9 of this year, they won their suit against someone for using the word IKEA as part of their domain name. Here's a link.
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/09/09/Ikea-wins-domain-name-ruling/UPI-65531252528299/
The domain name in question was iloveikea.com Now have a look at episode one: Opening shot - a couple snuggled down in bed. Price tag, visible. Could be an accident, you never know. Cut to - wide shot of IKEA sign, in case you didn't get that it's filmed inside an IKEA store. No reason to do that if you're just a guerrilla filmmaker guy and no reason to allow it to stand if you're the corporate entity who owns the brand unless it serves a purpose.
Close up on the Swedish meatballs sign. Close up on "We're crazy about low prices." If the film maker is trying to be funny about being in IKEA, once is enough and anyway, these signs are on-message for the company's agenda, aren't they?Then there is the pillow scene, the crime boss wanted down pillows but the henchman brings an assortment of colorful cushions filled with polyester. His boss is annoyed because "polyester breathes"
No video screen, regardless of how good its definition may be can discern between polyester and goose down or foam or any other kind of fill. However, not everyone is clear on the selling points of polyester fill, one being, cost and another, apparently, that polyester fill, at least this polyester fill, breathes. Gee - thanks for the information, you can get breathable polyester pillows at IKEA in lots of colors, who knew?
From there, it just goes on and on. The acting is awful, the scripts are not funny enough to raise a smile but the product placement and the idea, as viral, are brilliant. I have shown this video to a couple of other people and they have laughed but what they laughed about was the absurdity of filming a TV series in IKEA and about how awful the acting, shooting and scripting was. Ask them anything about the actual content and they can't remember. Hmmmm
With IKEA Heights, IKEA has launched into a new level of marketing, making pretty good use of web resources that have puzzled other marketers and finding a way to generate income without wasting resources on an untried medium.
Doubtless it is an excellent use of resources even if the film maker was paid from the start and especially if, as people continue to claim, this is a series made by some struggling film maker in California who received no remuneration for his efforts.
With this campaign IKEA avoided the cost of placing ads in any medium. It was carried virally and generated its own press. Most of it looks as though it came free and all of it top tier. The LA Times covered this story, as did CBC, NBC and of course there is all the chatter online. You cannot buy coverage this good.
Even better, all of the press was of the "gee-whiz-isn't-this-great!" variety. Not a critical word was spoken. Just two months previous, IKEA other "viral" campaign tanked in the news. A Vancouver skateboard shop owner complained vociferously to the CBC that IKEA had defaced his property with graffiti as part of a guerrilla ad campaign. (story below)
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/07/29/bc-vancouver-guerilla-ad-campaign.html
Then there is the fact that the series continues to run online making full use of the IKEA name, showing interiors and garnering coverage that is positive if not exactly credible. I know I have said this already but I feel it should be emphasized, IKEA is a sophisticated corporate entity with an elaborate corporate structure. This would not and could not happen without consent from IKEA.
IKEA Heights is completely consistent with IKEA’s history of unorthodox ad campaigns. IKEA campaigns have, in my opinion, successfully positioned them as a quirky individualistic place. This placement defies all logic. Surely, if there is a MacDonald's of furniture stores IKEA is it. They are literally everywhere, all over the world and their product serves a very large segment of the market.
In these times, IKEA may serve the largest segment of the furniture buying market. I have only ever met two people who have not been to an IKEA store; both make well in excess of $100,000 a year.
In the course of my research into this story I took one of them to the local IKEA store. What did he do? He bought a dresser.
Here's a link to another interesting IKEA campaign from 2006: http://marketallica.wordpress.com/2006/05/23/everyday-fabulous-with-ikea/
Then there was the official IKEA TV series which starred Ileana Douglas and can be found here http://www.easytoassemble.tv/ Easy to Assemble wrapped up earlier this year, leaving a plank missing from IKEA’s marketing platform until the space was filled by IKEA Heights.
If IKEAHeights were an independent production, copyright law would protect IKEA’s right to their trademark. If IKEA chose to relinquish that right, even by choosing not to prosecute, then this story could be true. However, if IKEA allows IKEA Heights to use their trademark as they have then the door is opened to anyone else using it in a similar fashion, once you’ve opened up your trademark to the public domain you cannot choose to reel it in. If IKEA protects their trademark as they have proven they do, a contract must exist between IKEA and IKEA Heights which means it is not guerrilla film making it is smart if cynical, marketing.
