March

PSA: We’re currently researching a new report that will be fuelled by your opinions on customer loyalty and personalization in 2025. Please take two minutes to fill out our short survey, and as a thank you, we’ll give you early access to what we find. 

Okay, now I’ve got that shameless plug in there for my boss, let’s take a look at some notable marketing campaigns from this month. 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice? I’m bored. 

Officially, April Fool’s Day is tomorrow, but if you’re in the UK, you’ll know that this month we already experienced Fool’s Spring (IYKYK).

And if you’ve spent any time on social media, you’ll know that Duo’s legacy is alive and kicking. April Fool’s came early thanks to Lipton Ice Tea and a couple more copycats killing off their top seller this month. 

On March 18, the brand shared that Ice Tea Peach, you know, the main flavor, is being discontinued. It was quickly undone with a follow-up post a day later explaining it was an accidental early April Fools. Rumor has it that it was a real Sugar Honey Ice Tea moment for an intern accidentally posting too early, but the cynics among us are calling it a planned stunt.

Anyone who spends time on LinkedIn knows that even when brands do mess up seemingly for real, a slew of ‘brand experts’ will say it was intentional to create LinkedIn discourse - all press is good press remember. So, the jury’s out. 

We then saw a slew of copycat posts from the likes of Aldi and Lynx killing off the middle aisle and Lynx Africa respectively. Is this a fun new marketing trend, or is it lazy and unoriginal? If we’re killing anything off, kill off copycat campaigns I say. Can you tell I’m over it?

On a lighter note, my main takeaway from the whole thing is how short these copycat brands’ approval processes must be. Dreamy. Oh, and don’t worry, we’ve no plans to kill off Winston, even for likes. 

A breath of fresh air 

I always say that billboards have a big job to do within small parameters - so when they’re done well, it’s worth taking notes. One that stood out this month is from Netflix. The streaming giant used real-time data to make the humble billboard dramatically capture the attention of passersby. 

Netflix has leaned into data-centric marketing to draw attention to its new show, Toxic Town, and to highlight why you should care. ‘Toxic Town’ is a drama based on the real-life events in the town of Corby when toxic chemicals caused birth defects in children born in the area. 

Using real-time insight from AccuWeather, the billboards display a different image based on the quality of the air surrounding it. If the air quality is good, the billboard shows a typical advert for the show. If the air quality is bad, the billboard is covered in white smoke, and a message reads:

‘You can’t see this ad, because the air quality is currently poor’. 

These billboards are an excellent example of the power to be found in localized, personalized marketing. The billboards get your attention by making its message relevant to you, at that very moment. If you’re standing in front of it, it’s telling you whether the air you’re currently breathing is good enough. Even someone strolling along in their own world is going to find it hard to miss this one. It taps into human nature’s reflex to be alert of threats. 

The billboards cleverly convey the theme of the show instantly, whilst also demonstrating that this is everyone’s problem, to appeal to the individual. It’s a great billboard and an excellent show, too.  

Get advice and inspiration on ways to add personalization to your marketing strategy with our free marketing personalization checklist. 

Facebook friend request: denied

This month, a landmark case occurred in the UK when Tanya O’Carroll, a human rights campaigner, forced Meta to stop targeting her with bespoke ads based on her personal data.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) said: 

“Organisations must respect people’s choices about how their data is used. This means giving users a clear way to opt out of their data being used in this way.”

Before we panic, this is about consent and giving consumers choices. It’s about providing a customer experience that the customer has chosen for themselves. When a customer shares their data, use it wisely. When they don’t want to? Respect it.

Although a landmark case for social media platforms, it just reinforces what marketers have known for a while. The settlement reflects the change in consumer attitudes to privacy we’ve seen grow over recent years. 

Responsible marketing is something we’ve been talking about and encouraging for a while at Dotdigital. This case proves how important data privacy is to consumers (taking Meta to court isn’t a casual stance), meaning it should be just as important to you as a marketer and a brand. 

The case highlights that giving consumers choices, keeping them informed, and respecting their personal data is key to maintaining the relationship. When personalized marketing is done well, it’s good for both the customer and the brand. We know that a better, more relevant experience often equals more sales. 

Meta reportedly gets 98% of its revenue from advertising, so this ruling is going to make a difference. While it only applies to one person, for now, it’s a landmark change in the power dynamic of platform and user, and who knows what may follow now that the precedent has been set. 

Meta has since floated the possibility of a paid subscription to access its social media platforms ad-free. While social media has always been free, it’s such an ingrained part of today’s culture that I can actually see this happening. What will be interesting is how influencer ads would be swept up in this, as the proposals include Instagram as well as Facebook. 

Share some nostalgia 

To round off this month’s musings, I want to talk about nostalgia. Last week, Coke re-released its iconic ‘Share a Coke’ campaign. This time full of personalization to appeal to Gen Z - see, personalization really is everywhere… unless you’re Tanya O’Carroll. 

Islam ElDessouky, Global VP, Creative at Coca‑Cola said: 

“As digital natives, Gen Z’s digital interactions can feel fleeting, fueling a desire for real-life engagement. As Gen Z seeks authenticity and connection with people in real life in a world where interactions online can feel momentary, sharing a Coke offers a tangible way to show you care.  It’s not just about likes and shares… we're talking real-world moments, amplified.” 

I don’t know how I feel about it. On the one hand, I totally get it. It’s a reimagination of a well-loved campaign from the past getting a new lease of life thanks to the tech we have today. (Even though it kinda feels like Coca-Cola is saying that today's technology is a problem in the ad itself). 

There’s also the argument for nostalgia; the world is a scary place, and remembering happy summers from years gone by is nice. But I started this newsletter complaining about copycats, and I think even when it’s your own idea - maybe especially when it’s your own idea - you should be doing better. If all we do now is look back, what will we have to look back on in the future? 

It’s not just Coca-Cola looking to the past fondly. I’m seeing a number of brands going back to their roots. Earlier this month, telecom giant O2’s marketing boss said the brand would be reverting its positioning back to its founding message from 2002. And at the tail end of last year, Nike brought its ex-president out of retirement to become the brand’s latest CEO. 

It’s got me thinking: Has marketing run out of originality? I don’t know, maybe I’ve just been watching too much Robert De Niro in Zero Day on Netflix, but life imitates art, right?