Brandjack News

By Quentin Langley

An ad attacking Gmail’s advertising driven business model – and contrasting it with Office 365 – has been trending on YouTube. Speaking to Mark Ragan’s PR Daily, Microsoft refused to comment

Negative advertising is not new, nor unethical. In a market, as in an election (and negative ads are very common in politics) people make choices. Choices are not made in a vacuum. You choose A or B. The point is not whether A is any good or even whether B is bad. The point is which is better. A simple contrasting of the features or business model of two product offerings is perfectly reasonable.

But why is this attack ad (semi)-anonymous? That the ad is partisan for Microsoft’s Office 365 is obvious. Microsoft should not have refused to comment. If the company is responsible for it, it should have said “Yes, we did it. We are proud of it. People should know about Gmail’s assault on their privacy”. If Microsoft is not responsible, it should have said “No, it wasn’t us. But we love it. Great ad”.

In social media, people value authenticity and engagement. Tell us what you really think.