Whoopi cushion: Goldberg maintains her Poise. Will you?

Ladies and gentlemen, presenting the face of incontinence, Whoopi Goldberg. Yes, the comedian and The View co-host is helping to get discussion - pardon the pun - flowing about light bladder leakage. More accurately, she's helping Kimberly-Clark market its line of Poise panty pads.

Goldberg is going to be featured in a series of conventional ads and online webisodes that will highlight the bladder control problems of historical/mythical figures like Cleopatra, Joan of Arc and Eve. The goal is twofold: to reach out to young women and to let people know that not all products are created equally when you lay it on the line, or liner.

I'm all for raising awareness, particularly in the younger demo, that one in three women have this problem. But what nags at me is how it was decided that Whoopi is the right spokesmodel to engage young women in this discussion. Aren't they likely to see her as a mother, or grandmotherly, figure, thus defeating the purpose of the campaign? Wouldn't a contemporary like, I don't know, Rihanna or Kate Hudson have more cachet?

Also, why would women today care how Joan of Arc or Cleopatra dealt with weak bladders, even if handled comically? I would have thought something more contemporary would have been the way to go. But what do I know? I'm not the target audience.

Still, I'd love to see the stats after this campaign has played out for a year, just to know if the young ladies take their cues from Whoopi, and to prove me wrong. And forgive me this but I can't help wondering: is there any chance these Poise webisodes will leak online before their intended release date?

Read all about it: Globe & Mail fails to deliver on brand expectations

So, my other half, who I call M'lady, recieved a complimentary subscription to Canada's self-proclaimed national newspaper, The Globe & Mail.

It's a 90-day subscription that began last week, so it's Monday-Saturday delivery. Except, on Saturday, we didn't receive our copy of the newspaper. M'lady called to inquire about it and was told that, for comp subscriptions, they won't do a redeliver.

And I have a problem with this.

Here's the thing. I know I'm not a paid subscriber, but the 90-day comp is supposed to be an enticement for me to become one, right? So, if you were trying to woo a new customer, wouldn't you treat someone like me as if I were an existing customer? Wouldn't you try to impress me with outstanding customer service to give me some sense of what I can expect from you?

Apparently, if you're The Globe and Mail, you don't.

Here's the thing. If you want to have positive brand perceptions among customers - current and potential - you need to deliver a great brand experience. By not offering to send a replacement copy, The Globe and Mail failed to meet my expectations that we would have a paper for 90 days. It also suggests that the Globe and Mail views potential customers very differently than current customers, not valuing them enough to provide such a courtesy.

Sure, it's a small thing. But I think even a small thing like this has the power to alter the public's perception of a brand. So, it's something to keep in mind. And it's something that will be on my mind when the Globe and Mail calls to see if I want to be a subscriber. Here's hoping this news reaches them.

MTV: The Day the 'Music' Died.

So MTV has a new logo. And the interesting thing about it is... they've dropped the Music Television slogan.

Anyone could have told you that the M in MTV doesn't stand for music, and hasn't for a very long time. This thanks to the proliferation of things such as Jersey Shore and The Real World. This content has gradually crowded out music videos and performances.

The question now being, 'If MTV's brand is not all about the music, then what does the M in MTV stand for?' Mundane? Mediocre? Manure? Help me out here...