If you weren’t alive and watching the Super Bowl in 1984 between the Washington Redskins and the Los Angeles Raiders, you missed what many marketers believe to be was one of the most impactful commercials ever shown during the “Big Game.” That says a lot given the NFL’s remarkable marketing platform, an annual challenge for advertisers and brands everywhere to make their mark.
Apple’s “1984” only aired that one time in the Super Bowl, creating even more intrigue. And with no Internet or YouTube, the spot took on an incredible mystique. It was bombastic – a powerful message that the Mac could help you maintain your individuality in a world of lemmings.
Not surprisingly, there was a great deal of interpretation of the spot with much controversy about the company’s marketing strategy. Some felt the spot was brilliant, others called it crazy. And yet, it generated a dialogue and a controversy that occasionally resurfaces decades later.
Here’s the spot:
For Apple fanboys and girls, it was a sign of the company’s brashness, its creativity, its uniqueness. In those days, Apple CEO and co-founder, Steve Jobs, wasn’t just obsessed with making amazing products; his M.O. was to position his innovative company as different from every other tech company. And it was commercials like “1984” that delivered that message, adding to the company’s mystique, and creating conversation and even controversy.
The fact it was a one-and-done campaign on the world’s biggest stage – the Super Bowl – gave the spot even more cachet and enigma. And it communicated in no uncertain terms that Apple was capable of surprise, shock, and delight in both its products and its marketing – all at the same time.
You either saw it or you didn’t.
Here we are 40 years later and Apple is at it again. This time, it’s not the Macintosh, but the debut of a new ultrathin iPad.
And in a new ad that evokes controversy and even shock value, Apple is once again smashing stuff. In fact, that’s the theme of the new 2024 marketing message embodied in a TV spot named “Crush” where media and gadgets including turntables, musical instruments, books, and an arcade video game are crushed by a massive hydraulic press.
The press opens to reveal the new ultra-thin iPad Pro, essentially replacing all the “old media” in its midst. Take a look:
It evokes the “1984” breakthrough ad to some observers. But to others, it’s disturbing.
Many of the objects destroyed by the mighty Mac “crusher” are endearing to us – a piano, a record player, and even cute little animated yellow characters, sporting terrified looks as the Apple machine mercilessly pancakes them.
I’m not offended easily, but was turned off the moment I saw “Crush.” For me, it brought back my first memories of seeing the Who from their beginnings in the mid-1960s. Early on, the band often ended their shows by “spontaneously” destroying their instruments. Pete Townshend grabbed his guitar by the neck, repeatedly and violently slamming its body into the stage stage floor, while drummer Keith Moon grabbed mic stands and other objects to pulverize his drums. It was shocking, especially the first time you saw it without warning.
Interestingly, the Who was – and continues to be – one of my favorite bands of the era. While there’s no way of knowing, I’ve probably seen them live more than any other performers of that iconic time in music history. Their vivid statement about punk alienation has stuck with me forever.
At that same time, I was saving up for a Farfisa Mini-Compact Organ at a cost of several hundred dollars. Way back in the ’60s, this was a lot of dough for a kid earning $1 an hour delivering prescriptions for Band Drugs in Metro Detroit. Watching the Who crushing their perfectly wonderful instruments on stage may have made a point for them. For me, it was pointless and even a bit troubling.
Apple’s attempt at shock left me with the same empty feeling. And I found I wasn’t alone.
And yet despite its obvious effort to inspire that kind of reaction, Apple CEO, Tim Cook, was on Twitter/X reminding his legions of followers about Apple’s new and powerful tablet with the ad embedded in the tweet.
Apple has leveraged its reputation and brand essence on catering to innovators everywhere. And yet, “Crush” seemed to evoke the opposite reactions. AdAge saw it as “crushing the history of human creativity.” And the director of Handmaid’s Tale, Reed Morano suggested Cook “read the room.”
As I was putting this post together yesterday afternoon, Apple released a statement apologizing for “missing the mark,” simultaneously pulling the spot from their TV creative arsenal.
Here’s how Apple walked back “Crush” yesterday in a statement from Tor Myhren, Apple VP of marketing communications:
“Creativity is in our DNA at Apple, and it’s incredibly important to us to design products that empower creatives all over the world. Our goal is to always celebrate the myriad of ways users express themselves and bring their ideas to life through iPad. We missed the mark with this video, and we’re sorry.”
So, what can we take away from Apple’s misstep, and perhaps even apply to our own marketing and branding challenges:
1. Shock is tough to pull off – especially now – It was one thing when Howard Stern shocked us back in the ’80s. It was a different day, a different time. As Howard intuited, after years of “morning zoos,” the audience was ready to be rocked out of their daily monotony in kitchens and cars. Today, life is shocking enough as it is without Apple contributing to our angst.
2. When you screw up, suck it up, admit it, and move on – To its credit, Apple quickly realized how tone deaf “Crush” was and pulled the ad – just two days after its debut. Even Coca-Cola took more time – 77 days – to walk back New Coke. That story has become part of marketing infamy and countless PhD dissertations, something Apple desperately wishes to avoid.
3. Pre-test your creative – Here’s something interesting. “Crush” wasn’t created by an agency. Instead it was Apple’s in-house creative team. Maybe “group think” allowed a really bad idea to continue passing internal tests. In any case, $10,000 worth of focus groups would have revealed the same reaction to the spot before it embarrassed the company after it started to air. The fact Apple didn’t do these or ignored their own research is unconscionable for a company of their magnitude.
4. “Your baby’s ugly” – The entire fiasco smacks of the internal trap organizations fall into where no one has the stones to tell the boss the idea sucks. Every organization needs someone who has permission to disagree with the herd – or the boss. And by the way, when consultants are doing their jobs, this is precisely what we’re paid to do.
5. PR, buzz, and “going viral” isn’t always good – The old adage, “Any publicity is good publicity – as long as they spell your name right” is patent nonsense. For a premium brand like Apple, they’ve spent decades building their brand on supporting creatives with the sleekest, fastest, and smartest machines. “Crush” does nothing to suggest they’re living up to that reputation.
6. Everyone’s capable of a bonehead mistake – Even the slickest, smartest, and richest companies can make a bad decision, even with all the necessary safeguards in place. If you’re working for a mom & pop, a small, scrappy enterprise, or a startup, it’s comforting to know anyone can lose their mind. It’s what you do afterwards that matters.
A 6-pack of lessons from one of the biggest companies in the world is heartening in an era where many brands and leadership teams struggle to act rationally and wisely.
And it’s a reminder of how not to get “crushed” by arrogance, hubris, and bad decision-making.
Jacobs Media has consistently walked the walk in the digital space, providing insights and guidance through its well-read national Techsurveys.
In 2008, jacapps was launched - a mobile apps company that has designed and built more than 1,300 apps for both the Apple and Android platforms. In 2013, the DASH Conference was created - a mashup of radio and automotive, designed to foster better understanding of the "connected car" and its impact.
Along with providing the creative and intellectual direction for the company, Fred consults many of Jacobs Media's commercial and public radio clients, in addition to media brands looking to thrive in the rapidly changing tech environment.
Fred was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in 2018.
- Baby, Please Don’t Go - November 22, 2024
- Why Radio Needs To Stop Chasing The Puck - November 21, 2024
- Great Radio – In The Niche Of Time? - November 20, 2024
What if instead they took each of those items, dropped them into a giant funnel that fed those expressive tools into the I-Pad? Go ahead Apple, you can use my idea for 1 free I-Pad!
I’m not sure that Apple didn’t get exactly the response it expected. The ad is going viral even if it’s being talked about negatively. Their quick apology seems like it was waiting in the wings. Meanwhile, the ad got 7-million YouTube views and growing, along with myriad “backlash” videos and lots of pointers to the Apple Event video. Maybe I’m jaded, but they seem to have had too many “excuses” ready for the aftermath.
Yes “1984” played once. At that day in time in my life I didn’t see it. But I have seen it countless times when it is brought out, dusted off, and talked about. That is a lot of return on a commercial that played once. Is Apple dumb like a fox? Is “Crush” going to be the same way? Are they using an old radio trick where the GM comes on the air and says “we are sorry for what Bobby said this morning.” It used to create buzz and interest. Same here?
I honestly don’t think so, Joel. It feels to me like a terrible miscalculation. Then again, we’re still talking about it.
Yeah, the spot was pretty horrifying, and one of my fave social media platforms sent it up in flames in response. Except one that “fixed it.”
Another creative’s take on the Apple spot, where it reversed the entire ad, starting with the ultra-thin iPad Pro and “un-crushing” all the things that were heaped on the crushing machine, basically showing what was compacted in the m4 chip. Very clever.
Wow! That’s brilliant!
I have not seen that but I love the concept. Still, doesn’t it make Apple look bad?
Hey Fred for we “old guys” who often remember more, isn’t this Apple Crusher TV spot an expansion of John Cameron Swayze using a similar crushing machine to quickly destroy a boom box radio in a memorable TV spot for New York City’s Z-100 in the early 1980’s? THAT was shocking at the time, but Apple is famous for doing things that gain them TONS of free advertising. With the proliferation of SOCIAL media, the reach is now officially over-the-top! Ain’t that many truly new ideas, just a lot of masked plagiarism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bTALzErTl8
Per the comments, that ad might’ve also been used elsewhere. Plus, there’s a different video that features a version with Hulk Hogan replacing the Mr. T impersonator here.
(Personally, the Apple ad reminded me first of both the Kids in the Hall “Headcrusher” sketches and the very early Wild Wild West episode with the “Deadly Bed”.)
I forgot about the John Camderon Swayze campaign for Timex (“Takes a licking and keeps on ticking”). So, did Z100 “plagarize” that, or was it brilliant parody marketing?
Left an impression alright…of one shooting themselves in the knee.
Isn’t there a school of thought, around “New Coke”, that it was intentional. If memory serves me they didn’t pull “New Coke” they brought back the original formula as “Classic Coke” and now had 2 drinks in distribution. Conspiracy theorists might agree.
To your 2nd point. You are absolutely spot on. Although is not as simple as it sounds, look at Tylenol. That is considered one of the gold standards in PR for crisis management.
You are correct, Jerry. New Coke hung around for quite a while, which (IMO) wasn’t about totally admitting their mistake AND perhaps not wanting to alienate the crowd that actually liked it. But I don’t believe it was intentional. And yes, kudos to Apple for their crisis management move.
The ad is cringeworthy. The spot shows Apple destroying the tools of creativity. Apple doesn’t, or shouldn’t, destroy creativity. Apple products inspire creativity. The ad fails to show how the new iPad helps inspire creativity.
The 1984 Mac ad showed how Apple would prevent sameness. More importantly, it was a revolutionary ad for a revolutionary product.
A new iPad model that’s an eighth of an inch (?) thinner isn’t revolutionary. Was anybody holding back on buying an iPad because it was too bulky?
But you’re right; anybody can make a mistake – even avoidable ones. At least they followed the rules of crisis management and got in front of it quickly.
Couldn’t agree more, Andy.
Videos of hydraulic crushers squishing things are all over YouTube, so the concept is nothing new. But yeah, Apple’s approach was all wrong.
With what it cost to rent the machine, procure all the props, move that piano, hire a crew etc etc, they could have animated it instead to look more comical, make folks smile and give the computer a friendlier sell.
Curious you should highlight the clip of the Who from the Smothers Brothers show; I was nine years old when that aired and was just getting interested in learning the guitar. Up until then, the “El Kabong” cartoon was as violent as anyone got with a guitar so it was funny and easy to digest. But my reaction was the same as yours and that scene shocked me out of my socks.