British Invasion

February 1, 2011 • 3:56 pm • POSTED BY lhendler

American’s love making the old new again, (some artists make an entire career out of it, yes I am talking to you P Diddy and Jay-Z ). We sample, we borrow. And maybe we have to, because as my illustrious Executive Creative Director, Jim Walls says, “there are only 14 original ideas in advertising.” But what happens when we try to make something from across the pond (or anywhere else for that matter) translate here in America? One of our clients, Love Beets, a grower and packer of fresh beet marinated in a series of yummy flavors, is trying to assess that right now as they bring their product to the U.S. market, (and more specifically to a Wegman’s or Whole Foods near you). Packaging must change, copy, design, layouts, etc. because after all, some things just don’t translate (even when you speak the same language…sort of).

But many successful TV shows have been remade for the U.S., after originating in the British market. One of the most well-known of these cross overs is The Office. Though I am a fan of the American version, (I have even perused the Halpert Baby Blog), I respect that it is universally known that the British version will ultimately reign supreme. It is a cultural thing. And who knows, maybe we will see a mash-up sooner then we think based on this recent run-in that feels a lot like a foreshadow of how NBC could handle Michael Scott’s departure.

The challenge is, how do you take the essence of what makes a show special in one country, and bring that to another with the right variation that helps it resonate with new audiences? And will it always work? Big Brother was the second coming in England, with its “reality” stars became “real” stars who skyrocketed to the A list, whereas in the U.S. some enjoyed the show, but saw the contestants for what they were–average people with interest in their 15min. of fame or a chance to win some dough…even if you have to look incredibly stupid along the way.

These examples give insight into how comedy and reality TV can translate, but what about drama, sex, and teenagers? Case in point, Skins, “a British teen drama that follows a group of teenagers in Bristol, South West England”. The controversial plot line delves into similar topics as say, 90210, but with well, a bit more edge…like a Ginsu. MTV recently decided to adapt this series for the U.S. market, and it is causing quite the stir with the “prudish” American public. Allegations of child pornography (youngest cast member is 15 yrs. old), drug use, and sexually explicit content have caused the Parents Television Council to take a strong stance labeling “Skins” the “most dangerous program that has ever been foisted on your children.” As a result, numerous advertisers have pulled out, beginning with Taco Bell, then Wrigley and GM and now, Tax prep company H&R block, one of the show’s largest advertisers. As if this weren’t bad enough (or good depending on how you look at it) the other side argues that the U.S. is too prudish to let the show live up to the standards of the British version. In response to this, MTV put together a promotional campaign highlighting these “haters” of the program.

So how has Skins fared in the ratings so far? Most likely due to all the hoopla, 3.26 million tuned in for the debut, but the show took a 5o% ratings dive for the 2nd episode. Was it too offensive? Not offensive enough? Or just bad TV?

The question remains, how can the U.S. succeed when faced with both sides willing it to fail? Or does this actually create its best chance for success by creating such a controversy? Or is this all moot if the programming stinks? MTV has taken this tact in the past and come out on top several times, but they may be fighting a losing battle on this one. Should the British invasion continue? Can it be successful here? It worked for the Beatles, and a few others, but would we be better off just creating our own original programs to suit our very particular US audiences?