The FA's gay video misses the goal

The FA's new video tackling homophobia fails because it lets people off the hook. The ad’s character is so objectionable the majority of fans won’t identify with him. He's a grotesque that's too easy to reject. Violent morons like that are not going to be influenced by this campaign. They’ll probably love it.

Homophobia in football exists as a discreet prejudice amongst players, club staff and fans. This creates an environment which makes gay footballers uncomfortable about ‘coming out’ (remember Robbie Fowler showing Guardian-reading Gramee Le Saux his arse?).  A senior rugby professional felt able to come out without the world ending, but not it seems a footballer.

It is middle England with its softly spoken prejudice, that forms a bigger barrier to gay acceptance than a few easily identifiable extremists. The intolerant culture is formed by people who see themselves as mainstream, decent folk. These are the football-going 'respectable' families as much as the 'lads'. It's their quiet comments and asides that create that culture. They see gay people as "a threat", but wouldn't dream of saying so to their faces. They need to be shown this is not the case.

Maybe that's why Peter Tatchell and the Gay Football Supporters Network have criticised the campaign's content and the lack of consultation in its creation. I tend to agree with Mr Tatchell that a positive portrayal of gay footballers or fans would be more effective amongst a wider group of people. It may be less shocking to show ordinary fans that gay people pose no threat to their values or lifestyles, but that's what needs to be done.

Why Toyota shows trust is the ONLY real brand value

Toyota, Eurostar, RBS, HBOS and Royal Mail have all suffered recent dents to their brand trust. When customers feel they can no longer rely on a brand to deliver on its basic promise, it hurts sales now and in the future.

As a writer, I'm a tedious stickler for copy that is legal, decent honest and truthful, with claims supported by evidence and facts. Customers have to trust what you say.

Without trust, a brand has nothing. Trust does not equal product reliability, although that is important. Most car manufacturers have recalled models. It's the way you handle such problems that determines whether customers will trust you.

Like many of you, I've sat through "brand presentations" where you're not sure whether you're at the launch of a new widget or at a revivalist rally. All sorts of "values" are attributed to a mundane product or service, many of which are not values, but marketing objectives or the parroting of focus group findings. Can your toothpaste really be "inspiring, inclusive and engaging"? Through over-attribution of spurious values marketers are in danger of losing focus on the core value of trust.  It's why I wince when I hear people talking about charities as "famous brands".

The origin of brands was all about trust. They were products customers trusted to deliver. Much of the rest is just hot air.

Why The Observer shouldn't waste money on TV

Guardian newspapers lost £57m and considered shutting the Observer. Instead, they decided to give the ailing Sunday another chance (hooray!). Then today I read they are planning to relaunch it with a TV campaign (boo!).

When you have a well-defined audience, TV can be a wasteful medium. Especially if your budget doesn't stretch to much more than a short burst. There are not millions of likely new Observer readers in TV land. There may be no more than 50,000. White van man ain't gonna fork out £2 for Andrew Rawnsley's analysis of the Tory tax strategy, so why advertise to him?

The Observer is is a complex proposition and a considered purchase. This relaunch is crying out for the dying marketing skill of persuasion, coupled to an enagaging direct and digital strategy. Call it social media.

Observer readers are very active online.Wasn't it a Facebook site that attracted 9,000 names supporting its survival? Isn't there a clue there? What will the Observer app offer (yes, people over 50 do have iphones)? Could they call on one of their famous Facebook supporters (e.g. Rory Bremner) to help them out with a cheeky little viral? What's the email strategy? They're hardly short of content for that.

Of course, The Observer will be planning much more than TV and may well be doing all the things I've mentioned. But just imagine if they'd briefed for a digital/guerilla/direct solution to save the TV money. I bet an imaginative, engaging and cost-effective campaign would have emerged. I wish the Observer luck and pray that it survives. I'm sure the TV campaign will generate some awareness. It is easily the best Sunday paper and I read it every week. That's why I care.

After cigarettes, will food and drink brands go next?

The Government is proposing to remove all branding from cigarette packaging. The British Brands Group is up in arms. "Companies like Rothmans have invested a lot in building up a particular heritage or brand positioning...," to which will come the reply "so what? Cigarettes kill people." If they can ban cigarettes from all public buildings and workplaces, and be applauded for so doing, I'm not sure intellectual property rights will not pose too much of an obstacle.

Whatever next, you may ask?

The answer is food and drink. Obesity and alcohol-related problems are already major public health issues. More links will emerge between certain foods and heart disease. Alcohol will increasingly be linked to violence, depression and illness. There will be heightened public concern at food manufacturing methods as part of the new green agenda.

Fast foods, salty foods, fatty foods, processed foods, spirits, strong lagers etc will be subject to far more stringent advertising rules than they are now. There will be prominent health warnings on packaging for crisps, sweets, beer etc. Advertising snacks and fast food in front of children, and that does not just mean "children's programmes" will be banned. Alcohol ads won't be allowed on TV at all. There will be no more Carling Cup. Certain types of food and food production will be outlawed. Long established brands will disappear.

This is the way the world is going and some of this is happening already. But I believe we ain't seen anything yet. The template for government control has been set and David Cameron's family agenda suggests a Tory Government could be even more protective, especially towards young children. But if marketers fail to anticipate trends and react defensively to attack, they will only have themselves to blame.