31.8.06
5 Reasons why there is so much rubbish advertising around
1. Because the consumer is not an idiot but the creative is
2. Because the client is the ultimate creative director
3. Because the agency didn't have the balls to take the client somewhere they haven't been before
4. Because everybody in the room gave it a 'nod' of recognition (they have seen it before, therefore the horrible proclamation 'it is a bit like what x did for y...'
5. Because no one got scared of loosing their job by coming up with it, selling it or making it
What if it isn't about a BIG IDEA?
Just read an article in Champagne about how the agency of the future will be about coming up with the big idea not the 30 second ad. Somehow having the idea of the BIG IDEA drummed into everybody's head has become a form of mass hypnosis for fad-land. What if the brand can have many small ideas? Even better, lots of small ideas that are so perfectly executed in a medium that they cannot possibly live anywhere else e.g. subservient chicken? What if it isn't about who runs the campaign or becomes the architect for it but a rather a dedicated partner who looks after the short / long term health of a brand (e.g. Nike & W&K)? What if the Campaign changes it's name from campaign to Brand Territory? I think our obsession with creating campaigns that may have a big executional idea in it is all well and good but what we seem less obsessed about is the brand territory long term? There is a difference between brand positioning / territory and the expression of that in a form of communication idea. What if brand consultancies start telling fad land what the positioning should be because fad land has been obsessed about creating ads instead of genuinely caring about the brand positioning (they don't make money from that you see) e.g. BBH & Wolf Olins and the case of Sony Ericsson. What if the agency of the future didn't make its money out of creating 'executions'ads / sites etc. but made its money for nurturing, developing brand territories not big campaign ideas over time? I think that this will never really happen because brand owners (marketing directors etc) have an average tenure of 18 months. They don't necessarily care that much about long term brand territories perhaps they just want to make a couple of famous campaigns perhaps in the 18 months then move on. Then another marketing director comes in and wants to stamp his or her mark and there you go the search for another BIG IDEA begins...
30.8.06
The Loss of Fantasy

27.8.06
Insecurity v Information v Identity your honour...
Another supper club accuasation. A judge (as in courts etc) entered into a heated discussion with me on how advertising works. In his 'judgment' advertising trades on people's insecurities. Promising to fill emotional voids just as an obese person eats to fill an emotional hole. OK so here I am trying to be Marketing 2.0 etc talking about how advertising fulfils a function in economics that of information & inspiration I gave the example of the 'Delete' (http://www.steinbrener-dempf.com/) campaign done by a couple of Belgian artists where they installed blank yellow sheets over the signs of stores in a Brussels high street as protest over the influence of advertising and contamination of their beautiful buildings. Two days later somebody graffitied the yellow sheets with the following statement: 'but I need consumer information'. I think people confuse advertising with consumerism or at least quick to judge it as it is the most visible bit of the consumerist / capitalist system. He took my point but still insisted that it trades on peoples emotions to which I replied yes it does however in the absence of Religion, National Identity, Beliefs, Strong stable systems of allegiance such as a political party for example people use brands that evoke a sense of belonging and identity in fact the better ones always do e.g. Apple's rebel computing for creative people simply pulls a culture that identifies with such an ethos way beyond the manufactured images that aim to attract people with lines such as '...because you are worth it'. I also pointed out that just like everything in life there will be good and bad examples of everything you can't blame anti-ageing cream ads for all the brilliant work done by companies like Apple, IKEA etc. He admitted that that he likes Apple and actually listens to Shubert on his iPOD at wich point I said well the day you are prepared not to buy brands is the day you can judge advertising sir. I was saved by the arrival of the pudding ...
24.8.06
What I learnt from Porn Recently


Planners should be FEARLESS above all else.
Lots of things are said about what planners are, should do and be. Walking up the street it struck me that the difference between planners and everyone else in the agency in the way they apply a core part of their discipline, namely insight. It is about being absolutely fearless. Here is what I mean:
Planners are champions of the TRUTH not just the consumers.
- in a client meeting where everyone is scared of the client and the account girl playing more the role of a P.A. than a business manager (instead of an account manager) the planner is the one who should have the intellectual courage to stand up to the client, debate the belief in the idea and the evidence for it, something that no one else in the room does or can do.
- planners should take inspiration from journalists who go out to war zones genuinely seeking to report the truth of what's going on (unless you are CBS reporter) I often felt jealous and ashamed when comparing how far I go as a planner to get underneath a compelling insight or truth in comparison to journalists.
- planners should take inspiration from Star Trek, I recently replied to a question in a supper club about what I do for a living with the answer 'I boldly go where no one in my business dares to go'.
And as Bill Bernbach once said:
"The future belongs to the brave"
23.8.06
Ideas that are carried forward by culture live more.
Good & Bad Agencies
A thought on good and bad agencies. Bad agencies tend to think their mission in life is to be big and rake in the cash fleecing the clients and the consumers they are talking to in the process. They will do whatever they can in order to do so. They tend to behave in a laddish manner where it is all about how big their revenue, profit etc. Good agencies love the work.
Command & Control
It occurred to me that the difference between bad marketers and good ones is that the first genuinely think that it is a scientific prodecess whereby if they tick enough of the right boxes add the right chemicals apply the right formula you will have an explosive effect on consumers. This is rubbish because the good marketers that I've worked with tend not to repeat the 'formula' that was pre-developed by common marketing sense but genuinely fight such temptation and force themselves to discover what's missing from the culture and allow good accidents to happen. In fact those that take the bigger risks by going 'out there' intellectually and creatively are the ones that come up with ideas that seem well, less formulaic.
22.8.06
Fluffy Advertising
There is nothing wrong with loving your job and injecting a sense of pride in what you do. I mean you have to. To justify your choice of career and why you are advertising a cigarette brand for example. Recently I noticed a strange phenomenon. Some of the best people I worked with and know in advertising with a history of making revolutionary ads had one thing in common, they actually hate advertising. Or at least hate to make ads that look like ads. Some even actively try not to make ads anymore because they feel that they are making the equivalent of a fizzy can of Coke instead of a LAB cocktail. If I was to segment the people who work in ad land I would say the majority want to make ads and nothing else that, sadly this is the height of their ambition while there is a small niche minority who are in advertising because they are interested in communicating with and influencing culture with ideas. The ones who think they are in advertising will never learn that this is exactly what they will ever do for the foreseeable future - just that - advertising. While those who are in the business of communicating to people and influencing culture the method is genuinely as important as the idea and hence gets equal amounts of innovation.
The thing that annoys the hell out of me these days are ad lads pretending to be doing all sorts of ideas (e.g. digital) when they don't mean it want to or believe that they can. If advertising is what you are good at then why don't you just become the best at that don't bloody pretend you can do something else when you don't actually give a toss.
17.8.06
The Brand Innovation Manifesto
A new John Grant book. Ahead of its time?
John's latest book is useless. Useless if you work in a big ad agency the size of the Titanic, turn corners as fast as a tortoise and still think your job is to take briefs from clients.
This book is ahead of most people in the ad industry. The implications of the forward thinking in the first half of the book on shifts in the way we should think about brands and culture is not for every body. If anything the book leaves you thinking how backward ad land is. But then again this is John Grant who co-founded an innovative and ahead-of-its-time agency - St. Lukes - at the age of 28.
While needless to say brands need to innovate everything about them from their product to their vision, to the process and management there are big barriers. Sadly, as John says in the final paragraph: 'The very notion of a "creative department" suggests that the other 95% of people working in marketing are not supposed to be creative!'. This book is compelling reading and should inspire you to get over real life constraints. The biggest challenge is as it has always been that you are not making ads your are evolving and developing ideas. John has an interesting thought about this.
'Brands as clusters of strategic cultural ideas' is the central thought of the book.
John having the brain that he does (about the size of Jupiter) takes on the concept of brand communication as a structured approach (onions, pyramids ads and matching luggage below the line executions) and turns that into an 'Anti-Structure' - he proposes the brand molecule as such a structure. It is a fundamental shift almost backwards into how innovative ideas are really developed through being opportunistic and entrepreneurial in your approach and not confined to rigid structures for thinking and planning.
He then extends the chemical analogy into a periodic table detailing typologies of pretty much all the brand ideas from different categories around. This is one of the great things about this book, I've already used it in a brainstorm to stimulate a client out of the conventions of his category by trying ideas from other categories. And it works.
The best thing about John's book is that it takes you out of the 'we have a brief for a 30 second ad now what's the idea?' mode and forces you to think on a much bigger picture how your brand influences culture through its ideas and innovation not through trite communications. You can apply the thinking not just read it which makes this not a book but a valuable tool for stimulation.
10.8.06
The Future of The Agency
What would the agency of the future look like?
I tried to answer this question with a friend of mine based on our own un-common sense, looking down the road from us, up the road from us and outside the country. This, is what we concluded.
7.8.06
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)