The Makers Mark

Once upon a time, in an Agency far far away - a brief landed in an inbox. This brief was the most beautiful brief any at the Agency had ever seen, it glistened like the nape of a female tennis players' neck (mid set, a proper grunt ladened one), and all that regarded it swooned. After a number of weeks exploring its cavernous regions - a multitude of ideas were presented, each like a baby Lion proudly held aloft for all to celebrate.

After much applause and backslapping - and presentation of ballpark production costs associated with each - it was said with a heavy heart that the Client did not have the necessary budget to realise any of the ideas.

This is a story of enchantment, hope and heartbreak.

On Linkedin I've seen a few Producers post moan-y 'aren't-clients-stupid' things like the below:



These posts might raise a smile amongst those able to stop licking their elbows long enough to look at their computers ; however what does this really say about a Producer?

It's very easy to make amazing work if you have lots of cash - and doesn't take a genius to do it. Things can be done faster, and to a better quality if you throw money at it - human nature takes care of that one for us. With all the money in the world - all that is required is the ability to google 'best Photographer/Director', a talky box to repeat what some creative-type spouted along with any relevant adjectives, and a functioning hand to keep writing the necessary cheques.

A good Producer is able to realise an ambitious concept using sod all budget. They can find savings beyond the sum of a jobs parts, find efficiencies, and are able to deal with random last minute curve ball requests that change everything. It's someone who doesn't read off a rate card - but who's responsive and can anticipate and embrace change.

It's always nice to go into a job knowing if shit happens, you've got some cash in your pocket to help rescue things - but in my opinion a successfully run Production should do the idea justice, come in on time, and be under budget.

Vested Interests

You may have noticed that there was an "all-Lego" ad break the other night that featured remakes of some mostly unremarkable commercials [with the exception of Vinnie for the BHF] made entirely of those little toy bricks from Denmark.

What you may have failed to notice is that this stunt was supposed to be promoting the forthcoming Lego movie.

Yes, it was mentioned in the press release that all the trade publications recycled without comment or interpretation. But away from all the industry second screen chatter and gossip, did the general public really make the link or was this just seen as some PR noise for Lego?

The cult of remaking iconic film scenes from Lego is nothing new. Yet, the idea of giving a few ads the same treatment and running them together in the same commercial break is being heralded as "an inspired and truly innovative Media First" as ground-breaking and heroic as the moon landing.

Now, I can't deny that this activity hasn't captured any attention.

But like a sparrow's fart, I'd wager that this isn't going to last for very long.

I'm sure Warner Bros are delighted with their revolutionary media activity but was this stunt really in their best interests?

Did this idea really make people interested and excited about seeing the Lego movie?

Was this idea really the best idea to do that job?

Was filling an entire commercial break the best way to invest that money?

Or was it pursued because it was a newsworthy "Media First" that would make a great case history and win awards?

We've spoken before of the corrupting influence of other things like peer recognition, fame and awards getting in the way of agencies doing the right thing for their clients.

There's a hell of a lot of it about.

It seems that now more than ever that there's a massive disconnect between what clients ultimately need and what agencies ultimately want to give to them.

Just because you can package something up as being pioneering and original doesn't automatically mean it's any good.

The hidden agendas and vested interests that exist behind the magic curtain at a lot of agencies often come to light only when clients wake up to realise that bugger all difference has been made to the bottom line.

And only then does the penny drop that agencies are much better at selling themselves than they are at selling their clients' products.

Someone Got Paid to Make This #2

BlinkBox felt the need to send this to my inbox.

Can you believe money was exchanged for writing this hooey.

I just pray it was Monopoly money.

The most E-P-I-C Superbowl commercial you never got to see

Unless you live in Georgia (the only state where it aired), or read the New York Times, Daily Mail or one of the many other media vendors that ran an article on it.



Don't think I'd want to hire the fella though, pretty fundamental that.

Treating Consumers Like Mouth-Breathing Morons?

It's been said that the current advertising bandwagon for making emotional brand campaigns treats consumers like mouth-breathing morons, incapable of logic or reason, bereft of the ability to make a logical decision, whilst agencies and advertisers dangle shiny trinkets in front of them. Well, I think this new campaign for biscuits puts that idea to rest, once and for all. And, best of all, it's impossible for other brands to copy.

10 Myths About Modern Advertising

One of the best pieces of advice we can give to students who want to work in advertising is beware, be very aware of opinion that is masquerading as fact.

Right now, there's no shortage of deluded, militant evangelism polluting the business by proclaiming some kind of new world order where everything has changed.

There's also an alarming lack of common sense and, in Dave Trott's words, street smarts in agencies who seem obsessed by the ridiculous bubble of adland and less interested in how people actually behave in the world.

In particular, there are many prevalent schools of thought dedicated to propagating nonsense as if fashionable, zeitgeist thinking is some kind of law that must be obeyed. There are many "how to" conferences devoted to revealing the secrets of modern marketing so these theories can be followed and translated into action.

This is, by no means, an exhaustive list of modern advertising myths. It's just a starter for ten of the ones that we think are getting in the way of great, commercially successful advertising being produced.

We can sometimes feel like voices in the wilderness and I imagine that challenging the ten points below will sound like heresy to many agencies, clients and prominent industry commentators.

But, fuck 'em. It's about time the record was set straight.

1. Brands are more important than products.

2. Most people really do give a shit and actively want to have relationships with brands.

3. Collaboration leads to better creative work.

4. TV is dead.

5. A bigger logo means better branding.

6. The "interruption" model of advertising is no longer effective. It's all about engagement, innit.

7. Featuring great looking people from central casting will make your audience more favourably disposed to buying your product.

8. Creativity can come from anywhere.

9. Putting a call to action on your advertising means people will be likelier to act on it.

10. Advertising, these days, is ultimately not about selling.

This happened

and this...