September 26, 2016
Today I am reprinting parts of my talk from the IAPI/ADFX awards in Dublin, Ireland last week. For the sake of brevity, I am leaving out some sections and focusing solely on my comments about creativity. Hope you enjoy.
Thank you for inviting me here tonight.
I’m not usually invited to speak at high class affairs like this. I usually get invited to horrifying events like the “The Programmatic Real-Time Digital Insider Summit” or some other majestically titled festival of horseshit.
But, thankfully, tonight is different. Tonight you are recognizing the best of Irish advertising. And I am honored to help you do that.
I love good advertising. I started my career as a copywriter. After a while I got myself promoted to creative director for a few agencies. And after proving myself to be an utter failure as a creative director, I was demoted to ceo.
But the one thing I always really wanted to be was a great copywriter. Sadly, my copywriting career consisted mostly of holiday-weekend mattress sales and low, low financing on every Corolla in stock.
Despite my mediocrity, doing creative work was the only thing that really interested me about advertising. The rest was torture.
As far as I was concerned, the agency business worked like this: the creative people made the ads and everyone else made the arrangements.
What I could never understand was why it took 5 times as many people to make the arrangements.
I guess you could say I was a creative department chauvinist. And to be honest, I still am.
We are here tonight to celebrate effectiveness in advertising.
I know how had hard you clients, and you account people, and planners, and data analysts, and media strategists worked for the awards you’re getting tonight, and I congratulate you.
But I want you to know in advance, that I’m not going to be speaking about you. I am going to be focusing on the contribution that our creative people make to advertising effectiveness. And the peril they, and we, are facing.
Regardless of how brilliant the briefs we write are, and the strategies we develop are, and plans we implement are, at the end of the line are the people who will take our plans and strategies and briefs and turn them into magic or turn them into trash. They’re our creatives.
For better or worse, the consumer never sees the briefing documents or the strategic rationale. All she ever sees are the ads. And if the ads stink, the whole thing stinks.
Over the past few years I have been doing a lot of traveling and speaking about advertising. Wherever I go in the world, I invariably hear the same two themes.
First is that advertising has become less effective.
And second is that advertising is less creative.
It is hard for me to believe that these two things are not related…
…The problem we are facing today, I’m afraid, is that the creative side of our business is being devalued. Creativity is quickly and quietly becoming a support service.
The alarming thing about this is that I believe creativity is the agency business’s only unique value to clients. Everything else agencies do clients can get somewhere else.
They can get business strategy from about a million different consulting firms. They can find media planners and buyers on every street corner. They can buy data by the truckload with two clicks of a mouse.
The one thing every successful marketer needs — and the one thing agencies can provide better than anyone else — is imaginative ideas about brands.
But apparently, the advertising industry has decided it can no longer support itself by focusing on creativity.
If you remember the aborted marriage between Omnicom and Publicis last year, the rationale for creating the biggest agency in the world had nothing at all to do with creativity. The primary reason given for the merger was their presumed ability to compete with Google and Facebook in the collection and utilization of data.
It seems to me that the agency business is betting its future on playing the other guy’s game. I think this is a mistake.
Over 25 years ago I left the agency business for the first time. Two years earlier we had sold our independent agency to a publicly traded "global" network. And after the two worst years of my life, I decided it was not the life for me.
For three years thereafter I did creative services on my own directly for clients. In that three-year period being outside of the agency business I learned a very important lesson. Clients, I want you to cover your ears and not listen to this -- Okay, agency people, here’s what I learned. Secretly, clients don’t like agencies.
They put no value on "account service” — or as one client told me "all it does is keep the agency from fucking up, it doesn't do a thing for me."
Behind our backs, they chuckled about our "strategic abilities."
The value they saw in agencies was in creativity. They believed the only place they could get good ads was from an agency.
But creativity is in trouble.
There’s a mantra I hear in agencies back in the States. I don’t know if you hear it here, too. But it goes like this. “We’re all creative” or “Creative ideas can come from anywhere.” In my opinion this is bullshit.
True creative talent is a rare and precious thing.
Have you ever wondered why there are so many shitty songs, and shitty TV shows, and shitty movies? I’ll tell you why. Because it is really fucking hard to do a good one.
The same is true with advertising. No one sits down to write a crappy ad. Mostly they just turn out crappy. Why? Because it’s really fucking hard to do a good one — and there are very few people who can do it.
If you really believe that we are all creative, then you have to believe that it’s just a coincidence that Shakespeare wrote dozens of brilliant plays and Donald Trump didn’t.
Now, I stipulate that when we talk about creativity, the word is confusing. It has two very different meanings. And the new bigwigs of advertising are trying their best to muddy the issue by confusing the meanings.
In the first meaning, creativity is seen as a method for accomplishing a practical goal. So you can approach any task in a creative manner. In this meaning creativity is a way of thinking. So you can fry an egg the traditional way, or you can be “creative” and fry it in alligator oil or something.
In the second case, there is a special meaning for the word “creativity" that is specific to the communication arts. This is the kind of creativity that makes music and art and literature and, yes, sometimes even advertising, extraordinary and delightful.
Sure, the guy who printed the tickets to Hamlet, or made the popcorn, or counted the proceeds, may have found creative ways to do so. But he didn't write the fucking play.
That’s a whole different kind of creativity. And a whole different meaning of the word.
But the current generation of ad industry kingpins are trying very hard to dilute it into meaninglessness by asserting that we’re all creative and that creativity can come from anywhere.
If you think I am overstating my point, let me read you a recent quote from Martin Sorrell, the ceo of WPP and the most powerful man in the history of the agency business. And, by the way, an accountant by trade.
”The snottiness of believing that creativity just resides in the creative department of traditional agencies, that media people can't be creative, or data people can't be or people who do healthcare or promotion or CRM can't be creative – it's a nonsense and it's insulting to the people who are in those areas.”
He’s equating doing a practical job in a creative manner, with creating something unique from scratch. He’s saying they are the same thing.
Now don’t get me wrong. I have nothing against account people, or planners, or data people or CRM people or anyone else who thinks smartly and does a job in an imaginative way.
But I resent that the talents of our great creative people are being dismissed as the same thing.
This is not healthy for the ad business nor is it healthy for the people who work in it.
Our industry has been hijacked by aristocrats with private jets. They have made the agency business leaner and meaner.
They have made it more efficient. They have made it more productive. They have squeezed all the fat out of it. And in the process, they are also squeezing the life out of it.
They are money managers, and investors and financial wise guys. The one thing they are not is advertising people.
Advertising evolved as an industry of craftsmen and craftswomen. Account people, art directors, researchers, copywriters. People who actually worked on accounts would start their own agencies. There were hundreds of independent, entrepreneurial agencies in every country. When I started in the ad business 300 years ago, the largest agency in the U.S., Y&R, had about a 1.5% share of market. Today four global giants control over 70% of U.S. advertising spending.
A while back, Mr Sorrell gave a talk in London. According to press reports, he told the conference…
...‘media, has become "more important" than the message…’
This is unacceptable. Someone who believes media is more important than the message, believes the instruments are more important than the music; the canvas is more important than the painting; the bottle is more important than the beer.
Call me crazy, but I think ad agencies should be run by advertising people. I don’t see airlines run by green grocers. I don’t see hospitals run by folk singers. I am curious why the agency business is being run by bookkeepers.
In an industry led by people who now think delivery systems are more important than what they are delivering, creativity is floundering
We need to convince marketers once again that the most effective way to build brands is through the unique and unmatched power of great advertising ideas.
This summer the IPA released a report called “Selling Creativity Short.” In it they reported that creativity by itself can make a marketing dollar ten times more effective.
We also have to stop deluding ourselves about what we are doing. You know, we talk a lot about our “target audience.” As a former adman and recent Harvard faculty member, Doc Searls says, there is no audience for advertising.
An audience is created by demand.
There is demand for music, so there’s an audience for it. There is demand for movies, so there’s an audience for them. There is demand for theater, so there’s an audience for it.
The demand for advertising is precisely zero. Nobody is demanding advertising. There is no audience for advertising.
Similarly, the idea that anyone wants to engage with advertising is equally delusional. We engage with people and things we enjoy.
We find books engaging. And music engaging, and dance engaging. And people engaging.
Who in their right mind wants to engage with advertising? On a rainy Sunday afternoon have you ever heard someone say, I’m going back to my flat to engage with some advertising?
Advertising is at best, a minor annoyance. Sadly, our obsession with online advertising has turned it into a major annoyance, in fact, a scourge.
It has been reported that over 400 million people worldwide - 400 million - now have ad blockers on their devices. This is the opposite of engagement. This is dis-engagement on a monumental scale. This is the largest boycott of anything in the history of humanity.
We’ve got to stop bullshitting ourselves and come to terms with reality.
If we want there to be an audience for advertising, if we want people to be engaged with what we do, we have to do a lot better. We have to make advertising beautiful, and interesting, and entertaining. And I have bad news… algorithms, and data, and metrics can’t do that. Only people can do that.
Let’s not allow the devaluation of creativity to continue. I’m tired of hearing that advertising isn’t as effective as it used to be, or as creative as it used to be. We have so many more amazing tools and amazing media options than we’ve ever had before for making wonderful advertising. We have much better data. We have much better ways to measure. We have no more excuses.
Let’s stand up for what we are celebrating tonight.
Let’s appreciate the unique gift of talent and creativity. And make it, once again, the centerpiece of the advertising industry.
Congratulations to tonight’s winners. I know how difficult it is to create something really good. I know how hard you worked for what you’re about to receive.
Down at the pub you may be just be Jimmy or Mary. But to me, you’re a hero.
Congratulations and thank you all very much.
September 21, 2016
"Despite being one of the world’s most loved and talked about brands, McDonald’s weren’t connecting with 16-24 year olds."
The idea was to create a video channel...
"...for young people and in collaboration with the influencers they admire most." (Ooh, influencers!)According to The Guardian, this was done by The Drum in cahoots with OMD.
You see, according to The Drum, these darn Millennials are...
"...a generation getting out there and doing amazing things. (And Channel US)... brings them together, gives them a leg up and helps make their ambitions a reality."Sounds like an Advertising 101 pitch at a bad junior college. But apparently, that's all you need these days. As long as your strategy is, "get younger, get more digital" you can't lose.
According to OMD,
"This exciting new YouTube channel is the next activation of McDonald’s latest brand platform – ‘Good Times’ – celebrating the role the brand plays in customers (sic) lives."Someone fucking shoot me.
Back to The Drum.
"All of this was aided with the help of YouTube favourites Oli White and Hazel Hayes, who fulfilled the roles of both presenter and contributor as they called upon they (sic) worldwide fan bases to back the Channel Us stars."Yeah, baby. Get them worldwide influencers influencin'.
McDonald's CMO had this to add...
“This is a ground-breaking moment for McDonald’s in the UK...The launch of Channel Us is completely new territory for the company."Yeah, well, the best laid plans...
Last week, McDonald's announced they were aborting this monstrosity. In 2016 thus far, not a single "episode" of this clown show managed to garner even a thousand viewers. Do you have any idea how shitty a big budget creation from one of the world's biggest brands has to be to get fewer than a thousand views?
I could post a picture of my dog's ass on this blog and get more views than that. Although, to be fair, some might say my dog's ass has greater appetite appeal than your average McChicken sandwich.
Content marketing is one of the planet's biggest cons. Just because there are a few companies who are successful spending billions on it, doesn't mean you will be.
As Jonathan Salem Baskin has said, "Most branded social campaigns are only as "successful" as the money and time marketers are willing to commit to perpetuate the pretense of conversation and relevance."
September 19, 2016
I am traveling and speaking once again this week so blog posts will be thin on the ground. To atone for my negligence I am reprinting yesterday's Type A Group Newsletter here today.
Alarmed by a tidal wave of consumer antipathy to the awfulness of online advertising, last week a group of big-time advertisers, publishers, agencies, and media announced a coalition to "rid the internet of annoying ads."
Yeah, any minute.
According to MarketingWeek...
"The ‘Coalition for Better Ads’ aims to take on the “Herculanean task” of bringing together advertisers, agencies, ad tech and publishers to come up with global standards on digital advertising to tackle the rise of ad blocking."I'm pretty sure they mean Herculean but, hey, who cares about language anymore?
Published reports claim that over 400 million people worldwide currently use software to block online advertising, and the number is growing rapidly.
Here are the self-proclaimed goals of this cruel joke of a coalition:
- Create consumer-based, data-driven standards that companies in the online advertising industry can use to improve the consumer ad experience
- In conjunction with the IAB Tech Lab, develop and deploy technology to implement these standards
- Encourage awareness of the standards among consumers and businesses in order to ensure wide uptake and elicit feedback
"The enormous success of digital advertising is based on the fortunate circumstance that almost no one understands anything about the numbers."Happily for the online ad industry the initiative came to nothing and the confusion over online ad metrics is greater than ever.
This new "Coalition For Better Ads," including Facebook and Google, is doomed to spin in circles and accomplish nothing except waste money because it will not deal with the real problem -- consumer stalking (aka tracking.) If they just got rid of tracking, a great many of the problems consumers, publishers, and advertisers are facing would evaporate.
- Consumers would not be constantly stalked and harassed by tracking software leading to insufferable "precision targeted" ads.
- Quality publishers would be able to monetize their audiences instead of having their ad revenue stolen by crappy or imaginary sites through re-targeting.
- Advertisers would know who they are reaching and where; not have most of their media dollars pissed away on adtech middlemen; not have to rely on problematic "ad networks."
As Doc Searls says, display advertising is "tracking-aimed junk mail that only looks like ads."
Google and Facebook will never accept the suppression of tracking because surveillance is their business.
Dracula is guarding the blood bank.
On The Road Again...
This week I will be in Oslo speaking for Discovery Networks Norway. Then traveling to Dublin, Ireland to speak at the ADFX awards.
Next week I'll be in NYC attending, reporting and podcasting from the week-long festival of self-promotion called AdvertisingWeek. Stay tuned. That should be good for a few laughs.