The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]

I want Andy to do a blog with George Parker.

I’m sure there is a rationale behind MAC’s use of Dame Edna but then some people think there was a valid reason behind liberating Iraq.

I am a humble client but I still believe you should be able to “see” strategy within communication. Many people think this is the wrong approach but without short or long term strategy, you are communicating without purpose and that can be commercial suicide.

Robert has always said an idea should be understood by more than just the people who have spent months working on it behind closed doors and I completely agree. This does not mean having bland strategies or communication, in fact the opposite is true, but it must be rooted in relevance to the audience or you are in danger of simply disrupting for the sake of disruption.

Like Robert, I am not prone to wearing make up and accept I am not the sort of person Mac cosmetics wishes to appeal to, but I still fail to see the relevance of Dame Edna, especially in Asia and would welcome someone enlightening me regarding the choice of ambassador.

One final point, where is Robert? He has been strangely absent for a while.

1) Lee is right – though I’m not sure there is really such a thing as short-term strategy – that would be tactics.

2)Aren’t Queen 75 years old?

3)Robert has always been strangely absent.

Rob is back – after numeropus shit flights, some shitter than shit taxis and a meeting with the sort of people that make an evening with Dodds seem more attractive.

First of all, I’d like to say that Northern should know better to use 3 people as a barometer for a campaigns likeability. Besides, LIKING a brand and BUYING a brand are very different and who knows if the people he asked were the sort of folk who even wear make up 😉

[Just teasing NP]

In all seriousness, whilst I appreciate that their may be an ‘irony’ element in this campaign – it still doesn’t work at all for Asia – not because they don’t get irony [which they don’t, at least the Western interpretation of it] but they don’t know who Dame Edna is so it looks like MAC is a brand for ugly OAP’s.

And I don’t agree with John that shorter term strategies are always tactics. Surely it is dependent on the timeframe you’re talking about? Pedantic? Moi?

Anyway, I still think the campaign is shit and I still think “irony” would be more of a post-rationalisation than an explanation of the real strat … but even if that wasn’t the case, I think the work isn’t that great – especially for a global platform.

Ooooooh I feel better after all that has been released, ha!

Well of course it depends on the time-frame (insert tired old keynsian cliche here), but that’s my point. If the time-frame is long-ish then you can think strategically. If it’s short-term, then you’re acting tactically – though all tactical efforts have to comply with previously determined long-tem strategy.

I’m not saying the long-term strategy is set in stone, it has to be flexible if thigs change but that should be built into your thinking already. But if you start creating short-term “strategies” the big risk is that you foul up the longer-term one.

Is that the real reason why women say “no” to you then? 🙂

Only through their lawyers eh?

I didn’t know who this woman/man is and after Andrew told me about him/her I still don’t know why they use her. Someone said it is about irony but I think it is silly.

please tell me that on another blog somewhere, there are pages of critique about that skinny bitch keira knightly being used as the face of chanel. that would make me feel good too.

also, i have to say that benefit NYC have taken over from where mac used to be, in terms of irreverence towards the trad cosmetic überlords.