Why Would Anyone Believe What Adland Say’s When They Pull This Sort Of Shit?
37 Comments so far
Leave a comment
May 21, 2013, 6:10 am
Filed under: Comment
Filed under: Comment
Tragic isn’t it.
I know Clear may claim the offer in the envelope is worthy of societies interest, but they need to remember – like so many companies need to remember – that it’s not about what you want people to find interesting, but doing stuff that is actually interesting to people.
37 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well that was the easiest way to ensure people will avoid all clear correspondence in the future. Is that approach called reverse advertising?
Comment by George May 21, 2013 @ 6:19 ambased on unplanned planning?
Comment by niko May 21, 2013 @ 6:40 amUnplanning was Robert’s gig. I agree with it, but I’m not to blame for any of it.
Comment by George May 21, 2013 @ 6:57 amWhy does it sound like you’re throwing me under the bus with that comment George. Ha.
Hello Niko, it’s lovely you’re back. It’s almost like old times – or it would be if Lauren, Age, Marcus and untold others decided to forgo their taste and brains for a moment and comment on here again.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 8:53 amwhat a fucking load of stupid, lying twats.
Comment by andy@cynic May 21, 2013 @ 6:26 amanyone else remember how the direct marketing wankers used to look so smug saying they got results and everyone else just made a fuck load of noise? they were twats then but theyre even bigger fucking twats now with shit like this.
Comment by andy@cynic May 21, 2013 @ 6:27 am“We get results” when what they meant, as Rob drilled into my head on an almost daily basis, “we have the results of how poorly our work faired”.
Comment by Pete May 21, 2013 @ 6:47 amYep. That was the thing that bugged me most about DM – their condescending tone regarding ‘knowing results’ when [1] all they actually knew was how little results their advertising was achieving and [2] ignoring the reality that some communication is not about getting the transaction today, but seducing them into consideration for the future.
Don’t get me wrong, too many agencies use ‘awareness’ as a justification to produce work without genuine commercial purpose and their willingness to track/evaluate success is highly questionable – but that said, if we follow the DM view of communication, every time someone sees an ad, they should want to rush out and by the product which is about as mental a viewpoint as you can get.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 8:57 amI don’t come on here to have serious debate. Can you stop now please.
Comment by DH May 21, 2013 @ 9:28 amlike the akqa bloke who said ads are pollution or some bollocks. hes right, 99% of it is fucking shit but he shouldnt act like a smug fuck when most of their stuff are fucking ads and they sold out to ad maker numero uno wpp.
kevin roberts say his ads are the only ads that have love marks (more like shit stains) akqa slag off any ad they havent done as pollution. dm twats send out letters saying its not dm. does anyone wonder why adland is on its fucking knees. doesnt need a planner to whip up a 2000 page powerpoint to tell you does it.
fucktwats the lot of them. the end.
Comment by andy@cynic May 21, 2013 @ 6:32 amFucktwats. Word of the year.
Comment by Billy Whizz May 21, 2013 @ 6:35 amIt was bad enough when agencies claimed they had proprietary processes but they don’t even bother with that anymore. Now they just refer to a few random words (never more than 3) and claim it’s their agency philosophy despite them all being variants of the same approach. To make matters worse, the work these agencies produce rarely represent their “philosophy in a word” and yet they happily attack their competitors despite them approaching and producing “ideas” in a near identical way.
Comment by Pete May 21, 2013 @ 6:45 amNotice how the good agencies don’t have any of that shit. They just do work that shows their approach rather than talk about it. Basically the opposite of how planners work.
(That one was for you Andy to welcome you back)
Comment by DH May 21, 2013 @ 6:53 amThe issue isn’t about having a philosophy, even a philosophy that sounds similar to a competitors. The issue, as you all say, is when that philosophy is not expressed on a continual basis through the work that you produce.
Comment by George May 21, 2013 @ 7:02 amWell said gentlemen. All very fine points.
Comment by George May 21, 2013 @ 6:58 amBilly’s comment is not included in my previous praise.
Comment by George May 21, 2013 @ 7:00 amMine is the only one that makes sense.
Comment by Billy Whizz May 21, 2013 @ 7:51 amIt’s good to have you back Andy.
I know you’re not here as much any more, but when you are, it’s nice to have your inappropriate, unsubtle, take-no-prisoner style of commentary.
Except when you insult me. Ahem.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 8:59 amIf that’s not junk mail then me beating up their sales team isn’t violence.
Comment by DH May 21, 2013 @ 6:53 amTragic.
Comment by Lee Hill May 21, 2013 @ 10:35 am“This is not a holiday”
Comment by northern May 21, 2013 @ 3:03 pmI’m definitely going to be using that. Next week in fact.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 6:58 pmAnd you’ve destroyed my moral authority to complain about it
Comment by northern May 21, 2013 @ 7:12 pmStrategy in action.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 7:14 pmI know of a company that does this when it informs its customers of price changes.
Comment by Marcus May 21, 2013 @ 3:07 pmIt’s not 100% dumb to have an agency philosophy – clients like to think they’re buying a process. It is 100% dumb to then try and live by that process.
Comment by northern May 21, 2013 @ 3:07 pmWouldn’t that be inauthentic?
Comment by John May 21, 2013 @ 4:21 pmOf course. But there are very few clients that want to know the idea came when a few people took a break and had a game of ping pong or whatever.
Comment by northern May 21, 2013 @ 5:11 pmI’m not saying it’s dumb to have a philosophy – but a philosophy that [1] is the same as everyone else and [2] is not demonstrable in any way is a bit mad.
Maybe the area of confusion is that my view of a philosophy isn’t in any way about how you work, but how you think about work … hence you can never be caught out by getting the idea when you’re having a piss during a concall with the client.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 6:52 pmMy best ideas come when I’m watching Youporn
Comment by northern May 21, 2013 @ 7:13 pmSo in 30 second bursts?
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 7:15 pmAs sudden burst of inspiration
Comment by northern May 21, 2013 @ 7:21 pmBut does it satisfy or disappoint?
I can’t believe we’re having this conversation.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 7:23 pmThis is a big bowl of wrong
Comment by Northern May 21, 2013 @ 7:32 pmEnd of conversation
This blog is always a big bowl of wrong.
Comment by Rob May 21, 2013 @ 7:39 pmSick perverts.
Comment by Billy Whizz May 21, 2013 @ 9:34 pmJust get a room so we don’t have to see any more of your planning seduction.
Comment by DH May 21, 2013 @ 10:58 pm