If Effectiveness Is In The Eye Of The Beholder, I Am An Optician.
May 11, 2015, 6:20 am
Filed under:
Comment 
So for the next few days I’m in Singapore judging the Asian Effectiveness Awards.
While some of the thinking, work and results are fantastic – I am semi-alarmed at how badly some people articulate their argument.
It appears the approach taken by the agencies submitting the poor entries is “talk and talk and talk and hopefully they will be able to work it out themselves”.
And to those people I tell them this.
Yes. Yes we can. And we have worked out you don’t understand what effective communication is, let alone what commercial effectiveness is.
The good news is the overall standard of submission has vastly improved and there are some genuinely smart, creative and crafted ideas on show, however what is slightly concerning is how many brands want to be a social crusader … fighting against issues that are apparently affecting millions of people.
This might seem a strange thing for me to say given I spent years talking about how brands have the power to help society while helping themselves … especially as I got so into this theory that I even gave the approach a name ‘socialistic capitalism’ … however the way many brands are approaching the task feels like they are more focused on creating the illusion of helping others than actually helping others.
You can generally tell who they are.
+ They do something small but try and make it sound like they’re changing the World.
+ They spend so much money telling people what they’re doing, you feel their motivation is marketing rather than helping.
+ They do a hugely exploitative campaign and try and back-rationalise it’s ‘social value’.
+ They take on issues that make them look hypocritical.
+ They take on such themes [loosely connected to their product category] that are so ambiguous, you wouldn’t be able to tell if they’ve had an effect or not.
Look, I know it’s shit for me to question this approach, because like those people who slagged off Madonna when she got preferential treatment to adopt a child [errrrm, me], the fact is they’re still helping in some way which is something worth celebrating … and cynicism aside, I still think it is amazing when a brand decides to use its muscle to try and make a difference beyond just their balance sheet … however with so many brands seemingly only focused on ‘raising awareness’ for an issue rather than trying to solve it, it’s quite refreshing when someone comes along and does a good old fashioned, straight-to-the-point ad campaign, which is why I liked last years TBWA HK campaign for AIA Insurance.
[Though I obviously hated the newspaper ad they did that I link to above]
I suppose what I’m saying is that it’s great so many brands want to try and make a difference and it’s great they believe they’re making such a difference, they can enter it into an effectiveness award … however I’d be interested to see how many of them stay committed to their cause when they realize their ability to stand out as a brand is becoming diminished given so many other brands are basically following the exact same strategy.
At the end of the day, there is a significant difference between being ‘interested’ in a cause and being ‘committed’ to it and while I do not want anyone to mistake what I’m saying as an attack on anyone who is trying to make a difference, I do think we should be challenging them to evaluate their ‘effectiveness’ beyond just a rise in awareness, likes or sales.
[Acknowledging it is very important they feel their activity is making them money, because that ensures they’ll keep doing it]
God I’m going on aren’t I?
If it’s any consolation, you’re not going to be stuck in a judging room with me banging on about this issue for the next 8 hours.
There’s some more good news for you.
No more posts till Thursday. [But it’s a corker, even though I say it myself]
I’m all give, give, give.
People Believe What They Want To Believe …
May 7, 2015, 6:25 am
Filed under:
Comment 
When I was younger, I went to a lot of concerts.
Big, loud, heavy metal concerts.
The sort of shows where – like the photo above – 50% of the stage was taken up with amplifiers.
It was impressive, intimidating and exciting all at the same time.
So of course, when I started playing the guitar, I wanted to have something similar so over the years, I started amassing amplifiers.
Big ones. Small ones. Speakers. Amp Heads. You name it, I had it.
So you can imagine my surprise and disappointment when I got a bit older and realised that I had been sold a lie.
What do I mean?
I mean this …
Yes, all those stacks of amplifiers I saw at the concerts of my favourite bands were often either not turned on or – even worse – fake.
Bloody fake.
I remember at the time it bothered me quite a lot – especially as I had spent a fortune acquiring about 40 amps by that time, including a bunch of ludicrously big [6 feet tall] and heavy Marshall Stacks – however I also remember coming to the realisation that without them, the whole live experience would have lost some of it’s magic because seeing a band live wasn’t about hearing them replay their records on stage, it was about giving you a night of entertainment.
[Unless you saw Genesis, which was absolutely about playing their songs on stage. Exactly as they were recorded. Yawn]
And here’s the thing.
As much as we know magicians don’t really have supernatural powers and rockstars don’t really throw televisions out of every hotel window and guitarists don’t really use 50 amplifiers on stage … we choose to ignore it because we’re addicted to the feeling of emotional escape.
Maybe it’s because we love the idea there is something bigger than us … maybe it’s because we all want to believe in the impossible … maybe it’s simply because we are living vicariously through the perceived/hyped/imagined actions and behaviours of others … but there are occasions and situations where we are all complicit in the lies we choose to believe.
Maybe this is one of the reasons some brands are able to command a level of loyalty that defies all logic.
Not because they’re great storytellers, but because the story they tell – or represent – is one that we choose to suspend our belief over, because we want to believe in their ridiculousness and implausibility.
It makes us feel better.
It lets us spiritually escape.
It emotionally entertains.
Which kind-of explains why some people are so obsessed with religion, cosmetic companies and Nottingham Forest.
Maybe.
If You Want To Know The Power Of Design …
May 6, 2015, 6:25 am
Filed under:
Comment … just look at this:
Yep, if they can make Phil Collins and Celine Dion look like head-biting, drug snorting, Satan worshipers, then they really have more power at their fingertips than Spiderman.
More information on this evil genius can be found here.
Yes … that really is the end of this post. Consider it an early Christmas present.
Customer Service Mentaldom …
Yes this is real.
And yes, it is utterly stupid.
However as mad as it is, I don’t know if it’s any more ridiculous than the companies who spend millions of dollars saying customer satisfaction is their priority rather than doing stuff that proves customers satisfaction is their priority.
It is as annoying as those companies who bang on about their staff being their number 1 asset but treat them as a commodity with a ‘use-by’ date.
The reality with all these ‘mission statement proclamations’ is that unless you act on the implications of the words, they just end up being meaningless rubbish … which is why marketing is in danger of being the tool of the lazy rather than the amplifier of the good.
Of course there are agencies out there who don’t care.
Their strategy appears to be ‘take the money and run’.
But if we all do that, we undermine our value, relevance and future.
So we can’t let that happen.
But it’s down to us.
Filed under: Comment
So for the next few days I’m in Singapore judging the Asian Effectiveness Awards.
While some of the thinking, work and results are fantastic – I am semi-alarmed at how badly some people articulate their argument.
It appears the approach taken by the agencies submitting the poor entries is “talk and talk and talk and hopefully they will be able to work it out themselves”.
And to those people I tell them this.
Yes. Yes we can. And we have worked out you don’t understand what effective communication is, let alone what commercial effectiveness is.
The good news is the overall standard of submission has vastly improved and there are some genuinely smart, creative and crafted ideas on show, however what is slightly concerning is how many brands want to be a social crusader … fighting against issues that are apparently affecting millions of people.
This might seem a strange thing for me to say given I spent years talking about how brands have the power to help society while helping themselves … especially as I got so into this theory that I even gave the approach a name ‘socialistic capitalism’ … however the way many brands are approaching the task feels like they are more focused on creating the illusion of helping others than actually helping others.
You can generally tell who they are.
+ They do something small but try and make it sound like they’re changing the World.
+ They spend so much money telling people what they’re doing, you feel their motivation is marketing rather than helping.
+ They do a hugely exploitative campaign and try and back-rationalise it’s ‘social value’.
+ They take on issues that make them look hypocritical.
+ They take on such themes [loosely connected to their product category] that are so ambiguous, you wouldn’t be able to tell if they’ve had an effect or not.
Look, I know it’s shit for me to question this approach, because like those people who slagged off Madonna when she got preferential treatment to adopt a child [errrrm, me], the fact is they’re still helping in some way which is something worth celebrating … and cynicism aside, I still think it is amazing when a brand decides to use its muscle to try and make a difference beyond just their balance sheet … however with so many brands seemingly only focused on ‘raising awareness’ for an issue rather than trying to solve it, it’s quite refreshing when someone comes along and does a good old fashioned, straight-to-the-point ad campaign, which is why I liked last years TBWA HK campaign for AIA Insurance.
[Though I obviously hated the newspaper ad they did that I link to above]
I suppose what I’m saying is that it’s great so many brands want to try and make a difference and it’s great they believe they’re making such a difference, they can enter it into an effectiveness award … however I’d be interested to see how many of them stay committed to their cause when they realize their ability to stand out as a brand is becoming diminished given so many other brands are basically following the exact same strategy.
At the end of the day, there is a significant difference between being ‘interested’ in a cause and being ‘committed’ to it and while I do not want anyone to mistake what I’m saying as an attack on anyone who is trying to make a difference, I do think we should be challenging them to evaluate their ‘effectiveness’ beyond just a rise in awareness, likes or sales.
[Acknowledging it is very important they feel their activity is making them money, because that ensures they’ll keep doing it]
God I’m going on aren’t I?
If it’s any consolation, you’re not going to be stuck in a judging room with me banging on about this issue for the next 8 hours.
There’s some more good news for you.
No more posts till Thursday. [But it’s a corker, even though I say it myself]
I’m all give, give, give.