Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Corporate Evil, Crap Products In History, Culture, Film, Food, Government, Health, Marketing, McDonalds
Oh my god, it’s October 1.
We are in the last quarter of 2026 and this is good news for a heap of reasons.
+ 2026 hasn’t been the best year so we only have 90 days till the fuckers over.
+ It means we’re officially counting down to one of the best places in the World for summer.
+ Which also means we’re approach one of the greatest festive holiday periods in the universe.
Suddenly, there’s so much optimism and happiness in my world – hahaha. Unfortunately for you, that means you still have 3 months of my ranting rubbish to deal with so let’s start getting it over and done with, with this post …
Do you remember the movie Super Size Me?
It was a documentary by Morgan Spurlock about McDonald’s and what happens to the body if that’s all you eat for a month.
It caused a huge stir for a whole host of reasons.
+ It brought the issue of obesity to the forefront of conversation.
+ It revealed the exploitation of those from more humble backgrounds.
+ It talked about the tension between convenience and quality.
+ It showed the power and influence of corporate farming.
Now was the film perfect?
God no … the book Fast Food Nation did a much more balanced and informed job at doing that. And then there’s the fact Morgan Spurlock was later revealed to be a problematic character – which permanently took the shine off his breakthrough film.
But all that aside, the impact of his movie was pretty swift.
McDonald’s launched a range of healthy alternatives.
They ensured the calorie content of their food was easily available.
And they reminded people that a daily diet of Maccas was not great for your health.
Except – as is the case with most corporations – they worked hard to restore things back into their sweet zone through product and marketing promotions, such as the 99 cent burger deals and the – admittedly brilliant – ‘famous orders’ campaign.
Zoom forward to now and the issue of obesity and fast food is widely known and accepted … and yet, rather than things getting better, they are arguably getting even worse.
More fast food companies.
More calories per meal.
More desire for convenience.
Rise of mukbang culture.
Add to this an economic crisis which means people are increasingly choosing food based on price than quality – not to mention, as I have discovered first hand, how much it costs to eat healthily – and Super Size Me looks more like a dark-comedy than a documentary.
But the ultimate proof that things are bleak for health is that every company is trying to exploit the high-calorie gravy-train.
Yep, that’s KitKat cereal.
From Nestle … the company who states they are all about ‘good food, good life‘.
Hmmmmmn, sorry to burst their bubble but 24.7 grams of sugar, 10.9 grams of fat and roughly 420 calories per 100 grams is not good for anyone – especially the kids they’re obviously targeting.
“But hang on Rob …”, I hear their lawyers cry. “… we recommend a bowl of 30g for kids, which is only around 126 calories”
And maybe that’s true except …
1. The 126 calorie figure DOESN’T include milk, which puts it to around 170.
2. You know what people think is a 30g portion and what it actually is are wildly different.
3. You openly acknowledge it should only be an occasional breakfast because of its lack of goodness – reinforced by the fact even you’re too embarrassed to mention its real calories on your own official website.
[I should point out I’ve not seen their ads for this product, but the usual approach food companies use for selling ‘high-sugar, children targeted foods’ is to say it provides ‘energy’ for growing kids. Which may be true, but also blatantly gaslighting at the same time]
Look, I believe we all have to take responsibility for our own health … but I also believe it’s very difficult when times are tight, good food costs a fortune and we’re surrounded by a whole host of cheap convenience.
So while it’s ultimately our decision and choice, I can’t help but think the Government have a role to play in all of this.
Because if they are here to ensure the health, happiness and wealth of the nation is sustainable … then surely any food company who undermines that through the distribution of products they know are bad for the health and wellbeing of millions, should be considered a potential threat to the nation.
Is that extreme? Maybe.
But let’s face it, they’ve shown they don’t really care about it.
I mean, on one hand you know what you’re dealing with, with Maccas … but when ‘responsible food companies’ like Nestle prove they don’t give a shit, maybe there is a reset that needs to be set.
And while I’m not suggesting they are kicked out – can you imagine the headlines in The Daily Mail if they did that? – maybe they could find some ways to either make it less economically beneficial to keep pushing bad shit on us or to encourage more ways to make good shit more economically available and accessible to us all.
Jesus Christ … who have I become?!
Filed under: 2026, Advertising, Cannes, Colenso, Colleagues, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, EvilGenius, London, Mischief, New Zealand, Si Vicars
The CCO of Colenso is Si Vicars.
I’ve waxed lyrical about him over the years.
His talent.
His overfamiliarity.
His evil genius bastardness.
His Chicken Parmesan abilities.
But one thing I’ve not talked about is his physique.
There’s many reasons for this.
It’s objectifying.
It’s an HR violation.
It’s not much to write home about.
Put simply, for all the talent that bursts out his body like an overload of steroids, his actual body resembles a twig.
I say this, despite the fact he’s some sort of martial artist master … even though he’s such a nice human, he’s more likely to drink tea with you than to karate chop the shit-out-of-you.
But maybe it’s the fact his hands are a dangerous weapon – and I don’t mean in terms of writing some Cannes Grand Prix idea – that on a recent trip to London, his hosts were confused with the person standing in-front of them. To the point one of them said TO HIS FACE:
“You don’t look like I thought you did. I thought you were ripped”.
To which another person in the room apparently looked up and said, “So did I”
And despite their rudeness legitimately allowing Si to snap their neck he, of course, did nothing and instead casually mentioned it to me on his return to NZ … while wondering out loud, where this rumour has come from.
Hmmmmmn, I wonder …
Happy Monday.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Corporate Gaslighting, Creativity, Culture, Data, Emotion, Experience, Humanity, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Practice, Marketing Science, Technology, Toxic Positivity, Transformation
Before I start, I want to acknowledge David, Dave and Andy because today is the 25th anniversary of 9/11.
And while I know that terrible, terrible day resides deeply in their everyday … it’s a significant anniversary and so the memories, pain and loss may feel even deeper to them today.
So know I’m thinking of you.
It was special seeing all of you.
I send big hugs to each of you.
Love you.
OK, let’s get on with the rant …
Years ago, I – and, ironically, David, Dave and Andy – worked for the founder of a very successful company who was obsessed with how his customers and lowest level employees felt, experienced and interacted with the brand.
He had seen far too many organisations manage senior leadership through pandering, toxic positivity and managing-up and was determined that was not going to happen to his company.
His view was the only way to keep improving was to know what’s going on … and the only way to know what’s going on is to ensure the people with the authority to change stuff, saw life from the perspective of the coalface.
Not occasionally.
Not via carefully orchestrated engagement.
But shoulder-to-shoulder and eye-to-eye with their people and customers.
It’s why his C-Suite were mandated to always travel economy, rather than business. Not because he didn’t care about the comfort of his most senior executives, but because he cared even more about the experience of his people abd customers as well as the standards and behaviour of his brand.
It’s part of the reason he saw the generous salaries he – and his C-Suite – were paid was about responsibility.
Not to the shareholders, but to their customers and employees.
Put simply, he believed the job of the most senoir management was to actively protect the standards, values and aspiration of the brand for the customers they serve and the people they employee.
His premise for it was simple. If you look after them, they’ll look after the shareholders.
It’s why he didn’t tolerate convenient answers.
It’s why he utterly loathed generalistic perspectives.
It’s why he vehemently rallied against outsourcing blame or responsibility.
And it’s why he demanded people spent time in the coalface, rather than looking down at it.
Over the years, I’ve had a few clients who behaved that way – and, unsuprisingly, they tended to command the greatest love and loyalty from customers and employees alike.
But these days it seems it is becoming less and less common, prefering – instead – to use data points to inform than actual experience.
And while it can be argued there are more ways to measure more things than there has ever been before, there’s 3 fundamental flaws with this approach:
1. It relies on people knowing what they’re measuring.
2. It relies on people knowing why they’re measuring it.
3. It relies on people knowing what the findings are saying and – more importantly – aren’t.
And while you may think this is obvious – which it is or should be – the reality is, it happens less than you think.
There are many reasons for this – from politics to convenience to different interpretations of industry language and definitions – but blindly accepting data-points without the counterbalance of real and raw human knowledge and experience means what you think is clarity ends up being commercial confusion.
A perfect example is from Sir Alex Ferguson, the legendary manager of Manchester United.
Back in 2001, Sir Alex Ferguson decided it was time for the defender, Jaap Stam, to leave Manchester United..
Stam was at his professional peak and considered one of the best defenders in the world, but Ferguson decided it was time for him to go.
The decision was made after Ferguson took look at Stam’s performance data.
On close inspection, Ferguson saw the then 29 year old defender was tackling less and less and concluded he was past his prime and now was the time to move him on. He was subsequently sold to Lazio.
And to be fair, the data was correct, Stam was tackling less … however it was not because he was past his prime, it was because he had got better at defending.
Put simply, Stam’s positioning had got so good he did not need to tackle so much … he was dealing with the opposition attackers before it got to a point where he needed to tackle them as a last-resort kind-of measure.
So while the data was right, it lacked context and Sir Alex Ferguson didn’t think to question it or challenge it.
In essence, he momentarily forgot what the objective of the defender is, because it’s not about tackling, it’s about protecting the goal … but the data had obstructed his view and resulted in him taking the information at face-value, resulting in him viewing the declining amount of tackles as weakness, when it was actually a symbol of strength and progress.
This is not to say data is not important. Of course it is. It helps provide light on issues and subjects that may otherwise pass unseen until far too late. But the problem is it temps us – and is positioned to us as – speaking directly to our needs.
Where the claim is it provides all the information we need to make simple binary choices or decisions.
Forget context.
Forget questioning.
Forget understanding.
And definitely forget anything that challenges or states otherwise.
Simply make your choice and the most effective and efficient outcome is yours.
That’s where we are folks … a cross between Stockholm Syndrome and group Gas Lighting … but at least it helps explains why there’s such reluctance for companies to actually engage and interact with real people.
The people who work for them.
The people who buy from them.
The people who give a shit about who they are and what they do.
The problem with the industry – every industry – is we are subservient to data. We treat it like the second-coming of Christ. We have started to believe it can bestow us with miracles, when half the time we don’t even know where it came from, let alone what it’s actually saying.
Again, I am not anti-data, but I am anti-data blinkeredness.
It’s why I wonder how many corporate leaders spend any meaningful time on the streets of the customers and/or the shop-floors of their employees … rather than spending hours sitting around a boardroom table commenting on sales data and focus group reports that they’ve not actually read, don’t really understood and never question how they were compiled or what they were trying to uncover.
At a time where every conversations around business seems to be about maximising optimisation and performance data points, maybe the most valuable form of AI any C-Suite can engage in, is the promotion and consideration of real Audience Interaction.
______________________________________________________________________________________
PS: I am going to be in the US for most of next week, so enjoy the weekend knowing you won’t have to read my clap-trap until probably Thursday. You’re welcome.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Clients, Collaboration, Comment, Conformity, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Curiosity, Delusion, Imagination, Innovation, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Practice, Marketing Science, Mediocrity, Packaging, Perspective, Process, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Standards, Strategy, Systems, Technology, Transformation
One of the scariest, awesome things is starting a new project.
Especially a new project where you are given the freedom to take things to new places.
Scary, because there’s always the risk. you might fuck it up.
Awesome, because you can – in theory – go wherever the hell you like.
I love these moments.
I love exploring all the possibilities and then seeing where everyone’s energy is at.
I love the drama, the challenge, the breakthroughs and the crafting.
But most of all, I love the creation.
Seeing something come to life that wasn’t there before.
But to get to a place that excites rather than appeases, is emotionally draining and stimulating.
The process – if that is what you want to call it – is one that tests you more than tests the idea you’re developing.
And frankly we don’t talk about that enough.
Instead, we celebrate precision, perfection, optimization and logic.
And while there may well be elements of all that in all we do, they sure-as-shit don’t happen at the beginning of the process … and if you think they do, then you’re either kidding yourself or you haven’t tried hard enough.
But what’s scary is a lot of the way the industry is structuring themselves is to kid themselves or not try hard enough.
Too many people running our industry are people not from our industry – so they don’t understand how it works.
They see the rabbit holes we need to go down as a waste of time.
A costly exercise in the delivery of our ‘product’.
And while I appreciate you can take too long on things, you can also take too little time …
But that’s where we’re heading … where effectiveness is defined and determined by ‘delivery timelines’ or ‘fitting in’ to pre-determined definitions rather than trying to do something new … something different … something better.
Which is why it’s so funny so many brand and management consultancies talk about ‘brand transformation’ … because you can’t transform if you stick to predefined and predetermined rules, processes and logic. But then – as Lee Hill once told me – they’re not really transforming anyone or anything. What many are really doing is helping old and slow companies catch up with what everyone else in their category has been doing for an age. It means the consultancy can profit from articulating the learnings from the more progressive companies – rather than develop new possibilities and processes of their own – and wrap it up in expensive language that benefits both parties.
Or said another way … ‘catching up’ is sold as innovation and ‘duplication’ is sold as expertise.
OK, I’m being a little harsh there, but the point is … anyone who says creativity and progress can be delivered via a consistent, precise and stable process is either lying to themselves or lying to you. So don’t see the rollercoaster of the creative process as a cost, see it as people who want to make sure they do something really special for you.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Nike, Sport
Look I get our job is to help companies be successful.
I get that tends to mean encouraging people to choose spending their money with one brand over another.
I also appreciate a lot of people have given up trying to be financially responsible, because not only do they not have much hope for what their future holds, but they believe that if they try to save up for the things they want, by the time they have got the money – everything will be even more expensive than it is today.
But … but … even that doesn’t excuse this shit, does it?
I believe in our industry.
I believe in the talent of our industry.
But this shit is the worst of everything we are and do.
I get some people will point to some evidence that states this is what people already do.
I get in these competitive times, you have to look for every advantage you can get.
But when do we hold ourselves responsible to standards and values?
Are we now at the point that anything goes?
If that’s the case, when will we start using data to blackmail people into buying?
Saying that if they don’t buy [insert product X] we will publish embarrassing data/photographs/information on people.
I get NIKE are so fucked right now they will do anything to get their numbers up. And I appreciate JD are all about trying to run at the speed of culture. But there’s a fine-line between representing that generation and exploiting them and right now, I feel this shit means we’re no longer representing society, we’re enemies of it.
And that’s shit, because we’re not just better than that, we’re smarter.
Or at least we used to be. Before everyone was run by people who only see the money, not the implications.