Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Colleagues, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Work
Back in Jan 2021, I wrote a post about the ridiculousness of ‘unlimited leave’ policies.
By that, I mean companies pretending they mean it when we all know that they would lose their shit if someone said they wanted 4 weeks off, let alone 4 months!
Which is why I found this post I saw on Twitter/X recently, so funny.
Because while it’s taking the piss, it’s also never been so serious in its life:
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Corporate Evil, Crap Campaigns In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Technology
Years ago – 2006 to be precise – Apple did an iconic set of ads about Mac vs PC.
Here’s some of them. Because they were so unbelievably good at what they were designed to do – that is make Microsoft look a well-intentioned, but ultimately out of touch, out of date, faceless corporate monolith – they made loads of them.
In many ways, these ads cemented Apple’s persona into societies mind, presenting technology as something we could use for life, not just work … which sounds mad to say now, but was a big deal back then.
Anyway, recently when I was in the US, I saw this …
Yep, that’s the Mac vs PC guys except they aren’t promoting Apple, they’re advertising – drumroll please – Ozempic!
FUCKING OZEMPIC!
And while I can imagine there is some research that states people who can remember the Mac vs PC ads are now at an age where they have the money to help with their weight control, the reality is this all just felt tragic as fuck.
Not just because it’s the most borrowed of borrowed equity.
Not just because it feels they think this makes them ‘just like Apple’.
Not just because they’re using characters from TWENTY FUCKING YEARS AGO.
But because when you look at the ads, you don’t just think of Apple more than Ozempic … but when your brain finally gets around to working out these people are being used to promote a weight control drug, all you think is ‘Ozempic may help you lose weight but it sure as fuck doesn’t stop you looking old or desperate for cash’.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Comment, Consultants, Corporate Evil, Egovertising, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Technology
Following on from yesterday’s post, I thought I would leave this here without comment.
Well, I say ‘without comment’ but it does reinforce this post I wrote a while ago. And if you can’t be bothered to read that – you lazy bastards – the point is basically this:
Why does business revere ‘leaders’ who have a history of failing at breathtaking scale?
Is it the breathtaking scale that turns them on, or the idea they reframe their choices as ‘innovation’?
Which raises another question:
If Mr Zuckerberg can’t make AI work with his almost endless resources and investment in the technology … why the fuck does every legacy company think they can create an AI product – from scratch and with tech people who are NOT leaders in their field – that will?
God bless the egotistical delusion of old men who think creating their own AI platform makes them look young and relevant.
Hey, at least it makes a change from ‘sports car and having an affair with their secretary’.
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, A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, AI, Attitude & Aptitude, Brands, Business, Conformity, Consultants, Context, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Crap Products In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Empathy, Technology
I appreciate the commercial benefits of being associated with technology – especially technology that’s at the forefront of change – but I’m getting fed up of companies shoving the letters A and I ahead of everything they do in a desperate attempt to look cutting edge.
Do they realise they’re not fooling anyone – except, maybe themselves?
Have they forgotten what happened to WeWork when they persisted in their claims to be a tech company when even Stevie Wonder could see they were nothing more than an office space rental firm.
But it’s happening everywhere with everyone claiming everything they do is now ‘AI shaped/influenced/enabled.
AI project management systems
AI consultancy services.
AI home theatre systems.
AI photocopiers.
AI toilets.
AI. Ai. AI.
And even if I accept all these things now have some element of AI in their process and product, how come so much of them operate exactly as they did before?
All that advanced tech and everything still operates the same way as it always has.
That can’t be very good can it?
Surely that means the people behind it are either idiots, attempting to gaslight their customers or they have used AI to remove employees roles so they can squeeze out the last remnants of profit before they scraper and enjoy sitting on their millions.
While I’m at it …
Why is it the worst offenders of this sort of behavior tend to be the most conservative and traditional companies and industries?
[You can tell who they are as they tend to use images like the one at the top of this post because they think that proves they’re all about the ‘future’, haha]
On one hand I appreciate their desire to modernize, but the problem is – if the only thing that changes is the speed they can do things or the price they can do them for … then arguably, they’re proving they haven’t got the faintest idea what AI could do for them if they’re limiting its use to efficiency and productivity.
So to all brands jumping on the AI bandwagon …
Using Claude to speed up your manufacturing process doesn’t mean you’re an AI company.
Using ChatGPT to write articles about your products does not mean you make AI tech.
And positioning any form of automation as AI does not mean you’re a cutting-edge tech company.
Am I exaggerating?
Yes. But not nearly as much as you may imagine …
Every day I see ads and articles from companies claiming AI is at the centre of all they do.
Products.
Service.
Systems.
Manufacturing.
Marketing.
You name it, someone is saying it … which is why the best way to tell ‘who is trying’ versus ‘who is claiming’ is to embrace the same evaluation criteria as used to judge strategy, which is:
Can customers, employees and competitors notice a fundamental difference between how things were and how things now operate and behave?
If they can’t, it’s hype or self-serving commerciality. You’re welcome.