Filed under: Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Business, Comment, Creativity, Cunning, Death, Devious Strategy, Management, Marketing, Purpose
The industry likes to talk a lot about purpose.
The supposedly unwavering commitment to its higher purpose, even if it only turns up in marketing.
It likes to talk about agility.
The ability for a company to change focus to maximise opportunities even, if often it’s done to hide a lack of strategy.
And let’s not forget pivoting.
The ability to shift from one area of expertise to another, even if the reality is its because you need to survive rather than you are forward thinking.
Now of course, there are some companies who have purpose, agility and an ability to pivot without using it as an excuse to hide their shortcomings. Companies who have embodied and expressed all these traits, often before it became another marketing or business buzzword.
Or – in the case of pivoting – there are some companies who openly admit why they did it. That if they didn’t, they wouldn’t exist any longer. Netflix for example.
But there’s some organisations who see the writing on the wall, but ‘pivot’ to such an extent that they literally show themselves for the lying, cheating, manipulative organization they have always been.
The best example of this I’ve possibly ever seen is cancer champion – Philip Morris.
You see the tobacco company has decided that their core cash cow doesn’t have the same profitable future as it once did so have decided – to loud fanfare – to pivot.
“What to?” I hear you ask?
Hold on to your hats, because it’s a Health and Wellness company.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
No, that’s not a joke … well, it is, but they don’t mean it to be.
Yep, Phillip Morris – owners of brands including Marlboro are supposedly pivoting to a health and wellness company.
It’s the equivalent of the Trump Organisation becoming an international aid charity.
Or kids TV show, Playschool pivoting to a rival of Pornhub.
How can they say this with a straight face?
They’re even lobbying for a ban on cigarettes within 10 years.
This is worse than poacher turned keeper.
This is an attempt for death to turn doctor … conveniently ignoring all the shameful acts they undertook – and still undertake – to keep their tobacco business killing its customers.
Look I get they have to continue making money.
I get a lot of ‘health and wellness’ companies are as questionable as a cigarette company.
But come on …
Apart from their bullshit being utterly transparent and sickening … what about all the scientists and doctors they paid off, bullied and sued to keep their kill sticks in market.
Do they think they’re just going to nod and think, “hey, we won?”
Will there be a follow up to the Michael Mann movie, The Insider … where Russell Crowe spends 2 hours saying, “I was wrong, Philip Morris are lovely guys really and I forgive them for trying to crush and threaten my life.”
And that’s before we get to the scientists and doctors who work for Philip Morris who must be wondering how a company committed to tobacco can just expect them to change their focus to fixing the illnesses they helped cause in the first place.
But do you know what the sickest part of it all is?
The markets won’t care.
They won’t cast doubt or suspicion.
As long as they make money they will support them.
They’ll call them a poster child for ‘purpose’ and ‘wellbeing’.
It will see the CEO, Jacek Olczak, celebrated and revered by the business press.
It will see him earn millions from bonuses, consultancy and speaker engagements.
We’ll watch holding company CEO’s jostle for position.
We’ll see even more agencies pitching for their business.
We’ll read fawning editorial about their shift in industry magazines.
We’ll hear strategists talk about them as proof of the power of pivoting.
And it will make me hate even more people for the willingness to support hypocrisy for profit.
Philip Morris. You can say you are a health and wellness company, but we all know the only health and wellness you have ever cared about is your own bank balance.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Craft, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Devious Strategy, Finance, Money, Relevance, Resonance, Respect
The picture above is a well known internet image that reflects the value of using professionals.
It’s right.
But where it’s not entirely accurate is that in the real world, what’s happening more and more is that rather than ending up with an image of a horse drawn by a blind, drunk, 5 year old … clients are getting a beautifully image because the professional has been forced to lower his price to get the work.
It’s shit.
What’s worse is that many of these highly talented, exceptionally trained professionals have been made to forget their own value.
It doesn’t happen immediately, it’s often a slow, drawn out process – but the end point is the same, they treat their craft as a commodity. Not because it is, but because they’ve been made to think that way.
When I started working with Metallica, their management asked for my rates and costs.
I gave it to them.
They told me I was a fool and I needed to triple it.
Let me be clear, I thought it was a fair cost – I wasn’t knowingly lowballing myself – and yet here I was being told it wasn’t just low, it was THREE TIMES LOW.
I said I couldn’t do that, it was in-line with market rates and I felt it was fair … to which they asked me a question that changed the way I value what I do.
“Do you think your work and your experience is better than the market?
I knew if I said no, they’d ask why they were working with me, so of course I said yes.
I have to admit, I felt a bit weird saying it, but there were 3 reasons that pushed me to do it.
1. I really wanted to work with them.
2. It was obvious they thought I was worth that amount.
3. Without being arrogant, my experience is pretty huge.
Now the reality is my fee was still a fraction of what many people in the industry charge, but for them to do that when they could have just accepted my fee and said nothing – especially as they knew I wanted to work with them – is something I will forever be grateful for.
It also means I work harder for them, to both repay their faith and keep justifying my rate.
Clever sods.
Since this moment, my relationship with charging for what I do has literally done a full 180.
It’s why I was able to take on a procurement department when they tried to position me as ‘just another supplier’.
It’s why I enjoyed doing it.
It’s also why I was happy to do it in such a mischievous way.
For people who worked with me before – especially at cynic – this shift is amazing.
I was always George’s worst nightmare.
Agreeing to any price if the opportunity excited me.
It’s why I was banned from my own company when dealing with clients about money.
It’s why I still apologise to George for what I did.
Because I was not just undervaluing my talent, but everyone else’s too.
I know it’s hard, but the only way we will educate clients to pay what creative talent deserves – which, let’s not forget, it still a fraction of what they happily pay consultants who don’t ever do the work they recommend – is to give them the standard their budget actually should pay for.
For example the horse at the top of this page.
Because craft is not an expense but an investment.
An investment that doesn’t just lead to better work, but work that lets your client achieve more from it. Whether that’s charging a price premium or simple making more people more interested in what they do.
As Harrison Ford said, the most important thing we can learn is the value of value.
I’m sure I’m not the only one this happens to, but nothing amazes me more than people who were professional assholes to me in the past, writing out the blue wanting to chat.
It might be email or insta, but most usually it’s on LinkedIn.
Of course it’s never to apologise or make amends – of course not – generally it’s them seeking your help with a job or a contact.
Maybe a better person would let bygones be bygones – after all, LinkedIn in particular is a professional network and being professional means it’s never personal, just business.
Alas – as you all know – I’m not professional.
I also don’t believe business and personal are ever exclusive and I have no desire to help bullies prosper which is why I adopt the Sarah Millican approach to professional ‘users’ …
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, America, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Consultants, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Devious Strategy, Diversity, Education, Egovertising, Emotion, Empathy, Equality, Fake Attitude, Focus Groups, Fulfillment, Honesty, Innocence, Innovation, Insight, LaLaLand, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Planners, Planning, Point Of View, Professionalism, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect
Toxicity.
It’s a great word to describe a terrible thing.
It perfectly captures the strategy so many companies, people, governments have adopted to get ahead regardless of the cost.
But what a cost it is.
As the stories of Corporate Gaslighting highlight, it is destructive, debilitating and harmful and its rightfully being called out more and more.
However one of the byproducts of this rightful shift has been the increasing number of companies and agencies who will only accept ‘the positive’.
I’m not talking about them wanting to offer optimism in a challenging world, I mean they are actively dismissing or ignoring anything that they deem as bringing negativity into the conversation.
Questions about decisions.
Realities about their audiences.
Considerations about the categories.
No … no … no … no … no!!!
It’s the ultimate sign of privilege. Not to mention arrogance. An ability to simply close eyes and ears to the realities millions face every single day, just so they can continue living in their own Disneyland of the mind.
Actually Disneyland isn’t right, because their stories involve struggles and challenges … so we’re talking about organisations who make Disney look negative.
Jesus Christ!!!
And yet in the same breath, they will wax lyrical about wanting to have ‘deeper connections with their customers’ as well as ‘living their brand purpose’.
Of course it’s complete bollocks.
Deeper understanding equates to ‘how can we sell more stuff to them’.
And brand purpose is …. well, you know my view.
Can brand purpose have value?
Absolutely.
But brand purpose isn’t something you can ‘invent’ on a whim.
Nor is it a marketing tool to drive sales.
And it absolutely isn’t about saving the world.
It can be.
For some.
But it probably isn’t for most.
Which is why pharmaceutical companies saying stuff life, ‘We exist to rid the world of pain’ … makes me laugh so much I get a headache.
The reality is pain makes these companies oodles of money. The last thing they will ever want to do is rid the world of it.
And you know what … I’m cool with that.
Pain happens and they help it stop.
Cool.
But to say they want to get rid of it all?
Forever?
Are they forgetting how pain can actually be useful to people.
How it can help us understand our limits?
Can guide us to better decisions?
Without pain, can you imagine the trouble we would be in?
Which all explains why I – and shitloads of the planet – don’t believe a word they say when they, and countless other companies in countless other categories, go on about ‘their purpose’, especially when it’s obviously the total opposite of what funds their business?
And yet this delusional positivity of purpose is everywhere.
And what’s worse is we’re seeing more and more companies and agencies actively celebrate it, encourage it and demand it.
I cannot tell you how many planners I’ve spoken to about not being allowed to bring truth to their meetings and conversations.
I talked a lot about this – and the reasons behind it – in my rant at WARC, but it still blows my mind that companies and agencies expect planners to adopt this approach when it’s literally the opposite of what our jobs are about.
Planners are not blind cheerleaders.
We liberate through filter-free truth.
That means we’re supposed to question, challenge, have a hint of cynicism, push buttons.
Not to be dicks, but to help you be better.
It you want a planner to just accept whatever alternative reality you live in, go hire a bunch of Alexa’s.
You can say as much as you like that …
“We don’t really have competition”.
Or
“We don’t like negative insights”
Or
“We don’t want to talk about negative comments about us”
… but that doesn’t mean we should just accept it.
I don’t get why some people have this belief questioning is wrong.
At its most basic level, questioning is about wanting to understand more and surely that’s a good thing.
And even if we challenge what we’re hearing … it’s not to cause upset, it’s to get to truth.
Real truth, not corporate.
The truth that helps create great work. Not just in terms of creativity and cultural resonance … but commercial value.
If you don’t want to hear that, then frankly, you don’t want to grow. Or evolve. Or do something that can genuinely mean something.
Anyway, the reason for this post is because I was recently talking to a couple of creative mates of mine and they introduced me to the most perfect expression for this new attitude of only wanting and accepting ‘the positive’.
It’s this …
Oh my god, how good is that!!!
I cannot tell you how much I love it.
Not just the expression of Toxic Positivity, but the definition.
“The belief no matter how dire or difficult a situation is, people should maintain a positive mindset. It’s a “good vibes only” approach to life.”
Both are utterly, undeniably, absolutely bloody perfect.
Because both are utterly, undeniably, absolutely bloody true.
When I heard it, it immediately helped explain why I found so many things in LA, so annoying.
Don’t get me wrong, there were amazing people there. And the country is amazing in many ways.
I absolutely feel a deep sense of gratitude for the experience my family and I got to have there.
However quite a lot of people I met had this ability to blatantly ignore reality in favour of repetitively repeating some superficial and delusional positivity while trying to look like they weren’t annoyed when I asked what the hell they were talking about.
Even the mere suggestion that everything was not quite as perfect as they are trying to claim was met with an icy smile.
I think I’ve written about it before, but America taught me the difference between truth and honesty.
For me, truth is often uncomfortable.
It doesn’t mean it’s done to be harmful, but it does force situations to be seen, explored, discussed and dealt with.
But honesty – at least the version of it I experienced in the US – was different.
Honesty there, was truth with so many layers of sugar-coating on it, you didn’t taste any bitterness or sharpness.
What it meant was everything was designed to be easy to swallow … to give the impression of openness without being open.
Silicon Valley are particularly good at this approach.
White people – dealing with issues regarding race – are exceptionally good at this approach.
An ability to ignore reality by communicating an alternative version of it.
One that bursts with positivity and happiness. And if they could add a Unicorn to it, they would.
But it seems Toxic Positivity is becoming more and more prevalent.
And while the picture above shows Zuckerberg, it’s not specifically about him.
It’s about any organisation who deals with the raw realities of life with a thin, pained smile while they slowly and calmly explain to you everything is great and everything their company does is great and to even suggest otherwise – even if it comes from a desire to help make things better – is an act of intolerable aggression.
As much as toxic negativity is a dangerous act, so is toxic positivity.
It denies the truth for the people who need it the most.
And while I get why some companies would rather not deal with that, actively shutting it down to spout some inane and delusional ‘happy clappy’ message is equally as destructive, debilitating and harmful as it’s more negative cousin.
The reality is truth and transparency makes things better.
Nothing shows greater respect than giving someone objective truth for the single reason you want them to succeed more powerfully.
I appreciate it might not always be easy, but it’s always worth it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Business, Comment, Confidence, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, Devious Strategy, Finance, Honesty, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Money, Relevance, Social Divide, Social Media
Back from a nice long weekend.
Hey, if this makes you feel bad, imagine how my poor colleagues feel.
Anyway …
I recently read the book Hype, by Gabrielle Bluestone.
It is depressingly brilliant.
While it covers a huge range of topics, it centres on the actions and behaviours of Fyre Festival founder [or should I say, scammer] Billy McFarland.
Now I appreciate with worldwide coverage and 2 documentaries on the subject, you may think you know all that needs to be known, but apart from Gabrielle bringing some new information to the table, what makes it especially interesting is how she compares his actions to others who are regarded as business geniuses.
Like Elon Musk.
Now you might think that sounds like the actions of someone desperate to create hype for their new book. But no. It’s incredibly well written and researched … and as you turn page after page, with hustler/liar story after hustler/liar story, you come away thinking the whole world has fallen for the Emperors New Clothes trick.
Not to mention that either Billy McFarland is unlucky to be sentenced to jail or Elon Musk – and countless other business people and influencers – are lucky not to be.
Society loves its success stories.
It loves trying to ‘codify‘ the system.
But while only a few ever succeed, it doesn’t stop people blindly following some ‘proven’ rules. Often losing themselves in details rather than appreciating context.
All the while making the originator [or person who shouted the loudest, quickest] even more powerful and famous … before they end up a caricature of what they once were.
I’m seeing a lot of this in marketingland at the moment.
Now, I am not suggesting these people are doing it to ‘con’ anyone. Far from it. In fact their intentions are pretty wonderful. But somewhere along the line, their perspective has developed into a ‘system’ and that system now has a number of unquestionable and unshakeable rules attached to it which, ironically, is starting to negatively affect the very industry they want to help.
To be fair, they are not entirely responsible.
They are a bit … because they give their ‘system’ names that suggest intellectual superiority when it’s really ‘an educated beginners guide’, plus they conveniently turn a blind eye to how many of their students are executing what they learnt – without context or real audience understanding – so it ends up just being lowest common denominator thinking. But the real reason this situation is occurring is too many companies aren’t investing enough in talent or training, so they send people off to do courses with fancy names so they can all look and feel like they are.
Putting aside the fact this also highlights how many companies lack a philosophy regarding their approach and value to marketing, what this ‘one size fits all’ approach is doing is educating a whole generation of marketer/advertiser/company that talent, standards and creativity are not nearly as important as having people who can follow – and police – process, formats and parity.
We’re in danger of getting to the point where independent thinking is seen as dangerous.
Or weakness.
Or anything other than strength.
And while understanding how things work is important, creating a singular approach and process where building brands and creativity is approached like an airfix model – where the outcome is always the same, albeit with different brand names/colours attached – seems to be more about undermining the purpose of marketing rather than liberate it.
What makes this even more amusing is the brands who are attracting the greatest cultural momentum, loyalty and brand value right now are not following any of these ‘process rules’. More than that, they’re building their reputation and value through the creation of distinctive brand ideas that talk directly to their audiences rather than focusing on brand attribution that aims to be slightly memorable among their category.
[Please note, I’m talking about brands with a real business behind them, not just social hype]
Now I appreciate the context and circumstances of cultural brands and the brands who are adopting a marketing ‘system’ are very different … but what I’m trying to highlight is that we now find ourselves in this weird situation where the ambition for many brands is to not find ways to get ahead but to not be left behind – all the while bombarding the market with claims of innovation, new thinking, new opportunities.
And that’s why I loved reading Hype so much.
Not just because it pulled back the curtain on the hypocritical bullshit of so many self-appointed ‘business icons’, but it revealed where we’re all heading if we’re not careful … even though I know there will be people out there who read it and see it as their goal rather than their ruin.