The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]


Why Alexa Has Destroyed Brand Building, Agency Partnerships, Audience Understanding And Creativity …

I know, that’s quite the title isn’t it.

Some would even say it’s ‘clickbait’.

Well, while I readily admit it’s slightly exaggerated, hang in there …

So years ago, Jill rang me to tell me she’d discovered Otis – who was about 4 years old back then – had made a shopping list of things he wanted to order on Amazon through Alexa.

Loads of stuff.

Fortunately for us, this included a range of items even Amazon can’t source.

Stuff such as: Eyeballs … Polar Bears … “Poo Poos” … and countless other weird shit his mind decided would be fun to own.

Putting aside the fact this proved he was most definitely my son, hearing his little voice recite all the things that were on his ‘ownership bucket list’ was wonderful, which is why we have never deleted it.

Not just so we can forever relive his childhood curiosity, but because it will be brilliant to play it when he has his 21st birthday – hahaha.

I say this because I recently read another evil genius use – or should I say, abuse – of Alexa.

This.

Why the hell had I never thought of doing this before?

On the positive, it has shown how mature I have become over the years. On the negative, it has highlighted how I am a groupie for mischief because you can be sure-as-hell I will be finding ways to do this to people from here on in. No wonder the guys at Q-Prime called me ‘immune to maturity’.

And while you may shake your head and call me a ‘sad bastard’ for wanting to do this, think of it as an act of revenge against the tech-bro boys.

Because as much as Alexa may have many uses and benefits … it has also fucked humanity. Teaching us to expect instant gratification for whatever we want, whenever we want it.

No moment for pause.
No time for consideration.
No appreciation of nuance.

Where the only thing that matters – and you are judged on – is the speed of the response.

It’s probably why so many brands love influencers.
Not simply because of their audience.
Not simply because of their popularity.
But because they will say EXACTLY what they want … without challenge, opinion or rearticulation.

I don’t blame the influencer for this, because not only are they making bank out of it, why should they give a shit … for them, the relationship is purely transactional and what they’re selling is access, not authenticity.

But I tell you who should care …

Clients.

But in these days where the main topic of conversation seems to be about ‘shouting at scale’ – read: believing media is way more important than working with people who know what to say and how to say it – is it any surprise that despite spending over US$1 TRILLION dollars on advertising last year, the industry feels like one homogenous, barren contrived-as-fuck blob?

Or as a client of mine recently said, “we’re past the brand building age and now in the brand shrinking era”.

I get instant answers are convenient.
I appreciate having people push back on you can be a pain.
But we need to get back to normalizing the value of objectivity.

Because the point of it is not to frustrate, but to stop you shouting into an echo chamber and building something that people helps people become something.

__________________________________________________________________

Finally – as if it being Friday wasn’t good enough – I am away again for 11 days.

ELEVEN!!!

However it’s not all good news because if you’re in Perth, Western Australia … then Paris, France … then Beijing, China … I’m going to be in your hood so watch out.

Actually, it’s even worse for the people in Perth because I’m going to be shouting swearwords at the brilliant State Of Social conference.

That’s right, the wonderful, generous, kind idiots have invited me again … which means some people just never learn from their mistakes.

So have a good weekend/week. Unless you’re in Perth, Paris or Beijing.

See you around the 3rd Sept.

Comments Off on Why Alexa Has Destroyed Brand Building, Agency Partnerships, Audience Understanding And Creativity …


The Commercial And Creative Value Of Pleasing The Harshest Critic …

If you are going to read this post, please start by watching this clip …

I cannot tell you how much I love it.

Not because the speaker answers the question in a way that forces the entire audience to reconsider or re-evaluate their own perspective or judgement … but because I feel it shines a light on something we – as an industry – are increasingly failing to care about.

And that is, ‘do we like what we are creating?’

Don’t get me wrong, I know our job is to find a way to make audiences think or care about our clients in a way that offers them a commercial advantage … but too often it feels we’re ignoring the importance of whether ‘we like it’ in favour of whether ‘the focus groups’ and/or ‘research methodology’ does instead.

And while I fully expect many people will say, ‘who cares, the only people who matter are the customers’, you’d be wrong.

Not simply because it can feel you’re making work to please/appease the C-Suite more than the audience. Not simply because despite billions spent on market research [$150 billion in 2025], we still see high levels of underperformance when work is put out into ‘the real world’. But because if the people creating the work don’t find any joy in the work, then why the fuck do you expect anyone else to like it?

Actually, let’s go one step further …

If you don’t find any joy in what you’re creating, why would anyone else like it to the point they will actively choose to pay large sums of money for it?

Of course, ‘like’ is subjective. On top of that, it is incredibly dependent on having been exposed to a level of breadth, depth and craft of creativity that enables them to make objective and considered choices in how they judge and answer challenges. Which all leads to 3 points:

1. Companies need to stop thinking outsourcing their annual ‘one-size-fits-all’ training is acceptable behaviour. Especially when it’s outsourced to the same individuals and companies as everyone else is using, even though – ironically – they have never actually made any work that has made a sustainable and meaningful impact on society or categories.

2. Employees need to stop thinking that just because they receive a salary for doing a job – and/or have social media followers – they are equipped with all the skills, standards and qualifications to consider themselves ‘an expert’.

3. Marketing needs to respect and elevate the value of ‘experience’ again.

Not popularity.
Not price-point.
Not the ability to write ‘thought leadership’ articles.

Actual experience.

People who have consistently created, crafted and delivered work – not simply been associated with it – that has achieved, challenged pushed standards, brands and categories over and over again.

Because while they may be more expensive than other hires.
While they may be harder to work with because they call out the bullshit.
The value they offer is they’ll create work for you that passes the first level of the harshest critics … themselves.

And in a world of slop, parity and lowest common-denominator landfill, experience means you’ve just increased the odds of your business being able to take giant leaps rather than – at best – a few teeny-tiny, barely noticeable [unless pointed out with a big arrow] shuffles.

Comments Off on The Commercial And Creative Value Of Pleasing The Harshest Critic …


Why Companies Should Be Grateful For Emotional Employees Rather Than Regular Robots …

Over the years I’ve written a lot about companies viewing ‘emotional people’ as problems.

Viewing them as too passionate.
Too dramatic.
Too impatient.

But the reality is, emotion means you give a fuck and I’d rather have that than work with robots who efficiently execute what’s needed without ever wishing to add, elevate or challenge the status quo.

Of course, the irony is the companies who criticise employees for caring deeply about what they do, tend to also expect their people to be disproportionately passionate and loyal about the company – but guess what fuckers, you can’t have one without the other.

Now I appreciate there are different ways to express emotion …

And when it becomes about what YOU want versus what you want the work to be – they’re very different things.

But having people who care … who deeply want to do the right thing, the better thing and the new thing … is creatively and commercialy far more valuable – let alone interesting – than having an entire department of drones. And yet in these optimisation obsessed times, companies have decided the opposite is true.

Which leads to the point of this post.

Recently I saw this clip of Robert Glasper playing Radiohead’s ‘Everything In It’s Right Place’.

In it, you witness Robert crying as he plays the piece.

The emotional impact he feels because of the piece.

It’s not ego.
It’s not performative.
It’s pure, unfiltered emotion. For a piece of music he didn’t write but feels deeply connected to.

So connected, he gives his all in performing it. To honour what it means to him and what he hopes the audience will get from it.

In many ways, it’s one of the most selfless, geneous acts you could ever witness.

Something I am sure Radiohead would feel honoured by, rather than say:

“Robert … Robert … stop being so emotional about the music. It makes us feel uncomfortable and we don’t know how to deal with it”.

Because that’s the thing … the issue of emotion is not about the person feeling it, but the people who never can.

Who are so disconnected to what they do, the only thing they value is the checklist of what has been done.

Because for them, quality isn’t the goal, it’s productivity.

People who care about what they do and what the company does, is a gift.

It’s why we have to put an end to this false narrative of them being a problem … because they provide life to what so many senior leaders destroy.

Enjoy.


Comments Off on Why Companies Should Be Grateful For Emotional Employees Rather Than Regular Robots …


Why Smart Beats Clever. At Least For Strategists …

One of the things that has always bugged me about some strategists is their desire to be academically victorious in every conversation.

To not just be ‘right’, but to be the ‘rightest of right’.

And then expect wild applause for their proclamations and declarations of self-appointed brilliance.

Putting aside the problematic nature of this behaviour, the irony is it stands in the way of them being able to properly understand – and connect to – how others feel, think, believe or behave … because they’re too busy telling others what they ‘really mean or think’.

And here’s the kicker …

The reality is people often do know what they want, think or think … they just don’t know how to express it clearly.

Which is why the key is the ability to listen rather than to judge. Or explain.

And by listen, I mean listen ‘hard’ …

Not just what is said, but how it is expressed … verbally, visually, contextually.

And while I appreciate we’re in a time poor, distraction rich world … the benefit of doing this is that not only will you have a greater appreciation of how they see the world, they will often reveal opportunities that ‘intellectual logic’ may never see, let alone get to.

Maybe that’s why I love that Lucille Ball quote so much … because in a few words, she articulates the difference between clever and smart.

And where strategy is concerned, smart trumps clever.

That doesn’t mean you don’t care about facts, details, knowledge or academic accuracy, it just means you appreciate that being emotionally resonant with others can achieve more than being academically victorious.

Or as my Dad used to say:

“If you need to show how clever you are, you’re probably not”

I say all this because I saw a brief interview with the singer Billy Idol.

In it, he demonstrates the importance – and craft – of emotional resonance.

The act of understanding what others need to be able to give them the space and place to express.

Not manipulation.
Not exaggeration.
But emotional consideration.

Which is why if a true Rockstar – who has lived the equivalent of 100 lives – can do it, then us poxy strategists should be able to, too.

Watch it, you’ll be a better person for it.

Comments Off on Why Smart Beats Clever. At Least For Strategists …


Why The Industry Needs To Go To Specsavers So We Can See The Difference Between An Idea And An Execution …

As it’s Monday, let me start this post with some good news.

This is the last week of posts for a while as I’m flying off to Europe on Friday.

Not for a holiday.
Not for Colenso.
But for a stream of meetings in LA, London, Amsterdam, Milan and Berlin.

All in 8 days. Darrrrrling.

God, what an asshole humble brag. That isn’t even humble.

Which is why I am not asking you to feel sorry for me because [1] I’m not stupid and [2] 8 days or not, it’s a fucking dream gig. However – if it makes you feel any better – while all of these trips are at the invitation of a range of different VIP’s, I’m only going because they want me to be their cat litter tray rather than be a valued guest.

Did that make you feel less loathing towards me?

What about making the darkness of Monday morning feel a bit brighter?

No? OK … better move quickly on.

So not too long ago, I wrote a post about the brilliant Trevor Beattie and his brilliant analysis of the modern Specsavers creative work.

Specifically, the strategic shift from ‘what it was’ to ‘what it is’.

And while he didn’t say the current work doesn’t live up to the standards of the original work, his central point highlights – at least to me – why I don’t think it does, exemplified by this piece of work that I saw near our office recently.

I should point out this gives me no joy to say whatsoever, because:

1. Specsavers played a significant role in saving my sight by recognizing my disease early and then writing a referral letter for me to urgently see a specialist.
2. Specsavers has continually proved the commercial and creative power of s great idea.
3. The shift Trevor highlighted, may – for reasons I don’t quite understand – be deliberate.

But whatever is behind it … going from the comedic potential of not seeing properly to laughing at the incurably stupid … has potentially resulted in moving the brand from friend to foe.

Or worse, bully.

Now whether they meant this to happen or not is anyone’s guess.

I’m assuming not.

Which reinforces the need to always understand the nuance of an idea – because if you don’t do that, you don’t just undermine years of craft, care and rigor, you undermine the very value you are being paid to elevate.

See my recent post about the billboard for the movie, Devil Wears Prada 2.

There’s too much complexity in our business. But solving it with simplistic interpretation doesn’t help anyone either.

Which suggests every creative, strategist, suit and marketer may need to go to Specsavers to see how to do their job properly.

With craft.
With rigor.
With care.
With an ability to actually – ironically – see it.

And with an understanding of the nuance behind the idea so your work – whaever role you play – is always building the brand up rather than tearing it down.

Comments Off on Why The Industry Needs To Go To Specsavers So We Can See The Difference Between An Idea And An Execution …