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


How An Ad For Another Aussie ‘Icon’ Showed Qantas Would Not Be Able To Proudly Boast About Their Planes Safety Record If They Had To Include Their Advertising In Their Statistics …

Many years ago – 2009 to be precise – I wrote a take down of Qantas, the Australian Airline.

It wasn’t about their experience or service which – back then – were pretty good, certainly much better than they are today. No, it was about the lyrics to their ‘iconic’ song, ‘Still Call Australia Home‘.

Now I appreciate I’m a Brit.

I appreciate that, at the time, I had an agency called Cynic, so was full of piss and vinegar.

I even appreciate – as my Aussie wife reinforced to me in no uncertain terms – that the song and Qantas’ advertising was pretty special for Aussies so maybe I should shut the fuck up.

And that is good advice. Except 15 years later, I’ve decided to come back with a comeback.

You see recently I saw an ad for another Australian icon …

The difference being this one is worthy of that label annnnnnd – even more significantly – they’ve made a piece of advertising that ignites all the emotion, pride and Australian spirit that Qantas would possibly sacrifice their ‘never had a crash’ reputation, to achieve.

[Please note, this is simply to emphasise the point. I get it’s not a great turn of phrase. And I obviously don’t mean it. So if you prefer, simply replace it with: “… that Qantas would allow themselves to be embroiled in even more financial scandal, to achieve”. Better? Oh god … there’s no pleasing some people is there!]

Anyway, if you’re wondering what I’m talking about, it’s this from the Sydney Opera House for their 50th anniversary.

[Though while it’s being shared a lot at the moment, it actually came out about 8 months ago]

I love it.

I love it so much it made a cynical Brit emotional.

Sure, I have an Aussie wife … a ½ Aussie son … Australian residency and was even a member of the audience in a couple of the historic scenes they show in the film … but I’ve never, ever felt that way about a Qantas ad.

Not once.

Hell, I don’t even like Tim Minchin – the guy who leads every thing in the ad – and yet I still felt connected to the spot.

Part of it could be because The Opera House was to me, a symbol of Australia, decades before I moved there.

I still remember how overawed and overwhelmed I was when I first saw it for real. This incredible place whose image had been burned into my mind from years of seeing it on TV shows, in magazine articles or just everyday imagery.

But it’s more than that, it’s what the place signifies.

The story that underpins the whole film.

A true story.

One where the quest to do something different triumphs over the demands to control and conform. An ode to the majesty of imagination and art rather than the adherence of tradition and regulation.

It all feels – ignoring the fact the Opera House was designed by the Dane, Jørn Utzon – much closer to the ‘Aussie spirit’ than anything Qantas has ever done.

A salute to those who wish to push and challenge rather than seek the comfort of being back ‘where they’re comfortable’.

Now I appreciate that maybe that spirit is more confined to the past than the present.

One look at how the vote for ‘The Voice’ turned out reveals comfort, convenience and control are the words of the day.

But that aside, it’s a very special film.

Helped by the fact the Opera House is a very special place.

Not just for Australia, but for anyone who hopes for something a bit more.

A bit more personal.

A bit more emotional.

A bit more wonderful.

And if you need any more reason why you should love the Opera House far, far more than Qantas … let me tell you, even the Opera House’s cheapest seats offer more leg room than pretty much anything you’ll get on that airline.

Comments Off on How An Ad For Another Aussie ‘Icon’ Showed Qantas Would Not Be Able To Proudly Boast About Their Planes Safety Record If They Had To Include Their Advertising In Their Statistics …


Spraying Ourselves With The Scent Of Sense …

So this is the last post for a week as I’m travelling for work.

I know … I know …

And while you may claim it’s another freebie holiday, it really is work. Albeit this time, it’s work that is mental in terms of crazy and exiting … which I hope I can talk about someday as it’s definitely one of those moments I’d like everyone to know about because its huuuuuuuuge bragging rights, hahaha.

Anyway, given I’ve probably already screwed my NDA, let’s get on with this post shall we?

A while back I wrote a post about the fragrance naming of Tom Ford. Specifically, the ‘Vanilla Sex’ variant.

Someone commented they found it interesting that I – and likely all men – would immediately interpret this as ‘boring/average sex’ when vanilla is the most universally accessible scent so it could easily mean the scent represented ‘sweet smelling sex’.

I responded by saying that while it is true vanilla is the most universally accessible scent, it is also widely accepted that using that word in association with ‘sex’ had very different connotations … and that interpretation had nothing to do with gender, but maybe age.

They deleted their comment.

I am unsure why they did, but I can guess and that is disappointing.

Of course, I appreciate men make A LOT of interpretations, associations, and confident claims about things they know little about. They are the undisputed champions of arrogant stupidity.

I also appreciate get utterly fucked that is … especially when they wade into subject matters that exclusively revolve around women, or more associated with women or people who identify as a woman.

You see it a lot – in fact, it happened to one of the brilliant members of my team last week – Meg – when she wrote something on Linkedin about a Bumble campaign … and was immediately hit with men not just telling her she was wrong, but then telling her what she should be thinking.

Which is why when that shit happens, they need to be called out.

But when that isn’t the case – or you realise it isn’t – then deleting your involvement doesn’t help.

Of course I get why people do it … but it doesn’t help build connections, understanding and bridges.

And frankly, we need more of that.

The divide in our industry is insane.

People are actively looking for the wrong in what others say or interpreting any alternative perspective as a personal attack.

OK, sometimes that is justified, especially on platforms like Linkedin … but not always.

The reality is people make mistakes.

We all do.

Hell, in the league table of misadventure, I would definitely be in the top 10.

But the key – at least for me – is about context and intent and my belief is the vast majority of people don’t want to be assholes. More than that, they want to actively learn and grow.

Now I appreciate it may not always seem that way … I get some people are trolls who, for reasons I will never really understand, get off on being violent with their words on all platforms of social media [though it confuses me even more when they do it on Linkedin, given we can see who they are], but I’m pretty sure most people aren’t like that. I think most people are decent but that can only be seen when there is an openness and calmness to debate and discussion. From both sides of the debate.

Sadly, men also find this incredibly difficult to achieve.

Especially men who seem able to permanently reside on the social media platforms.

And while some of them are egotistical, judgemental pricks – literally and metaphorically – the majority aren’t and that is why I feel the best way we can help the industry unite and evolve is if we lose the ego and apologise when we’re wrong and not gloat like dicks when we’re right.

To actively encourage and embrace the new, even if we don’t understand it.

To be open to challenges but in the spirit of curiosity and growth rather than destruction.

And to be open to be wrong and own it rather than try to disown it.

Of course, this is a two-way street, but given men are probably the reason for the vast majority of this behaviour – or ‘normalizing’ it – it’s only fair we take the lead in trying to change it.

Or said another way … take the lead in creating the conditions that let everyone else feel safe to discuss, debate and disagree.

And while that may sound very fucking Disney – especially from me – the reality is if we don’t do that, then for all the cleverness we claim our discipline offers– we’re showing we’re not that smart.

Worse, we’re acting as a barrier to brilliant people entering the industry, wanting to enter the industry or being able to thrive in it.

And yes, I appreciate how ridiculous the heaviness of this post is given it was inspired by a comment about a perfume called Vanilla Sex … but sometimes the craziest things create crazy outcomes.

Which is why maybe Tom Ford could launch a perfume for the strategy discipline entitled ‘vanilla debate … a scent designed to put our focus on creating work that leaves a lasting aroma rather than a discipline that’s starting to smell a bit like a sewer.

And with that, I’ll see you on June 4th, because – bizarrely – New Zealand has a day off on the 3rd for King Charles birthday. Which is great, but also stupid given what Colonialism did to the rightful people of this land. But before I digress into another rant, I’ll leave you with one teeny bit of information about the 4th June. And that is it will be 8 days before my birthday … so if you send your cheques now, they should reach NZ just in time for my special day.

You’re welcome.

See you soon.

Comments Off on Spraying Ourselves With The Scent Of Sense …


Are You An April Tool?

This blog has been going for a loooooooong time.

Which means, it’s had its fair share of April Fool posts.

Some have been very good [even though I say it myself] with different industry people picking it up and commenting on it thinking it’s real.

And some being utterly, utterly shite.

But this year I decided not to do one.

Not because I couldn’t be bothered.
Nor because I couldn’t think of what to do.
Not because it was an Easter holiday on April 1.
But because after a while, it just becomes a bit boring.

I say this because a lot of brands don’t seem to get that. Instead, they keep doing the same thing over and over again without realising the audience have moved on.

That might be because of ego. That might be because of a lack of self-awareness. That might be because they don’t even know who the fuck their audience is … but whatever the reason, they keep doing what they do regardless.

And one of those things they keep repeating is ‘hijacking culture’.

By that I mean either during or after a topical event … they hire a van, slap a billboard on the back, put some headline on it that refers to whatever event they are ‘leveraging’ and then drive back and forth so a photographer can snap it in situ and then send it to the press or put it on the socials.

Hey, sometimes it’s really good.

But often, it just feels pretty sad.

Especially when lots of companies are all trying to do exactly the same thing for the same event at the same time.

Look I get it … it’s a way to get boost attention.

It’s also a way to show your client – or their bosses – you’re ‘on the ball’.

Can’t criticise that … except in many cases, it also seems to have a subliminal admission that they need to borrow from others to make people care about them.

Which is less good.

Yes, I know I’m being a bit of a pedantic asshole here, but here’s the thing … when people expect brands to do this stuff, then you have to accept that you’re no longer ‘hijacking’ anything, you’re simply conforming.

Of course there are ways to do it well.

Wieden were the masters and – arguably – the originators of it.

Which was basically to do stuff that ‘added to the cultural conversation, not just stole from it.

They did it with NIKE for literally decades.

Olympics.
Superbowls.
World Cups.
Winning.
Failing.
Achievements.
Retirements.
Fines.
Spectaculars.

But achieving it wasn’t simply down to great talent, great clients or being quick at doing stuff like this, it was down to 3 things.

Creatives co-run/run the account, not simply make the ads.
They understand the culture around the category, not just the category.
They think in terms of owning the brand voice, not just launching campaigns.

What the combination means is everyone feels there role and purpose is more than just making advertising, but finding how … where … when and who the brand can/should a voice and point of view. It’s more than just being pro-active, it’s a confidence in your preparation.

You know what the brand will say.
You know how the brand will say it.
You know what the culture of the audience want and need.

You’re moving things forward because you’re always moving things forward. Seeing your role as far more than simply fulfilling ‘campaign requirements’ and ‘unexpected opportunities’ but directly and continually driving, shaping and influencing the behaviour and energy of the vision and role of the brand in culture.

Many people will say they do that, few do.

Instead they just churn out stunts or puns that often end up being more for the ego of the people involved than the benefit of the audience it is supposedly for.

Which is the heart of what, in my opinion, separates brands/agencies who get it and those who pretend they do.

Because the wannabes and imposters talk about how they will make the masses love their brand, whereas the real deal know it’s about the brand showing and expressing who they love and who they are for.

Comments Off on Are You An April Tool?


Play To Win, Rather Than Not To Lose …

When Tiger and Nike recently ended their relationship after close on 3 decades, there was a lot written about why.

Hot takes.
Wild ideas.
Conspiracy theories.

But among them all was a post by Tom Bassett – a brilliant ex-Wieden strategist who was there when so much of what became Nike folklore was written.

The reason his voice stood out is because it wasn’t WHY the relationship ended, but why it started.

At the heart of his story was the brief Phil Knight gave for NIKE Golf.

He said: “Get NIKE to be #1 in golf or we get out the category all together”.

Having had the errrrm, pleasure(?) to meet and present to Mr Knight a few times, I can literally hear him saying/barking this … and what I love about it is the stubborn, blinkered ambition.

We seem to live in a world where the majority of conversation is around optimization … efficiency … brand assets … and basically how to get the most out of what you’ve got.

There’s nothing wrong with that, except it’s all about not being wrong than being as good as you can be.

Or said another way, being comfortable with what you’ve got as opposed to being impatient for what you want to have.

Get to #1 is a proper goal. One where the evaluation criteria is very fucking simple.

No hiding behind incremental growth or internal metrics … #1 is a criteria that dictates decisions and investment rather than the other way around.

Sure, there are ways #1 could be reframed in an attempt to look like you’re doing better than you are . Let’s face it, we see this sort of shit in the ad industry all the time, especially around award time … but Phil Knight wasn’t about skewing results but going right at them … which is why he didn’t place any additional burdens on how to achieve goal, other than demand it was true to the sport and how NIKE see’s the athlete.

Sounds easy, but it isn’t.

To do that takes a lot of confidence.

Confidence in who you are … confidence in your team … confidence in what your company stands for and confidence your company is full of people who know what that translates to in terms of behaviour, consideration and action.

And that’s why we often undermine the value of confidence and right it off as bravado.

Of course it can be that, but it is also about trust, experience, knowledge and openness.

As a chef once told me when we were doing Tobasco research at W+K, “the more confident the chef, the less ingredients they use”

And that’s why I love the clarity of Phil Knight’s objective.

He could have added a million mandatories, but he knew that would add a million reasons why his objective would then be almost impossible to achieve.

At least in a realistic timeline.

Which is why, as difficult as the objective was, he increased its chances of success by being clear as fuck and – to a certain degree – open as fuck. Enabling the team to not just tackle the project head on – rather than tap-dance around politics and restraint – but to also place responsibility back on the company in terms of what it needed them to do to help make it happen.

Not just in terms of money, but action and change.

It is one of the many reasons why I loved my time in China … why I loved Branson’s brief for the Virgin lounge … why I love working for Metallica and Mr Ji.

Sure, in China’s case, it was often more the ambition and scale than the clarity … but for the others, it is/was the single-minded, stubbornness of their objective, the trust they placed in the people they were asking to help them do it, the commitment of the whole organisation to give it the best chance of making it happen and the willingness to walk away rather than accept a poor substitute of what they wanted to change.

We need more of that.

Creative work would be more amazing for that.

Effectiveness would be more powerful for that.

But sadly we’re in a world where it’s all about hedging bets, outsourcing responsibility and managing internal politics rather than being focused, fierce and open on creating change.

Proper change.

Real change.

Massive change.

It all kind of ties in with the ‘Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative’ talk Martin, Paula and I did in Cannes last year.

The obsession with playing to the process while being continually outsmarted by those who are focused on enabling the possibility.

And while some claimed we were being irresponsible, unrealistic and even unprofessional in what we were saying, the reality is we have – and are – in the incredibly fortunate position of working with brands/people who prove the most responsible way to create powerful and lasting change is not by hedging your bets, but being willing and open to fight for it all.

Comments Off on Play To Win, Rather Than Not To Lose …


Why Creating The Conditions For Creativity Are As Important As Having The People Who Can Make It …

I’ve always had a love/hate relationship with advertising awards.

Of course, it’s nice to have them … but for me, it’s always about who you are competing against and who the judges are who are deciding them.

Oh, and whether those who have won before, won with real work or ‘ultra-niche, ultra-limited edition’ one-offs.

Also known as scam.

You generally can tell when that shit happens because they tend to either:

1. Be a one-off from the clients normal approach to work.
2. Be a one-off from the normal output of the agency.

Fortunately, it is less than it used to be, but still more than it should.

That’s why the agencies who do it properly deserve more credit.

To win awards as a byproduct of the work you make rather than it be the focus of the work you make, is a noble cause.

There’s more of them than we often give credit for … and you can generally tell who they are by how long they’ve been able to play at that level.

A few years ago, I wrote about how W+K and BBH were brilliant examples of this.

How they proved the old adage ‘it’s easier to get to the top than to stay there’.

And it’s so true.

Because without wanting to take anything away from anyone who does well, being able to do it consistently is an even greater achievement.

I say this because I think Colenso is one of these places.

For over 50 years, we’ve consistently made work that has been recognised by the best in the world as some of the best in the world.

NZ has tended to do very well in this area … DDB, Saatchi, Special to name a few … but few have done it with the longevity and sustainability of Colenso.

And a big part of that is because of the culture it cultivates.

From our approach to the work we make to the people we hire to make it … at the heart of everything is a deep love and respect for the power of creativity.

Lots of people will say that.
Lots of agencies will say that.
But you find out who means it through the work that they consistently make.

And that is – like all the places who consistently do good stuff – one of the traits that reveal who we really are.

That doesn’t mean we’re the easiest place to work.

Because even though the place is full of good and talented creative people … it’s also a challenging, demanding, opinionated and provocative environment, because ultimately, we have 50+ years of standards and expectations to honour, live up to and try to push further.

As the picture at the top of this page – from 934843049 years ago – shows.

But what’s interesting is how we want those standards and expectations to manifest.

Because it’s not about playing to be accurate, it’s about doing the right thing in the most interesting, original and audacious ways.

Do we always get it right?

Nope.

But we always strive to get it right and that’s why we are consistently awarded at the highest level for work as varied [and effective] as turning beer into an alternative fuel for cars, creating a radio station for dogs, getting Rick and Morty to explain green energy to youth culture and making a radio campaign that doubled as an outdoor campaign that asked New Zealand to make a radio campaign … to name but a very few.

And while this post sounds unbelievably corporate toady … it’s my way of paying homage to my colleagues and, especially, my partners.

Now I could wax lyrical about Si – our CCO – because he’s not just horribly talented, he is possibly the nicest human I’ve ever worked with.

[Well, I say nice, but he has his moments of evil – but even then, he manages to deliver it with a niceness that makes every Disney character look like a bunch of pricks]

But the reality is, you’d expect the leader of Colenso to be brilliant … otherwise why the hell are they here.

Which is why who I really need to acknowledge is our MD – Ange – because she’s the Ringmaster of the whole Colenso circus.

It can’t be easy.

Not just because she has to deal with me – let alone sit next to me – she also has to work with a bunch of people thinking up ridiculous ideas that challenge and confront on every level.

Not just creatively … but in terms of time, simplicity and possibility.

Yet she manages it.

More than that, she would fight for the death to maintain it.

Which is why the thing that is often forgotten about the agencies who consistently make great work is not just the people behind it … but the people who make it possible.

The people who create the conditions for it to thrive.

From the MD’s and finance people to the IT and support staff.

But – and here is the critical thing – it’s more than them just doing their job well, it’s them doing their job through the lens of what the whole company is striving to do.

Because to paraphrase that famous story of the janitor who met President Kennedy

They’re not working in a vacuum, immune from the needs and ambitions of everyone around them… they’re helping make the most audacious ideas get out the door.

Here’s to all of them. Every last fucking one of them.

With that, the first month of ’24 is done. And I can tell you, I’m as surprised as anyone that I decided to finish it in such an earnest, generous way.

Let’s hope February is less nice. Even I feel sick with it.

Comments Off on Why Creating The Conditions For Creativity Are As Important As Having The People Who Can Make It …