Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Business, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Content, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Education, Effectiveness, Experience, Facebook, Fake Attitude, Honesty, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Money, New Product Mentalness, Perspective, Planners, Relevance, Resonance, Scam, Social Media, Standards, Technology
After the amazing drama of yesterday, I need to calm things down.
Not for you, but for me … because my heart can’t take nerves like that.
And yet it’s going to have to do just that in a little over a week.
Bloody hell.
So to slow things down, let me take you back in time …
Back in 1985, the band Dire Straits launched a song called Money For Nothing.
It became famous for a whole host of reasons.
It was the first song of theirs that actually sounded slightly modern.
It had ‘modern’ day references in the lyrics.
It had Sting – from The Police – singing on it.
It had this video …
Did you watch it?
You didn’t did you?
You lazy bastards …
Well, to get back to the point of this post, here’s a screen grab from it …
Now while that image may not strike you as cutting edge, back in 1985, it was revolutionary.
Digital characters living in a digital world, where their universe was a blend of normality and possibility.
Hang on, does that sound like something else?
Something that a huge amount of the tech and marketing industry have been wetting their pants over?
Something that sounds suspiciously close to this …
Did you watch this?
You didn’t did you?
You über-lazy assholes …
Well, to get back to the point of this post, here’s a screen grab from it …
Yep.
Yep it does.
A music video from 1985 by the most snooze-rock band ever formed, not only communicated the metaverse, it did it in a style pretty close to what Facebook and every other brand have shown as ‘the standard’.
How terrifyingly embarrassing is that?
All these hip, technologists, futurists and strategists trying to look like they’re on the edge of culture creation and all the bollocks they’re banging on about was expressed by bloody Dire Straits 37 years earlier.
THIRTY SEVEN YEARS.
Hahahahahahahahaha.
I mean … when that Zuck video first broke, I wrote a post about how it was missing the point by showing things we can already do, but now – thanks to errrrrm, Dire Straits, I realise it was even worse than I imagined.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe technology and – the metaverse, even though what is being celebrated as it, isn’t what it is – will have the possibility to make a huge, positive difference to humanity. Eventually.
But making – and lauding – a film and idea that looks awfully similar to a bloody 1985 music video isn’t doing them any favours. If anything, it shows how much of this industry is filled with individuals who crave attention or adoration or just desperately seek relevance.
Not helped when you learn that, unsurprisingly, the main reason Zuck is so into the Metaverse is not for changing the world but upping his bank account.
Given how much Facebook tried to label Apple as ‘anti-business’ for the amount they charged creators and partners – which is a lot less than 47.5% – it makes the whole Meta situation even more laughable.
Don’t get me wrong, I know the new is often misunderstood.
And new technology should not be judged by the standards of established technology.
But when the ‘icons and industry leaders’ stand on soapboxes and stages to promote the future in a similar way that Dire Straits brought to the World almost 4 decades ago … it’s only fair to question if these people care about the future or simply their own career image.
Even though, sadly, we keep seeing hyping can get better career growth, than grafting.
If the Metaverse could fix that, then maybe we’d all sign up.
Then again …
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apathy, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Comment, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Digital, Egovertising, EvilGenius, Fake Attitude, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Politics, Relevance, Social Commentary, Social Divide, Technology
OK, I should point out I actually think the Metaverse has incredible potential.
It could revolutionise education, medicine and ignite the creation of industries that don’t even exist yet. Which is why I am still utterly baffled why Zuckerberg thought the best way to sell the technology was by putting out that utterly shit video … where you saw him and his ‘mates’ not only do things that are all possible right now, but were worse in terms of quality, creativity and interactivity.
And then I saw this picture and everything became clear …
Maybe Zuck doesn’t give a damn about the Metaverse.
Maybe he doesn’t want to help humanity evolve and develop.
Maybe the only reason he’s doing it is for the same reason a lot of conmen do things …
Because when you can distract your target, you can rob them when they’re not looking.
Now before Mr Z’s lawyers try and sue me for every penny I’ve got for saying that, I would like to point out two things.
1. I said ‘maybe’ …
That means I am absolutely not suggesting Mr Zuckerberg is a conman or only doing Metaverse for conman purposes. I am only suggesting that could be possible, however unlikely that is. Similar to me saying I could be a catwalk model.
2. Be honest. That photo is very, very creepy.
Whoever allowed that photo to get out at Facebook … I mean Meta … was either an idiot or a hero. Because when I look at that photo, I can’t help but think of this ad … except with a totally different ending.
Rather than everyone being saved in the nick of time – thanks to the hero coming in at the last moment and destroying the screen that is hypnotising and blinding the audience so they follow the words of evil – no one comes to save them, so evil walks past all of his hypnotised and blinded victims, smiling to himself that’s he got them exactly where he wants them.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Brand Suicide, Confidence, Context, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Differentiation, Distinction, Experience, Gaming, Honesty, Innovation, Insight, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Point Of View, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Standards, Technology
I recently read an article in the Guardian about the launch of the X-Box.
Given the brand has been part of gaming culture for the past 20 years, it’s easy to forget what an achievement this has been for Microsoft.
Let’s remember back then, the brand was far more synonymous with office computer programs than gaming … so to come from such a negative space and place to become the powerhouse it is today, is nothing short of incredible.
But it wasn’t all plain sailing.
Sure, their cause was helped by SONY seemingly forgetting everything that had made the original PlayStation launch so successful … but even with that, Microsoft were still coming from pretty much a standing start.
It’s a great article that’s well worth the read, but there was one part that really stood out to me.
This:
Let’s be honest, we’ve all been there …
Where someone chooses to ignore a statement of obviousness and instead, attempts to turn it around so you look like you’re making a potentially dangerous assumption.
Don’t get me wrong, we shouldn’t blindly assume common sense is common sense, and – without doubt – there’s been a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions that have ended up being the backbone of ideas and campaigns all around the World, but this sort of behaviour is nothing but an act of petty cowardice.
However, let’s assume for a moment the person who wanted proof that people did expect DVD quality to be better than the crunched-up shit that was on screen, was right.
Let’s assume that we didn’t know that DVD brands had been communicating ‘improved image quality’ to the general public for years.
Even if all that was true, the real issue was still not being addressed.
And that is facts doesn’t mean standards.
So rather than fall into a ‘fact inflation fight’ that no one was going to come out of well – even though I get why they were triggered – they should have asked Mr Petty if the image on the screen reflected the quality of product and performance he – and the company – wanted to globally be associated with?
Quickly followed up by enquiring whether Microsoft had the technology to dramatically improve the current standard of performance?
By doing this, they not only side-step the pointless barrier being placed in front of them and refocused the conversation to values, standards and ambition.
I’ve seen this situation happen so many times.
Where political point scoring derails ambition, potential and standards.
Where the company starts focusing on the ‘minimum viable product’ rather than what could drive the brands perception.
And while these situations have also seen me lose my shit – A LOT – I always remember my Dad telling me the real way to win these sorts of arguments, which is to elevate the discussion to reputational standards not down to petty point scoring.
He was brilliant at it.
Me? I’m still working on it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Brilliant Marketing Ideas In History, Confidence, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Diversity, Gaming, Imagination, Inclusion, Innovation, Insight, Marketing, Perspective, Relevance, Resonance, Standards, Technology
For all the talk about diversity and inclusion being spouted by companies, I don’t see much diversity and inclusion.
I still see companies mainly filled with people like me and where there is diversity, it tends to not be at the management level.
And on the rare occasion that it is, you then see the media go after these people with a zeal rarely seen towards anyone white. Or male.
Of course, diversity is more than simply heritage … though companies often use that as a convenient excuse to not hire People of Colour, ignoring that – SHOCK HORROR – People of Colour can also come from low income areas, have physical disabilities, be members of the LGBTQ+ community and/or have any other number of ‘minority’ characteristics you wish to throw at me … which is why I am so excited by a new video game that deals with diversity head on.
Forza Horizon 5 is a brilliant racing game on XBox.
The graphics are amazing.
They’ve introduced a ‘story’ mode to the game.
And the world you get to explore is almost limitless.
But … and it’s a big but … the really brilliant thing is the level of customisation they allow you to make of your character.
Look at this …
And this …
How amazing is that!
You can customise your identity and add prosthetics.
No doubt, this will cause huge offence to presenters on Fox News for succumbing to ‘wokeness’ which makes it even better … but they’re missing the point in 2 fundamental areas.
1. Being called woke means being called someone who considers the context and needs of others so they can live a similar life in terms of opportunity as you. For me that’s a compliment, not an insult.
2. The option is not to get headlines – though it does, because of its rarity – but to allow people who are minorities, feel seen and valued and celebrated for who they are, not who they aren’t. Anyone who thinks that’s a bad thing to do can basically go fuck themselves.
The gaming industry has a bunch of issues – from how it operates to the storylines of the games it makes – however they seem to be far more committed and focused on making change than so many of the companies who talk about their D&I programs on social media and in magazine articles.
People can accuse Forza Horizon of jumping on the woke bandwagon all they like.
They can shout that they’re only doing it because they don’t want to alienate potential customers.
They can say it’s a ‘one off’ and should be treated as such.
People can say what they like … it’s still more than most have done and will mean far more to the millions of people who have been ignored by companies for decades for no other reason than simply being a bit different to supposedly ‘common’ characteristics.
And I can tell you, that will mean more to them than some press release about a companies D&I program that doesn’t change a damn thing.
___________________________________________________________________________
Thank you to James Whatley for letting me steal his screen shots, even though I own the game myself. THAT’s how lazy I am. Not that you didnt know it.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, China, Comment, Confidence, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Entertainment, Environment, Experience, Fulfillment, Happiness, Honesty, Imagination, Innovation, Insight, Legend, Marketing, Technology
I’ve written a lot about experience in the past.
How important it is.
How it can drive brand value and growth.
How it can create distinction and differentiation in crowded categories.
I’ve also talked about how badly so much of it is done.
That it’s more about consistency than excellence.
That it isn’t a new approach, just a new profit centre.
That many aspire to everything average than some things spectacular.
It blows my mind what some agencies and companies think is ‘an experience’.
Especially when you compare it to people who genuinely ‘get it’.
Whether it’s certain luxury brands or my client, SKP-S in Beijing.
Which is why I love the picture at the top of this page.
At the time, the person on the runway was 62 years old.
SIXTY TWO.
This was taken on the first of 3 nights of performing to 68,000 paying people.
So over 200,000 in total.
In South America.
Think about that for a second.
OK, so the person in question is Brian Johnson … lead singer of rock band AC/DC.
But let’s also remember we’re talking about a group of pensioners.
Literally.
Yes, I appreciate there are all-sorts of factors/considerations/contexts/excuses you could use to explain why they can achieve that sort of response when brands – with all their experience models and big budgets – can’t.
But the one thing AC/DC understand is if you want to keep people coming back, you need to focus on creating a seminal moment for your audience not average consistency.
It’s why I always ask ‘experience strategists’ about their life rather than just their work. I want to know what their frame of references are for experience. Because frankly – and I appreciate I’m being a massive snob here – if it doesn’t include festivals, theatre, art, music, retail, museums … then I don’t know if we’re ever going to share the same ambitions.
Because while I appreciate ‘average but consistent’ has value to some organisations, I would rather drink bleach than advocate that as a brand goal.
Not simply because I have an aversion to average.
But because when you do experience right – which means knowing who you are and who your customers are – the profits extrapolate. See, I’m not totally selfish.