Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, China, Communication Strategy, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Crap Products In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Food, Honesty, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Packaging, Perspective, Planners, Point Of View, Purpose, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, WeigelCampbell, Wieden+Kennedy
I’ve written a ton about brand purpose over the years.
Not as viciously as my beloved Martin Weigel. But close.
It’s not that I am against brand purpose, It’s when it’s used as a marketing tool and ‘updated’ to whatever trend is currently popular that my hate boils over.
It’s why I have always advocated for belief rather than purpose.
Belief is demonstrated by what and how you do things, not what and how you say things.
Or give things away.
Belief drives change. Purpose hopes for it.
Which is probably why so many brands prefer purpose.
The ability to look like you care without always having to demonstrate it.
Take this from Unilever food brand, Knorr …
“Our purpose is to reinvent food for humanity by being healthier for both people and the land. Knorr brings the power of flavour to good food to overcome barriers that stop us from eating for good”
Sounds good doesn’t it.
Sounds purposeful.
But for those who are not sure what Knorr make, let me enlighten you …
Yeah, when I think of flavour and good food – not to mention being good for humanity and the land – the first thing I think of is cheddar broccoli rice sides.
But maybe I’m wrong, how do you cook these things that help us ‘eat for good’?
Here’s the instructions …
Microwave directions: In 2-quart microwave-safe bowl, combine 2-1/4 cups water, 1 tbsp. margarine(optional) and contents of package. Microwave uncovered at high about 12 minutes* or until rice is tender, stirring once halfway through. Stir and serve.
Yep, thought so. Utter rubbish.
The reason I am writing this is because I recently saw a post from an ice-cream brand.
Have a look at this …
While those words sounds trite, purpose-for-marketing … food and culture are incredibly entwined and so there is a real chance it may be a badly worded version of what they really believe and do.
Let’s look at their website.
For those too lazy, here is a screenshot of their flavours …
Hmmmmn … doesn’t seem too much about people, places or cultures does it?
There’s a lot about ingredients.
Some even seem interesting. But absolutely no mention of people, places or cultures.
But is that surprising when it’s so obviously an absolute load of purpose-washing?
And what a missed opportunity.
They could truly make that into something that could change something.
Educate, unite, challenge, inform … tell the stories of the people, places and cultures that were the inspiration of those flavours through the flavours.
Ben and Jerry’s meets Tony Chocolonely.
And what makes it worse is their intentions sound honourable. They’re already a B-Corp certified business, choose ingredients that are direct-trade and believe in diversity.
All great and important things except nothing to do with what they claim they do on their packaging.
Many years ago, at Wieden, we were invited to pitch for an ice-cream brand.
We said yes because hey, it’s ice cream.
Anyway, when we got the brief, it read like a purpose fluffer.
My god, it was literally dripping in claims and terminology that not only had nothing to do with their category, but had nothing to do with any of their actions, behaviours or products.
We spoke to them about looking at ice cream another way.
If they had to have a ‘purpose’, make that purpose about what ice cream is supposed to be.
Fun and tasty.
Not deeper meaning. Just that.
And then prove it in the product, not just the experience.
You may think that is overly simplistic, but by then the entire category had gone purpose insane and no one was actually owning what they were and what people actually wanted.
Put it this way, it had gone a looooooong way from the days where BBH had brilliantly changed the way people looked at ice cream and did it in a way that was sexy, powerful and based on a real truth. [A campaign so good that is was spoofed brilliantly by Fosters Lager]
Anyway, for us, the way we could get back to what ice cream was but in a way that proved the fun was down to flavours … so unlike Jeni’s ice creams, we actually went out and talked to all manner of people about their weird tastes. Things they love others think are a bit mental. Things that make them deliriously happy for whatever reason or whatever duration. Because we saw an opportunity for the client to be more like a taste and colour experiment lab than a manufacturer of everyday ice-creams and flavours with an unbelievable purpose attached.
So we worked it all up and I remember it for 2 main reasons.
+ We used a picture of a cat in the presentation with an inverted cross on its forehead … which is still my favourite mad presentation image ever used. And I’ve used a lot.
+ When the client wanted us to justify our idea, we simply showed this …
It may not be the deepest reason you’ve ever read.
It may not even be the most exciting.
But it was definitely more believable than all the shit they were saying.
And with the flavour combinations we had and how it all came together with the creative work – which had some weird ice cream flavour meme generator at the heart of it … generating all manner of taste sensation madness out into the internet … it was something that not only would help them differentiate from the competition, but have a place and role in culture.
They hated it.
Instead they went with some bollocks about ice cream being ‘a gesture of love for those who are not rich’.
No, I’m not joking.
Which may also explain why they … Haagan Daaz and Jeni’s talk a lot about their purpose in society but are – with the possible exception of Jeni’s – increasingly irrelevant ice creams brands whereas that old, dumb favourite, Ben And Jerry’s, still has some sort of position in culture, because despite selling out to the death star Unilever, they try to do shit rather than just say it.
Emphasis increasingly on try.
But even with that, the reality is – as is the real test of any brand that claims to have purpose – they show what they believe through every aspect of what they do, even when it’s inconvenient, rather than market what they claim their purpose is, only when it suits them.
Enjoy your day. Be careful you don’t eat any bullshit.
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: Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Brand Suicide, Business, Cannes, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Design, Distinction, Effectiveness, Insight, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Only In Adland, Presenting, Social Divide, Status | Tags: t
One of the things I’ve found fascinating over the past few years is watching consultancies AND platforms mock the value of advertising and then increasingly try and enter that space.
And while you could argue it’s because they saw an opportunity to do it ‘properly’, the way they have embraced it – and executed it – has shown they seem to want to be more like the beast they wanted to slay than the beast they are.
What do I mean?
Go to Cannes and the whole place has been taken over by corporations.
All the best locations, beaches, hotels are the domain of tech, consultancies and platforms.
Now you could say that’s because they’re the ones with all the money – and that’s true – but what is amusing is WHAT they do.
Because rather than reflect ‘a better way to do what those ad agencies used to do’ … they seem to be doing the same thing ad agencies used to do.
Parties.
Give-aways.
Celebrity talks.
Expensive dinners.
In fact the only thing that is different is how desperately bad their attempts to show ‘they’re creativity’ actually are.
Nothing brought this home more than a poster I recently saw promoting an advertising festival.
An advertising festival representing the ‘modern’ world of the industry.
This was it …
What. The. Hell?
Seriously … what is it?
I’m not just talking about the design and colour palette that could make a 1987 acid house party feel embarrassed … I’m talking about all of it.
The email automation masterclass.
The ‘scale your YouTube’ talk.
The $15 million ad storytelling formula class.
And let’s not forget the ‘thumb-stopping’ direct response scripts.
Look, I get small business may get something out of some of this.
And I appreciate there are many elements to run a successful business.
But this all comes across as used car salesman shit.
Worse, used car salesman shit where their office is a portacabin on a muddy industrial estate in Slough.
In all seriousness, what I find astounding is this must be what the people behind this conference must think is creativity. And don’t get me started on what it says about the people presenting there.
I include Scott Galloway who said ‘brands are dead’ and then not only invests in elevating his own brand, but starts selling courses on how to approach better brand strategy.
[For the record, I respect Scott Galloway hugely but when he said that – like when Mark Ritson said his advertising course was a ‘mini MBA’, when it is nothing at all like a MBA – I couldn’t help but feel their focus was becoming more about building their own cult than building better marketers. In fact, given their approaches have now been so optimised, systemised and codified … you could argue it’s actually undermining brand building because everyone is following the same approach and the result is passive corporate conformity. But I digress …]
I guess what I’m saying is that for all the smarts of modern marketing, the people behind this conference – and potentially the people at it – are revealing they know jack-shit about creativity or culture.
And you know what? That would be fine if they didn’t pretend they otherwise.
But for all their big Cannes events … agency buy-outs … and talk about advertising, the reality is they view creativity as a ‘wrapper’ for their engineering type processes.
A belief there is a singular approach to engage and grow – regardless of audience or category. That the features around a brand are more important than the brand. Or as I told WARC, that the condiments are more valuable than the steak.
Do not get me wrong, advertising has a lot of problems.
It’s got a lot it can learn from platforms and consultancies.
But at our best, we know how to use the power of creativity and culture in ways so many of thehaven’t got a clue about.
Now some may say that statement shows how out of date I am.
How contemporary business doesn’t care about all that.
And maybe that’s right … but while I could point out the vast majority of brands who are infectious to culture were not born anywhere near a ‘consultants proprietary marketing playbook’ … all I have to do is point at the AdWorld poster and say, “Look at that shit”.
Don’t get me wrong, I know there will be a bunch of valuable stuff at the conference.
I am sure it will attract tens of thousands of people.
It may make the organisers a shit-ton of cash.
But for all the smarts appearing at Adworld, they sure as shit don’t have any appreciation of style. And I would like to point out that I say this as someone who was wearing an ironic Celine Dion T-shirt when I typed this.
And with that, I wish you a good weekend … which only gets better for you when I let you know there is a national holiday here on Monday so there will be no post till Tuesday [I know, I just had 2 days off for national holiday – deal with it] … so with that, I leave you with a sneak-peak of the Adworld virtual after party dance floor.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Creativity, Culture, Egovertising, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, New Zealand
Love it or loathe it, but Wordle has captured the world’s attention. Whether it will continue to do that now the NYTimes has bought it, is anyones guess, but right now, it’s peak popularity.
Hell, even I love it and I HATE word games.
Crosswords? Hate.
Scrabble? Hate.
And yet whether it’s the last thing I do before I go to sleep or the first thing I do when I wake up, I’m playing the days challenge. And I’m brilliant at it. Hahaha.
Anyway, I was on Twitter when I recently saw this from Air New Zealand.
Look, I get it’s a competitive world.
I get brands are looking for anything that can help them stand out.
And I get ‘hijacking culture’ is a cheat way of doing this.
But there’s 2 reasons why this approach is tragic rather than magic.
First is it’s Air New Zealand.
Of all the airline brands out there, they are a pioneer. An innovator. A leader.
They’ve created, influenced and changed the airline industry in ways few have come close.
From being the first to make ‘in-flight safety videos’, entertainment to creating economy seats that turn into beds.
Ripping off Wordle doesn’t represent any of this.
If anything, it does the opposite.
But then, when I see the work they are putting out these days, maybe it all makes sense.
When a nation that prides itself as explorers and adventures has their National Airline promote their role in a post-covid world as being ‘we fly for you’ … you have to question if they realise what they’ve done or if they made a conscious effort to ditch the approach that made them great and forward thinking in favour of the sort of bland, contrived, unrealistic and meaningless twaddle of big corporation 90’s advertising.
Like this.
From 1991.
God I hope not. They are better than that and NZ needs them to be better than that.
Which leads to the other reason.
Hijacking culture.
What’s interesting is that so many brands do it.
As I said, I get why … but 99% of them have failed to understand how it really works and so we now live in a world where the approach is so common, it doesn’t surprise anyone.
If anything, it un-hijacks culture.
So how does it really work?
Well having worked with the brand and agency that arguably created the approach – or at least mastered it – the secret is to do something that adds to culture, not just steals from it.
Which means having an actual right to be there.
Then do something that opens things up, not just repeat what’s already happened.
Adding a point of view to the situation not just adding more noise and clutter to it.
Of course, even with all that, it still doesn’t mean it will work … but its definitely going to be better than the desperate amateur hour that so many brands favour.
Who think it makes them look cool but forgetting if you’re trying to be that, you’re definitely not ever going to be that.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Content, Context, Creativity, Culture, Design, Distinction, Effectiveness, Emotion, Empathy, Food, Happiness, Imagination, Innovation, Italy, Management, Marketing, Mum, Relevance, Resonance, Strategy
Yesterday I wrote about laziness in retail, well today I’m going to write about when you care deeply about it.
Have a look at this packaging:
Maybe it’s because I’m half Italian.
Maybe it’s because pasta is my undisputed favourite food.
Maybe it’s because the brand uses wheat from the region of Italy my family is from.
But how utterly glorious is it?!
It does everything packaging should do …
It is distinctive without trying too hard.
It shows the quality of the product inside.
It feels premium without being pretentious and charming without being childish.
It is a bloody masterpiece.
I love that because the pasta shape is an integral part of the packaging design, it allows the overall look to be clean while still being informative.
What’s even better is that while it started out as a project by Russian designer, Nikita Konkin … it ended up being turned into a real brand by German company, Greenomic Delikatessen, who bought the idea of Nikita.
Or said another way …
Creativity turned an everyday product into something with a highly desirable and distinctive commercial value.
Isn’t it funny how all those marketing training programs being flogged left, right and centre never talk about this sort of thing. Instead it’s all dot-to-dot processes to build identikit branded assets, eco-systems and strategy frameworks.
But then this also shows the difference between design and adland.
Designers identify real problems and look for ways to solve them with clarity, simplicity and distinctiveness. Whereas too many in adland choose what problem that want to solve and then add all manner of complexity to the solution in a bid to look like they’re fucking geniuses or to try and justify the ever decreasing fee the procurement department is forcing on them.
Remember Peggy?
The ‘innovation’ JWT Australia claimed ‘would allow their client to empower people to maximise their day through weather aggregation technology’. What that bullshit translated to was a ‘scam product and app’ that would tell you if it was going to rain so you’d know if you should hang your clothes out to dry
Yep, forget weather apps.
Forget USING YOUR EYES TO LOOK OUT THE WINDOW.
JWT was going to revolutionise the ‘washing line process’.
By making it longer, shitter and more expensive.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Unsurprisingly nothing happened with it because it was utter bollocks whereas everything happened for Nikita because he actually saw something that had real commercial value without extensive investment.
However in classic Russian melodrama style, he says he came up with the idea when he was “in love and perhaps this influenced me, though it could be just a coincidence” … which suggests he’s no longer in love and probably spending his time designing vodka bottles that look like your heart is dying. Or something.
I have written a lot in the past about the importance and value of design.
Whether it was the brilliant SONOS ‘sound waves‘ or the potential of using BK’s new logo as an emoji for food ordering.
Underpinning all of this is consideration, simplicity and craft.
Yes, I appreciate a personal project affords you more time than a client project … but designers are getting it right more often than adland and yet the talent in adland is there.
There’s tons of it. Everywhere.
And while there are still some amazing things coming out from the industry, I can’t help but feel design is pushing the possibilities of creativity more … which means the issue for adland must be something else.
Whether that is time, expectation, budgets or relationships, I’m not sure … but whatever it is, the attitude of ‘good enough is good enough’ is far too prevalent these days.
Or should I say, it is until someone like Nikita comes along and shows companies what they could have if they allow the experts to show them how they see the World rather than being told what to create by a committee of middle managers who value speed over quality and lack taste, judgement and real understanding of their audience.
It’s not easy to make something great.
But as a packet of pasta proves, it’s worth it.
Creatively, commercially and culturally.