Never be Tried and Trusted

For me, three of the most dangerous words in adland are 'Tried and Trusted'. In an industry that appears to love proprietry charts, systems and generators to distinguish one agency from another, I worry sometimes that we (at least in some agencies) have ended up being too guided by the success of the past.

As soon as we start to rely on an idea or toolkit simply because it has always worked we risk falling over. Advertising has always evolved, but now it is doing so quicker than ever, and just because something has worked for 20 years does not mean it is right for this brief, this client or this problem. If you can look at the problem and data that are relevant and then say 'this model definitely still applies' then brilliant, but fail to check and its the first sign of complacency.

There is nothing wrong with using models per se, as long as they help instead of hindering; don't steal time from the real issues; and are always sense checked for their relevance to a brief.

Some agencies have great models that are really just philosophies to drive themselves. It's why I will always prefer BBH's 'When the World Zigs, Zag.' to TBWA's 'Disruption'. The former (at least from my understanding) is a creative philosophy that doesn't get in the way of finding what is relevant; while the latter feels like a process that every bit of work is dragged through regardless of if it needs. [Please correct me if I am wrong.] Not to say it doesn't produce great work sometimes, but it seems like another hurdle rather than an enabler.

Every case is different, what works for one may not work for another.

Not only that, but this issue is also part of the problem involved in the 'advertising is dead/new model agency' debates that keep coming up. If it is dead, the reliance on archive models and ideas is probably a big reason why. The new models need to make sure their ideas are based on what is right, not what is currently wrong. Even the people claiming to look forward seem to be using the past as their start point.

This is why in my mind much of this debate can be summed up by saying: Advertising is not dead, it's just learning where it needs to go. The tried and trusted models aren't always right anymore.

I believe this industry works best (both in terms of results and in terms of creativity) when we treat every problem with an open mind based on the relevant problems/details/insights around it. Not when we stick a proprietary creative/planning system on top of the problem and end up having to solve two different issues to justify ourselves.

Famous Rob's Review of 2008 Part Two

Sometimes brands get stuck in their way of doing things, and often advertisers get pulled into that trap. This award is for those who have taken big steps towards freeing their brand from bad ads...

MOST IMPROVED BRAND ADVERTISING

Winner - Microsoft

Traditionally Microsoft have been the butt of every Mac owners jokes, and also of PC owners jokes. Their branding and packaging has been at best boring, and at worst diabolical.

Over the past few years though they have made big strides, and this year saw two campaigns that really demonstrate a change in the M$ behemoth.

The ads with Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld didn't change the world, but it really boldly pushed Microsoft into a new territory. Self parody is dangerous, but they struck the fine line well.




(US version, can't see the UK cut)

Then they followed with a more upfront ad, but one that actually makes Apple look a little like the bad guy. It almost reminds me of 'being number 2' (as someone, possibly Northern said this year), Microsoft speaking from second place; a remarkable change to what has come before.

I'd love to think that this will continue, and that Microsoft will keep developing in the right direction.

Runner Up - Toshiba

One brilliant ad, compared to... erm I can't remember anything else they have done since ello Tosh. A dull safe brand brought bang up to date in a few weeks. That's an improvement I like. Also shows good progress at Grey, which is more good news.



Runner Up - Tango

BBH, as good as they are; have always struggled to make Tango ads live up to the quality of what HHCL did. It's always lived in the shadow of slaps and blackcurrant patriotism.

Not anymore. BBH have embraced their inner orange man and woken up a dying brand with the wonderful Save Tango campaign.

Welcome back Tango. Can Fist!

Save Tango!

Looks like BBH has rediscovered its inner HHCLness with the latest campaign for Tango. After years of declining sales they have launched the save tango campaign; which along with a brilliant website, appears to wholesale bring back the tone of voice much loved during the era of orange slappers and Ray Gardner fights. (In fact they even have them as classic ads to watch on the site)

Its all done with tongue in cheek and with that brilliantly sarcastic yet witty voice. The opening video is magnificent, with wonderfully written lines like: "that utterly senseless and irresponsible act was to illustrate a point, that a much loved brand is being beaten from existence." and "Even local schools are helping out, St Enids has introduced child labour to the curriculum." The 'can fist' symbol is a brilliant bit of hookery.

Games such as 'click as many times as you like, the more you click the more you help us'; in which cans constantly appear as you click; are brilliantly done.

The soprano voice for titles, the desktop images with 'Rainforests can grow back, save tango', the Tangometer sitting at 'Up the creek'; its all produced and thought out so well that it actually does remind you of the brilliance of their past, and how sad it would be to let it go.

So people. Can Fist. Save tango, if not for the drink, for the ads.

Save Tango

Future Marketing Summit Day Two - Part 5

Next were Google and BBH to discuss the joint British Airways and Google Earth advertising.

The ads featured shots using Google earth, with cloud pricing. While the site was designed to let you view the destination, but with a cloud image with the BA price on!

One highly interesting point was on the net ads, Google intentionally asked BA to lower the Google branding and increase the BA branding on overlay ads because Google didn’t want to be associated with ads that get in the way of sites.


--------------------------------------------------------


Lastly, was Jon Hamm, the founder of Greenroom digital.

He discussed how this is an exciting time for agencies and clients, a time to take risks, to become even more creative.

He also mentioned how media consumption is becoming more and more chaotic, and how the power of social media is still increasing.

An interesting point he gave was about the nature of ‘viral’ distribution is moving to ‘resonate’ and ‘right place’ distribution. Its not just about putting a funny video up, its about putting it in the right place and making it resonate with the public.

One good point was how measuring views is not the only important metric anymore, it’s about how many people in the core audience viewed it, what did they say, and what sort of response it got.


-----------------------------------------------------


After all these interesting people, it was left to Douglas Broadley of Imagination to sum up. Here are his major points.

“Amazing!” – What an insight!

The gloss of Kevin Roberts words was appealing, but things are not always that glossy in real life.

The idea of owning a conversation is ridiculous…

Agencies forgot to make a plan B! Hence all the recent panic!

The continuing difficulty in finding people who can move between disciplines.

Those who are quick on their feet will succeed.

Integration should just happen, but people get in the way. Integration is not a ‘nice to have’, it has to be meaningful.

Meaning will engender greater belief, which will help engage.

We need to define what unites brands and corporate cultures.

Integration is about Integrity.

People talk when you are found not to be true to their meaning, you can no longer be dishonest, people will find out.

I think this guy knows his stuff. A good choice to sum up.