How Do You Talk With People In A Digital World?
An evening of discussion and debate at Mother London, on the 24th October, 7.00pm. With talks from Tom Uglow, Creative Lead at Google Labs, and experiential artist Pete Hellicar of Hellicar & Lewis, we’ll debate the future of communication and ask what’s the best way to do it? That is, if there is one set way. Talking about Google’s role in helping to keep people, and brands, talking to each other, Tom Uglow will demonstrate some of Google’s most innovative ideas and products, how they could shape our industry and society overall. On the other end of the spectrum, Pete Hellicar (who works with partner Joel Gethin Lewis) creates groundbreaking experiences that use art, technology and design, to encourage people to interact with them. Take a look at this film to see them talk about their work.
The talk is completely free but you do need to bag yourself a ticket.
Here.
The Internet Used To Be Fun, What Happened?
‘The digital revolution offered a whole new arena for us to create stimulating, interactive, big smile, Fun. LOL. Is the Internet still giving us laughs? Come and join members of Creative Social who will be discussing their individual views on this subject ranging from virals from the early days of the Internet, to how Google’s algorythms are adding to the world of crap, to the Dark side, and how to resist it, from a collection of Socials:’
Andy Sandoz, Creative Partner and Innovation Director, Work Club
Flo Heiss, Creative Partner, Dare – London
Laura Jordan Bambach, Executive Creative Director, Lost Boys International – London
Sam Ball, Creative Partner, Lean Mean Fighting Machine
Nathan Cooper, Digital Creative Director, Anomaly
Chris Clarke, Chief Creative Officer, Lost Boys International – London
Tickets here.
rubbishcorp® | Business As Usual
As you’ve prolly guessed (if you’re a regular) I’ve been away for the last 3 weeks. I’ve been mostly relaxing in my relatives beach house in New Zealand with friends and family – as well as doing some of the other stuff you’d expect to be done in this wonderful/sick land. Said beach house has no internet or phone, which as you can imagine has been bliss. It’s meant that I’ve had some proper time with my peoples, and a rare break from work and the continual searching and posting that being rubbishcorp® entails. On top of that, being out of touch has given me the opportunity to get back a little perspective, which, towards the end of last year, I was sorely missing.
Having said that, I love the Anomaly and the rubbishcorp® and am looking forward to properly getting stuck in to both of them when I get back to London at the weekend.
That’s it, what I’m trying to say is that from Saturday it’s business as usual.
Thank You Creative Company Conference
Quick thank you to everyone at CCC for an awesome day yesterday. Listened to and met some really interesting people and throughly enjoyed giving my talk.
Sweet.
rubbishcorp® Talking In Amsterdam (ish)
I’m gonna be talking about ‘What Makes An Anomaly’, at the Creative Company Conference in Haarlem on the 14th of September. Maybe I’ll see you there…
Link.
[Is] Social Media [A] Strategy?
This ‘social media strategy‘ thing, it’s been bothering me. Every brand seems to have or want one, yet I (a person who uses social media regularly) have only ever engaged with a product touting brand about three times in any of my many years of social media based activity. And I don’t think I am that abnormal when it comes to social media activity, if anything I’m more likely to engage due to my job. So, where are all the strategies? Or, more importantly, where are the ones that actually work?
Google Earth Is The State Of Adland
It’s been a little under 8 years now since I worked on a ‘tradition advertising campaign’ for a traditional advertising agency (St Luke‘s). 8 years is a long time in this world – then there was no YouTube, my 8290 didn’t have a camera (and was totally retarded), Steps were top of the (Compact Disc based) hit parade and an iPod was 5GB and looked like this.
Anyway, 8 years on and last night I sat through a ‘prime time’ UK TV ad break (for the first time in several years) and I have to say – the whole experience was pretty much exactly as it was 8 years ago. Same format, same ideas and even the same directors. The only difference being that back then the audience were slightly more predisposed – as most of their electrical entertainment came at them via an aerial.
It’s little surprise the industry is looking doddery. Sadly, given what I saw last night, I have little evidence to make a case for the defense.
Anyways, this train of thought took me to a conference call I was on the other day. I was discussing a brand, that wanted to be a bit like Google, with some people that worked in a traditional ad shop. During the call one of them asked me, ‘How come Google has done so well without ever doing any advertising?’
To answer that question I think you first have a look at what ‘advertising’ actually is. If you think it’s what I saw last night, then no they haven’t done any ‘advertising’. However, suggesting that Google has never done any advertising is kinda indicative of many peoples total blindness to what is occurring around them – and thus, perhaps, the state of the Adland.
My response to that question was to ask the man if he’d heard of Google Earth.
‘Of course I have,’ he replied, ‘but you haven’t answered my question.’
Listen Up Adland
I was reading this post from Scamp which kinda got me thinking. Prior to my deciding to join RIOT I ‘d been talking to a number of people about a number opportunities. I was lucky to be able to talk to some really smart people and companies. The majority of the companies I talked to wanted to know what was going to happen? Who would win? What was the answer? And so on. To be honest, a lot of the agencies weren’t actually looking for an employee, they were just looking the answer.
A lot were also just looking for a visual designer – but that’s another story.
Anyway, while desperate to ‘go digital/be more digital’ most were not really thinking about what that actually meant, or it is that is driving that. As far as many of them had got was that the industry was changing and their clients were changing – so they should change too. Honestly, I don’t think advertising has changed – it’s pretty much the same as it’s always been: client can’t sell product – client asks ‘expert’ for help. It’s exactly the same as it was 50 years ago, what has changed is most else, not least the audience.
It’s not that long ago I worked for agencies that said ‘audiences (people) were stupid’. They weren’t/aren’t of course, the agencies were just a little bit stupid themselves. They thought is was solely their brilliance that was convincing the world to buy stuff they didn’t need. Don’t get me wrong, that did happen, I just don’t think it was as often as ‘industry’ people thought. The reality is that at that time no one really had much of a choice. Society watched TV and they read the paper and so were lured into consuming messages that would, of course, eventually sink in.
As we all know, people now have a choice – and guess what? They are not so stupid after all. It’s clear that, given that choice, people generally tend not to have much time for those messages anymore. However, they do still want (and need) to buy stuff – and what’s more people will, if you treat ‘em’ nice, allow you (the brand) to help them navigate that choice.
My point is that agencies simply need to stop spending all their time worrying and about what is going to happen to the industry and just start listening to people. The answer won’t be found in a conference room or by the water cooler, it will be found outside, in the real world.
Oh, and just so you know, you can’t just pretend you’re listening either.
The Long Game
I wish I could do more stuff like this with my clients. I struggle because this industry still mostly operates within the boundaries of campaign style ‘short term win’ marketing. I can talk about it and I can promise it (as I do), and occasionally get close, but it’s difficult.
Being able to do this kinda stuff relies on the ability to sell a long term goal to people who can see no further than their end of year results. That’s their job, why are they going to invest in something that will only show dividends in three years? They need a short term win. You can’t blame them – but a lot of the time that’s it: short term win.
Brands have to build platforms – long term digital experiences that will make the internet better for their audience. Promises mean nothing today without the back end to support the fluff. Agencies have to build platforms in order to sustain longer term relationships with brands. But these kind of platforms take a while to build and where’s the short term win in that?
Brands and agencies that want to succeed have to elevate the conversations beyond the short term win team. How do you successfully manage a brand if the brand is a long term experience and your focus is a short term win?
People who develop products and services will simply talk to people who understand audiences. It’s the only way ‘marketing’ agencies can be more valuable in a world where MIT are doing what they do.
VodaFone Customer Censorship
I recently bought a USB Broadband dongle from Vodafone. I went into the shop, sat and talked with a man and then bought the device using my credit card, after signing a credit agreement, following a lengthy credit check. So, image my surprise when today VodaFone decided that I couldn’t look at a Killzone 2 site as they apparently deem it unsuitable for my viewing. They suggested instead that I go into a store with ID (that proves I am over 18) so they could grant me access to said Killzone site.
WTF? I have been in the store, and I was clearly 18 enough to buy something from you on my credit card. Don’t you remember? You remember to send me poxy junk emails – I guess I don’t need to be over 18 to receive them. And anyway, think about it, how on earth is my going in store going to enable you to determine if it’s me using my computer right now?
Can I give you a little tip? If you really want to implement the removal of my (a paying customers) basic right to freedom, then why don’t you ask me if I’d like that before you sell me something?
That might make my choice of provider that little bit easier.
Splitting Mr Edward’s HAIR
I was walking thru the North Lanes in Brighton today and I stumbled across John Edward HAIR.
I think we can all learn a little from Mr Edward.
Admirably, Mr Edward has gone against the traditionalists of his industry and bravely created brand communications that do nothing but tell us about his product. There are no ‘clever’ hair based puns here, no layer of marketing mumbo-jumbo, merely a simple, clear message.
Mr Edwards, like many, has come to the conclusion that experience (or interface) = the brand.
However, there is another lesson we can learn from Mr Edwards. Mostly, if your experience is your brand (unless you have a truly revolutionary and game-changing brand), you still have to tell people, those that don’t already know, about that brand. Mr Edwards brand isn’t (I don’t think, I’ve never actually been in) game-changing, he has created it’s personality through consistency, which had lead to trust. It all seems very logical – like his sign. But, as we know, successful relationships with brands are rarely logical, especially in a world of ubiquity, successful relationships are emotional.
And Mr Edwards, not unlike many bigger brands, has plenty of logic, but is struggling to provide his potential audience with this ‘at a glance’ emotion.
So, while Mr Edwards has scored highly for his matter-of-fact, uncomplicated approach to his thinking – he has at the same time fallen into the same trap as many. The experience = brand model only really works if people experience your brand. And if he wants people to do that, Mr Edwards will likely need some stronger, more concise initial communication.
Currently things are unclear, does Mr Edwards cut or sell hair?
360..?
I find myself wrestling with the idea of what a 360 agency actually means, or does for that matter. As I understand it, there are two kinds of 360 agencies: there are digital ones and ATL ones. The difference between the two being that the ATL ones tend not to do their production in house, so while having a 360 offering is probably easier to (apparently) achieve, it’s arguably not a true 360 offering. I also wonder if this 360 craze is being driven by a widely held belief that clients want the full service one stop shop so many are so crazy to create. Ironically, since when has this industry listened to it’s clients? An agency has to ask itself why it wants to be 360 and what actually does that mean.
Seemingly so hungry are many to compete in this space, that they often get a bit caught up and lose sight of the golden rule: it’s no longer about channel, it’s about product, audience and idea. A heady mix of internal politics, misguided belief in a monopoly and seeming desperation (to cross the line) can lead even the most stalwart agencies and creatives to suddenly become retarded and nefarious, seduced by the promise of what is surely a fools gold.
It’s a powerful learning, no matter which side of the fence you may be on, everyone is capable of sitting on their high horse and banging on about how the disciples from their side do not exist on the other. Yet, whether it’s a business or creative decision, or whether it’s right or wrong for the brief and client, it seems all will jump at the chance to broaden their horizons and multiply their offering. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against that at all, providing it’s the right thing to do and it’s for the right reasons.
Corporation/politic/grown-up naive as I may be, I have never done anything that I do not consider 100% right for a brand or an audience. And I sure as hell have never based any thinking solely on a desire to succeed in a specific channel, it’s always been about the power of an idea, the choice of channels is secondary.
My fear is that the idea of a 360 offering is predicated on the ability of a single company to create and (in digital), execute everything. I might be wrong, but a company that sets out to do that, to create and execute everything, couldn’t possibly excel in all.
Design For Life?
If you’re reading this from a feed you’ll likely not know what this blog looks like?
Or care.
It doesn’t matter, most ‘information’ sites/blogs look and behave in the same way. They all have a sort of template, one that’s built on functionality and enables ease of access. Neither of which actually need much polished (graphic) design. Slick ‘over design’ can act as a barrier; you could argue that online there’s a perception that the less designed the delivery of the information, the more real and trust worthy the material.
Ideas..? Sorry, We’re Fresh Out
Is it just me or are we running out of ideas?
I so rarely see something that has not been done already or isn’t just stolen. I don’t even know if it really matters anymore. Not only are there no original ideas, but there aren’t even that many things that a brand can own or do without being exposed as a desperate try-hard fraudster.
One day (probably soon) we will actually run out of ideas. Someone is going to have to sit down with a client and say, “Sorry, but there are none left. You’re gonna have to go with an endorsement or before/after style thing.”
And you know what, it’s the fucking ATL lot again. They spunked all of our ideas in the 80′s while they were high on cocaine. If only they’d have been more frugal, now we’re left with nothing, just a few experiences and the odd engagement.
Selfish bastards.
Can You Collaborate..?
Most ATL and digital agencies are forced to ‘fuse’ as a result of their reluctance to admit they need each other. Clients want 360 and they are paying, so who the hell are agencies to say no? This ‘collaboration’ is mostly always a bun fight, not dissimilar to that of two children that can’t decide whose Uncle is the toughest. Ironically, on their own, neither idea probably isn’t all that, yet each party insists it’s bit is the best and should lead. The ATL being the brand guardian while digital delivers value etc. Sadly, and more often that not, the victim is the work. In the heat of battle agencies can forget about the people with whom they actually need to be speaking; the punter.
Meanwhile, both parties continually claim to be collaborative, and both are, provided it’s within certain internal parameters that don’t make either look weak in front of their clients. Both saying things like: ‘it will weaken the idea, blah blah…’ Time and time again, neither are willing to meet in the middle and so the output is disparate.
So what if you could actually mix the two? What if somehow, in all of this extreme difficulty and heartache, the misunderstood geek could work with the narrative addict? What if they could sit in a room and actually collaborate? Or, in other words, isn’t it time every one grew up and stopped thinking they are better than the others?
I want it to be different.
I want it to be different because it can be. Because you don’t need to be precious about your ‘killer’ idea and you don’t need to care about the stupid bullshit awards. None of it matters anymore. Nike consistently shows us that it doesn’t matter who owns the idea – if it’s good, it can happen. I’ve lived in both worlds and I know that they can co-exist. Yeah people are scared to make it happen, because loads of idiots would be out of a job, but it can be that much better. The work can be that much stronger; it just takes a few good people top be brave.
The reality is that no one is going to win this ‘fight’, because there is no one single prize. The big shops can, and probably will, out-gun the specialists and will consume most of them. No matter what you think, clients are still not ready for the digital agency to become the brand guardian, no matter how many say they are, they are not. Some tech companies maybe, but that’s not everyone is it? Those that are not consumed by the networks will build a different model around technology and selling – but even they will still need to advertise those products and services. And yes, experience is the brand, providing your brand can offer a unique experience – and that won’t always work without a little helping hand.
The funny thing is that while the whole industry is banging on about who will prevail, this is already happening, a whole load of people, like me, just want to get on and do it. And we will.