A Room With A View[point]

Mr. Peanut single-handedly brings sophistication to nuts. His monocle is just lovely. He would be such a wonderful, gentlemanly date. Classy!

Even though this story is from last year, seeing it again managed to lift the cloud of depression that engulfs us being back behind our desks and we thought it might do wonders for other depressed employees too.

Last year in Bolivia, a taxi driver called Rafael Vargas was murdered.

Fortunately for the police, a woman who lived in the area was able to draw a sketch of a man that she said killed the driver, before setting fire to him.

As is common in enquiries like this, the Police thought the best strategy was to utilise mass media to try and get the public to smoke the guilty parties out.

Amazingly the strategy worked and 2 suspects were arrested shortly after the news media released the dramatic clip featuring theatrical soundtrack and a booming voice asking, “HAVE YOU SEEN THIS MAN”.

Now you may be wondering why I say ‘amazingly’ the strategy worked …

Well for that, you have to watch the clip and pay special attention to the ‘photo fit’ that went along with the appeal.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

How funny is that eh?

With the head shaped like a rugby ball, the lips sliding to one side, the phallic nose, the missing ears and the very, very, very bad hair day – it’s little surprise it has been labeled both the work of a 5 year old and the worst photofit picture in the history of crime fighting.

How the police caught anyone with such a disastrous image is beyond me … however if we were the lawyer of the arrested individuals, we think we would stand a very good chance of being able to get them off.

We – like many people – really enjoy the show Mad Men.

Well written, well cast and well executed … it’s American television at its absolute best, something we often forget they are so skilled at.

The thing is, as much as the subject matter is adland, it’s really a show about people with advertising simply serving as the backdrop.

Sure there’s some classic bits like this …

… but the show works because of the drama, intrigue and tension between the characters, not because they’ve written a great ad for Kodak or something.

Of course people in the industry have tried to ‘own’ the show and that’s understandable because our impact and value is so small these days, we are always looking for a way to keep the delusion and illusion alive.

We can’t remember who said it, but the best quote we heard about why ad folk love the show is something like ‘it reflects an industry we’d love to work in’ which we think is rather amusing given the show is fiction, not a documentary.

Of course it’s nice to see an agency dealing with a CEO of a company rather than some middle management conservative … sure it’s brilliant to see an agency fighting for what they believe in rather than simply crumbling at the first objection … sure it’s warming to see society value the industry rather than view them as overpaid, out-of-touch, wankers … but was it really like that back then?

OK, so without doubt agencies were more influential which – arguably – translated to them being able to do more interesting things, but the way some people go on, you would think everything they touched was gold plated genius.

Recently we asked a friend of ours to name one of the best creatives of the past 40 years.

Because we all know him, he said Neil French.

Now regardless what you may think of him, he was/is an amazing creative guy – and an astouding writer – so we then asked our friend how many truly great campaigns he thought he [Neil] had done.

After some consideration, he said that there was probably 15 or 20 campaigns that have gone into ad-folk lore.

So then we said if Neil has done 20 great campaigns in a career so far spanning 40 years, that would average out to be 1 bit of genius every 2 years.

Now of course these numbers are vague, the definition of ‘genius’ is open to all sorts of interpretations and some/most people would never be able to get close to anything Neil had done if they had a lifetime to try … but think about it … one campaign of uber-brilliance every 2 years.

TWO YEARS.

SEVEN HUNDRED AND THRITY DAYS.

FOUR THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY WORKING WEEK HOURS.

… and yet the way the history books and media describe it, they were churning future history out every bloody week.

Now we don’t want to decry the amazing achievements of the people from the past [or those still in the present] – they did stuff that still stands the test of time and makes a mockery of many of today’s so-called advertising superstars – but the reality is that I don’t want to look at Mad Men and think that was the time when advertising was at its peak, we want to feel it’s still to come.

Of course we know it’s going to be more difficult and more challenging – but there’s some amazing agencies and people out there – agencies and people that could put Don Draper and his cronies to the sword … agencies and people who actually do deal with CEO’s, fight for what they believe in and do things that causes a fundamental positive shift in their clients business … and whilst not everything they touch may turn to gold, they may have a better track record than the Kings of the Past, even if they still are the ones with the cooler stories.

Advertising isn’t dead … just the ambitions of many in the industry are.

We work in the ‘celebratory endorsement’ capital of the World.

Almost every possible brand in almost every possible category is endorsed by someone or other.

In Japan you get uber-stars selling their soul for any brand that has offered to buy them a new house in Beverly Hills whereas in other parts of the region, you see a bunch of people who have seemingly become ‘stars’ simply through the number of products they endorse.

Infact we are convinced MEDIACORP – Singapore’s main media organisation – makes more money selling their x-grade ‘stars’ to brands than they do from content creation.

From noodles to keep fit machines, you can be sure the ads will feature some pretty Asian face with the words “MEDIACORP STAR” emblazoned underneath their name – even though you haven’t got the faintest idea who they are or what they’ve done.

Maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if they got the ‘stars’ to ‘do’ something interesting/different/humouress – but no – 99% of the time they just show them using the product in the belief that is enough to get the general public to rush out and buy the product in their bucketloads.

Sadly it often is …

Of course endorsement is nothing new … and not just limited to the ‘East’ … however whilst we appreciate it can attain ‘cut through’ and can heighten ‘brand cache’, the communication often focuses more on the ‘star’ than the brand which leads to the possibility that when the endorser goes [probably to a competitor] so can the audience – especially if it’s in a fickle category like kids products.

Anyway the reason I am writing all this is because I recently came across this …

Yes, it’s Mr Handsome endorsing Nespresso.

Now putting aside the fact ‘Nespresso’ is possibly one of the worst brand names since ‘Darkie’ Toothpaste, do you really think George ‘multi-millionaire playboy’ Clooney really drinks Nespresso?

Do we believe he goes to his house in Lake Como – a house that resides in the country that prays at the Church of Coffee – and shoves a Nespresso pod into his Nespresso machine and then sits back and enjoys a cup of black gold from the same company that churns out Nescafe Gold Blend in the local supermarket?

Of course if you think he does, then our argument is shot nearly as much as your – and George’s – credibility … but is it really possible Mr & Mrs Bland feel that by simply purchasing a plastic coffee maker and drinking plastic coffee, they are ‘sharing’ a lifestyle similar to Gorgeous George’s?

Oh god, how totally and utterly depressing.

A little while ago, on a UK program called “Britain’s Got Talent”, a rather plain, slightly dotty, socially-nervous individual got on stage and within a few seconds, blew the World away.

That individual was called Susan Boyle.

To this day we feel sorry for her … not because of her looks or her uneasy manner … but for the way the World has – and continues to – treat her.

Without doubt she has talent, however we can’t help but feel that if Susan was better looking not only would the World’s reaction to her have been different, but so would the level of her success – and it seems her record company agrees because to accompany the launch of her first album, they’ve used a visual that reminds us of her ‘plainness’ as well as another image that is seemingly there to reassure us that we don’t have to worry, “the freak is less freaky these days” so we can openly buy her music.

We believe the reason Susan made such an impact is because we’ve become a society who believes talent is in some way linked to attractiveness – mainly driven through media and advertising influence – so when some dumpy lady came on stage, we’d already had the expectation she couldn’t possibly amount to much and then, when she proved us all wrong, we felt a level of amazement and guilt that transformed itself into hype, acclaim and record sales.

So are we saying talented but ugly people have a secret weapon in their quest for fame and fortune?

Well we don’t know if it’s a secret weapon, but if they manage to achieve mass exposure [which let’s face it, is very unlikely and difficult] then it is quite possible they will attain a level of impact that goes beyond their level of talent … even though if that happens, you can be sure they’ll be given an almost immediate makeover [to be more 'acceptable' to the masses] and will never achieve the level of success as someone hot – who has less talent – will get, which is another example of societies inherent prejudice.

Whilst adland has always said it has the power to change opinions and behaviour – it might be nice if for once they did it in a way that not only encouraged people to buy/consider PRODUCT X, but also helped change the inherent prejudices that exist in society so ugly people aren’t viewed as talentless, men aren’t viewed as stupid and darker skinned women [in Asia] aren’t labelled as coming from ‘peasant’ stock.

[Are you listening Unilever? Just because you have Dove doesn't escape the fact you profit from exploiting the fears of millions of women with your 'Fair & Lovely' disgrace]