Comments on: A Reading From Luke: Chapters 6&8 http://www.ordinaryadvertising.com/2008/05/07/a-reading-from-luke-chapters-68/ Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:28:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2 By: maurer http://www.ordinaryadvertising.com/2008/05/07/a-reading-from-luke-chapters-68/#comment-619 maurer Thu, 29 May 2008 09:27:13 +0000 http://www.ordinaryadvertising.com/2008/05/07/a-reading-from-luke-chapters-68/#comment-619 I heard a story that, way back when, Nike made Wieden put an 800 number on a women's print ad, so that people could order the product. The creatives pushed back, but eventually tucked the number away in a corner of the ad, hoping it wouldn't get noticed. The story goes that the first ad broke and Nike got thousands of calls, not for clothes, but for reprints of the ad. My point is, I feel like traditional branding and brand interaction were at opposite sides of the gym for a long time. And CPB, though they didn't re-invent the wheel, brought the two a little closer. Maybe it's a petty point, but I think it changed some thinking for the better. I don't think the agency did it while pooping on the principles of enduring and powerful branding either. Mini was not all hat. Neither was Truth or Method or some of those others. Not for me anyway. I heard a story that, way back when, Nike made Wieden put an 800 number on a women’s print ad, so that people could order the product. The creatives pushed back, but eventually tucked the number away in a corner of the ad, hoping it wouldn’t get noticed. The story goes that the first ad broke and Nike got thousands of calls, not for clothes, but for reprints of the ad.

My point is, I feel like traditional branding and brand interaction were at opposite sides of the gym for a long time. And CPB, though they didn’t re-invent the wheel, brought the two a little closer.

Maybe it’s a petty point, but I think it changed some thinking for the better. I don’t think the agency did it while pooping on the principles of enduring and powerful branding either. Mini was not all hat. Neither was Truth or Method or some of those others. Not for me anyway.

]]> By: Curvin O'Rielly http://www.ordinaryadvertising.com/2008/05/07/a-reading-from-luke-chapters-68/#comment-690 Curvin O'Rielly Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:31:33 +0000 http://www.ordinaryadvertising.com/2008/05/07/a-reading-from-luke-chapters-68/#comment-690 I was an early reader of the gospel according to Luke. I think my version is the first edition. Everything in it is fine - at least as far as it goes. It tells/shows copywriters and art directors the difference between bad/good work, and it challenges them to either go for the latter with everything they've got or else just not waste their time and energy by A.) trying to get a job in the business or B.) hoping they'll ascend into advertising's upper-most reaches. The weakness of Luke's book, in my opinion, is that it tips almost totally to the execution side of the ledger, perhaps even completely so, leaving readers woefully in the dark about coming up with good strategies, which is where success or failure is basically determined and always has been. If copywriters and art directors don't know the strategic side of the equation, they're put in the position of interpreting someone else's vision. Which is terrible, because if the vision is wrong and will result in rotten work no matter how well they execute it, all they'll be doing is spinning their wheels in their cubicles. All in all, when CWs and ADs run into bad strategies created by those who've made it their business to rule the roost strategically (clients, account people, account planners, creative directors), they need to argue persuasively and intelligently, with their argument(s) centered not only around the fatal flaws embedded in the strategy they were given to execute but also around their suggestions for making strategic alterations that'll result in greater returns. Arguing will piss everybody off. Ultimately, though, when CWs and ADs have proven their strategic thinking to be right more often than it is wrong, they'll be given carte blanche to do what they think is right. Given raises and promotions, too. I was an early reader of the gospel according to Luke. I think my version is the first edition.

Everything in it is fine - at least as far as it goes. It tells/shows copywriters and art directors the difference between bad/good work, and it challenges them to either go for the latter with everything they’ve got or else just not waste their time and energy by A.) trying to get a job in the business or B.) hoping they’ll ascend into advertising’s upper-most reaches.

The weakness of Luke’s book, in my opinion, is that it tips almost totally to the execution side of the ledger, perhaps even completely so, leaving readers woefully in the dark about coming up with good strategies, which is where success or failure is basically determined and always has been.

If copywriters and art directors don’t know the strategic side of the equation, they’re put in the position of interpreting someone else’s vision. Which is terrible, because if the vision is wrong and will result in rotten work no matter how well they execute it, all they’ll be doing is spinning their wheels in their cubicles.

All in all, when CWs and ADs run into bad strategies created by those who’ve made it their business to rule the roost strategically (clients, account people, account planners, creative directors), they need to argue persuasively and intelligently, with their argument(s) centered not only around the fatal flaws embedded in the strategy they were given to execute but also around their suggestions for making strategic alterations that’ll result in greater returns.

Arguing will piss everybody off. Ultimately, though, when CWs and ADs have proven their strategic thinking to be right more often than it is wrong, they’ll be given carte blanche to do what they think is right. Given raises and promotions, too.

]]>