Do we need a new recipe for diversity?

Diversity and Inclusion in advertising

It’s nearly Bake Off time. Yesssss. Surprisingly, what got my attention more than the concept of cakes was actually the way I found out Bake Off was back.

Unlike 2017’s ad that showcased a singing selection of pristine pastries. This year’s campaign has embraced those, shall we say, more unconventional bakes. To my great delight, as an enthusiast of questionable skill, it appears diversity has been welcomed in the world of baked goods.

Ok, so that might be a bit deep. But it did get me thinking. If it hasn’t taken scones that long to realise the importance of diversity and inclusion, why are so many brands still struggling? Being different is the one thing everyone, be you cake or human, has in common. But very few of us want to be treated or communicated with differently. Memorable, effective and worthwhile diversity and inclusion initiatives are successful because they normalise difference, welcoming everyone with open arms and making unique the new norm.

So, what’s the state of play?

Research conducted by Lloyds Bank revealed only 19% of people used in UK advertising were from a minority background. This infers one of two things. Either brands aren’t clear on the importance of diversity in their advertising, or perhaps more likely, they don’t know how showcase it in a way that isn’t stale, mundane, or simply panders to stereotypes.

But there are brands out there that are diving in head first and receiving positive feedback. Some have taken a big bang approach. Think back to Mars’s 2016 Malteasers ad campaign that humorously captured the ‘lighter side’ of disability. Meanwhile, McCain have subtly explored the subject of diversity in a broad range of everyday, family settings.

We’ve come a long way from IKEA’s 1994 Dining Table ad which kind of did the opposite of normalising homosexuality. But hey, at least they were brave enough to do it. Unlike Guinness who pulled their scheduled advertising the year after on the back of a public outcry. This progress reflects a changing society, as diversity appears more relevant to audiences than it was 20 years ago, and therefore more acceptable. But whilst things are improving, there’s still some way to go.

And, what’s the point? 

To be honest, I’m still trying to figure out if brands are learning to embrace diversity. Or whether they are just getting better at tolerating it. Even worse, is diversity in advertising actually only being used as a stunt to get noticed when other campaign ideas go off the boil. Remembering the minorities, but still targeting the majority for maximum ROI.

Lingerie brand, Curvy Kate’s recent #mybodyvictory campaign celebrates women in all their forms. Encouraging them to speak about how great their bodies are. But the fact I found out about it in the ‘news’ section of The Independent suggests the aim is to get PR and social media pickup, rather than spend loads on media promoting a message they actually believe in.

And, what does this mean for us?

Diversity questionnaires seem to be becoming more common place in RFIs. In my last agency I was required to outline the diverse nature of our account management team to a prospective client before even being accepted to pitch for their business.

Personally, I think it’s naïve to assume a business’s capabilities correlate with the team’s race, gender, sexual orientation, or anything that actually makes them individual. Great work relies on research to develop a clear understanding of who you’re speaking to, why you’re speaking to them, and what you want to achieve. Sadly, this critical stage is sometimes viewed as an unnecessary delay. Getting little investment or getting overlooked completely. Jeez, this whole thing really is a minefield. Which is why so many ignore it I guess.

And, in conclusion 

This is a tricky one as the subject is so complex. To my mind, diversity in advertising shouldn’t be treated as a campaign. It’s not a stand-alone concept to be ticked off the list once it’s done. To be viewed as a truly diverse brand, you need to deliver a message that is real, based on solid research and understanding. More importantly, it should be something you live and breathe, and not something you’re using as a cheap tool to drive sales.

But one thing I do know is that I appreciated Bake Off’s wonky swan and half-cocked hedgehog. Even if in reality, they may have only been there to ensure I tune in.

If you would like some diversity of ideas, drop us a note here.

And how would you like your creative Madame?

Creative led agencies

Whether you like your creative served raw or done well, we can all agree it needs to be produced with love and expertise. If you’re going to really enjoy and savour it, make it with love and knowledge.

Running an agency without a creative at the helm (and by that I mean owning or part-owning the bloody place) is a bit like opening a restaurant without knowing how to use the oven.

Yeah, you might be able to rustle up a sandwich or hire in a pizza putter-togetherer. However, you’re really going to struggle to serve up consistent high quality, mouth-watering work if you have a constant flow of jobbing chefs through the door. And if you don’t really know what they do, how they do it or whether it’s any good, you’re kinda screwed.

Culture

There’s obviously a counter argument that every agency also needs a quality business and numbers brain at the top. And I’m not for one minute denying this, my point is all about balance. Well more about who leads the culture that creates the product that solves the problems.

Take a look at the agency landscape, how many heads of those businesses were or are creative? Loads in London, the famous and most respected ones all have – think BBHegarty, AbbottMV, Saatchi&S, Wieden+Kennedy the list goes on. In fact you’d struggle to find one that doesn’t, even the big networked agencies have (or once had) a creative at the top table. And that person is quite often the figurehead.
Now name the successful regional ones. I can’t even get off one hand and that’s nothing to do with me being a right brainer.

Provincial thinking vs Big thinking

Why is it that the provincial agency owners tend to be non-creative? It’s like we see the success in the capital and think, oh that’s not for us. I’ll start an agency ‘cos my mate runs a sofa factory and I’ll hire a designer-cum-artworker in and someone who can bang out the odd social post. These ‘entrepreneurs’ almost fall into the industry rather than believe in it. And they do it a disservive and tarnish the quality.

Clients we talk to always put creativity at the top of their list when seeking out an agency partner. Capability to deliver is a given and costs can always be negotiated. But the reason for hiring any agency is to provide ideas that cannot be generated elsewhere.
Buttons on websites can be rounded and refinements can be made to digital targeting all to shift dials but if you wanna change things in a big way, then you’re going to need big thinking.

So why are the ideas people not leading the ideas businesses?

Maybe we’re (art directors and copywriters) to blame for not having the balls to start something big. Too easy to leave an agency and become a freelancer rather than have the ambition to create something tangible and long-standing.
Maybe it’s a reticence from clients to back creative talent but you will sign on the line for the salesman. It has and always will be about who controls the relationship, yet your question should always be “who’s doing the work?”

You wouldn’t hire an architect firm started by a tiler just because they know how to use a spirit level. And you’d be hard pushed to trust a butcher to start a zoo just because they have years of working with animals on their CV.
The world’s greatest automotive brands were born out of the passion of engineers not back seat drivers.
The leading tech companies have (or had) the sizeable brains of geeks behind them.
The best ad agencies all have at least one creative name above the door.

Pepperoni bride

So when you’re next looking to draw up a pitch list. Ask those on it what credentials the people who run and own it have to call themselves a creative ideas business. Is the work they show produced by that office by people who are still there? Is creativity at the core of their being?
If it isn’t the driving force of the people at the top, then you’re at risk of asking the local pizza franchise to take care of the catering at your daughter’s wedding. Which we can all agree may leave you hungry for something a bit more palatable.

Creative led agencies

If you’d like to talk to some creative agency leaders, email either Jon or Rich. And ask them to send a suit along to take a brief. 😉

The true test of research

Research and planning in advertising

As a planner who spends a significant part of my day-to-day life extolling the virtues of research and trying to persuade clients they should do more, where does it fit in the creative process?

Fail

A recent article in Marketing Week tells the story of the famous Guinness ‘Surfer’ ad failing in research. However, the client and agency both believed in the idea strongly enough to ignore the research and make the ad. A brave choice that proved to be very astute indeed. According to the article the campaign led to a 12% uplift in Guinness’s sales and, of people questioned by a Marketing Week and YouGov Omnibus, 48% remember the ad, rising to 72% among those aged 35 to 54. Among people recognising it, 57% attribute it to Guinness. In addition, asked to name the ‘best ad’ of the 1990s, 25% say Surfer.

Ignore

I experienced a similar situation working on the WKD account. TV scripts were tested in research with a view to only making those that performed really well. On two separate occasions scripts bombed in the groups, but the agency believed in them so strongly we managed to persuade a brave client to ignore the research and make them anyway. TNS brand-tracking went onto vindicate those decisions, with both ads ending up being some of the most successful for the brand in terms of cut-through and motivation.

So as a planner who spends a significant part of my day-to-day life extolling the virtues of research and trying to persuade clients they should do more, where does it fit in the creative process?

Start with the Why

For me, research has a huge role to play. But unless you’re willing to spend the budget on sophisticated neurological testing such as John Lewis has used for its yearly Christmas epic I’d avoid it for testing creative. In the past I’ve found it often leaves you with more questions than answers. Consumers can rarely articulate how they would actually react to an ad in the real world, and they certainly can’t tell you their emotive response. The response that really drives how people behave. They tell you irrelevant stuff as they’re trying to articulate how they feel but they can’t. This is because the part of our brain that controls our feelings, the limbic brain, has no capacity for language as Simon Sinek highlights in his fascinating book Start with the Why.

Qual and Quant

I think where research really comes into its own is at the very start of the process. Helping clients and agencies to unlock the magic insight that can make a difference to the bottom line, that can turn creative that on the surface looks great but doesn’t necessarily resonate, into something powerful, emotive and effective. That research could be as simple as experiencing the product how your consumers would (as was the case with Guinness) or it can be full blown qual and quant. No matter what your budget there is always a way to get some insight.

Research is also incredibly useful in proving what has and hasn’t worked once a campaign is live. (And vindicating clients and agencies who ignore creative testing in the first place.) And importantly helping brands and agencies to develop more of what works and less of what doesn’t.

At One Black Bear we’ve recently been running an extensive qualitative research project for a client. It has uncovered insight which we believe will truly make a difference to their entire business, not just their comms department. Being part of something that can really make a difference is incredibly rewarding and I personally can’t wait to see it come to life. But if they ask me to test any creative that comes out of it, I’ll be recommending they save their money. And I think most of the creatives I know will be backing me on that.

If you’d like to find out more about our opinion on opinions, drop us a note saying: ‘I really like the colour blue’ here.

 

Research and planning in advertising

BLAST: 04 Sweeping the boards.

Special build poster

How an outdoor campaign printed on boards swept the board.

Sometimes, great ideas can rattle around metaphoric bottom drawers for quite a while. It happens all the time and when it does, we try our level best to liberate such gems into the wild whenever possible.

Back when Jon and I were students, lateral approach and devising odd stuff for well trodden FMCG products were the most common weapons of choice in order to differentiate a student book.  In an era when the word ‘disruptive’ was more readily applied to wayward schoolchildren than communications, we had the idea of creating a campaign for a boarding and glazing company. The idea was to create messaging on physical pieces of board rather than just print them as conventional posters. They would run in city centre business districts amid a sea of corporate glass palaces. Providing rich pickings for glazing firms. They would stand out a mile – if we could do it the way we wanted to.

Build it and they will come

Fast forward to our first job and our MD – in truth a frustrated creative. He’d requested our student book and one day. He summoned us to his office as he’d spotted the boarding up campaign and thought it stood out (proof that an MD, not just a CD can get excited about a student book). It took all us all of two minutes to agree we should try and run it.

Award winner

Our brilliant client was persuaded to book some Adshel special builds involving the removal of protective glass frame and then stencilling some ad’ messaging on big old pieces of plywood with contentious, provocative headlines like ‘We’ll come round and put your windows in’ or ‘Any trouble & we’ll send the lads round with hammers.’  These bold boards around Birmingham attracted loads of attention and press traction – even attracting the odd bit of graffiti (see pic’) and the obvious plan was to test our luck in awards season once it came round. In addition to Roses, Cream (RIP), New York Festivals and the like, The IPA Business to Business Advertising Awards caught our attention and we entered ‘Boards’ as a campaign. The ceremony was to be held at The Brewery in East London with Ian Hislop as compere.

As IPA do’s…do, it attracted the great and the good from ad-land given John Hegarty was Chair of the judging panel amid several other Soho luminaries. Before taking our seats, we bumped into Dino Maddelena, creative supremo of Brookes & Vernon who’d been enjoying a lot of awards success with his fantastic ‘Buy British beef’ ad’ for JCB inspired by the BSE crisis. Rather than offer his hand up – he looked at us and bellowed:  ‘What the fuck are you pair doing here? – this was gonna be my night!!?’

Sorry

So this is an official apology Dino (20 years later).
Turns out we walked away with The Grand Prix, the Innovation Award and best Biz to Biz campaign that night.
Dino – you won best Business to Business Campaign of the year and One Off Best Business to Business ad’ of the year. So not too shabby all round.

All said, it’s amazing what you can do with no money when you ap’ply’ yourself.

No grey area for the Men in Black or the BBC

Save the BBC from the dirge of adverts.

As all good stories should start: I was sat in a Chinese takeaway recently waiting to collect a meal I’d ordered.

As the only person in there, I did what anyone else would do and began trawling my social channels.

Scrolling

Oblivious to the portable TV playing in the corner, I hadn’t noticed what was beaming out from its fuzzy 14″ screen. It was the 1997 Hollywood blockbuster Men in Black, starring Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones. Having seen it once or twice before and knowing I would only be sat on that hard plastic chair under a retina bursting fluorescent light tube for another five minutes, I believed the contents of my phone would be more interesting.

Then a voice came crashing over the Formica counter “I don’t pay my TV license for this crap.” Now I wouldn’t say MiB is one of the cinematic greats (7.3/10 on IMDb) but surely it doesn’t warrant that kind of reaction. The owner of the Chinese continued “This is the fifth time this year this has been on. I don’t pay my TV license for them just to repeat this rubbish.”

I politely nodded and agreed that indeed showing any film five times in just a few short months was a bit excessive. While I didn’t believe that the BBC would indeed have shown a film with such regular recurrence, I wasn’t about to start an argument. After all, this was a man who clearly sits glued to his precariously balanced TV night after night.

Guardian reader

“Six million of us pay our TV license every year, do you know that?” he exclaimed quite aggressively. This sounded low but again I wasn’t about to argue. “That’s £9billion we give them and all they do is play repeats.” £9billion from six million licenses? Now my mental arithmetic isn’t the best but this is where I plucked up the courage to say I didn’t think it was that much.

Mistake.

“I suppose you read the Guardian” he grumbled before wandering into the back to see if my meal was ready. While there, the ads came on. The TV was actually tuned to Film4. When he returned, I pointed this out and he just looked at me blankly. I grabbed my small plastic carrier bag, thanked him and left.

Dancing, cooking and antiques

I’m a huge fan of the BBC and believe that it’s entire offering is worth every last penny of the annual £147 license fee. For years it’s had many detractors in Parliament, the media and indeed living rooms (as well as takeaway waiting areas). Yes, through commercial pressures it’s lost many crown jewel sporting events (and many of those sports have lost a generation of fans… cricket, I’m looking at you). And there’s too many dancing/cooking/antiques shows for a bloke in his mid-forties. But let’s all rejoice that it’s still the best in the world at providing world changing documentaries and news programming.

Sky have long been a contender to the throne and Netflix/Amazon are really pushing the boundaries of drama production, as well as the convenience of on-demand and binge viewing. I subscribe to both Now and Netflix, which actually strengthens my belief in the value of the BBC.

Sad day

The Beeb will need to change. The way it’s funded will need to be addressed (give it more I say and see what it can really deliver). And it desperately needs to change its perception in the minds of politicians, their lobbyists and the public if it is to survive in its current guise.

There is an argument (and working in a commercial business I should buy this but sorry to disappoint, I don’t) that to see how good the BBC really is, make it stand on it’s own two feet.

Make it either run advertising or develop an optional subscription model.
What a sad day this would be. We’d lose the spirit of a pioneer and trail blazer that the world’s media has followed since the invention of the cathode ray tube. We really do have a fantastic institution in old Auntie. And although the world is rapidly changing and she has to move with the times, let’s never underestimate what great value for money it really is. Or what would follow in the vacuum it created. We’d still need a national broadcaster. Yet a state created propaganda machine or a powerful political king-maker creation isn’t something any of us would like to see. (Fox and Friends 24/7 anyone?)

VfM

Perception is a blessing and curse for any brand. And yes, the BBC is a brand.
On the one hand, the license fee is seen as providing all the TV that appears on our screens.
Yet it’s also seen as not providing value for money and is viewed by many as a tax.

A massive shift is required to put this right. Although it will ultimately come down to what it always has, which is quality programme creation, the job the in-house creative team are doing to advertise (I know, dirty word) the offering is quite remarkable. They are taking some brilliant products and applying advertising minds to them. In the process, convincing us all that it’s quality worth both watching and fighting for. I sincerely hope they succeed.

In 2016/17 the BBC received £4.95billion funding of which £3.79billion came from the TV licence. The UK has a population of 65.6million. This equates to the total BBC offering (TV, Radio, Digital, Live Events) costing each of us (through taxation and license payments) £75.46 (21p a day) or to break it down to the 27.2million UK households £182 annually (Sky ranges from £240 to £1,014 [and carries advertising], Netflix £72 to £120, Now TV £96 to £939).

Save the BBC from the dirge of adverts.

Smile as you knead the dough

It is said that a happy baker makes better bread. Because there’s less tension in the fingers, the dough is kneaded with love and this then shows in the lightness and texture of the finished product.

Rich and myself had a catch up with the head of another agency recently. Instead of the usual “How’s business?” question she asked “Are you happy?”, we pondered this for a few seconds before both answering with a resounding “Yes”.
“I can tell” she replied, “It shows in the work you’re doing.”

What a lovely thing to say. As agency principals, we spend our lives attempting to hide the trauma of the life and career we’ve chosen. Forever putting on that brave face to hide the anguish we suffer every day. Reassuring clients we are going to solve their problems and that we’re never too busy for another brief or putting an arm around our people to make them confident but rarely stopping to think about our own happiness.

But the astute can spot it. Only a happy agency can produce great work. Briefs solved under duress, scrutiny and relentless pressure rarely spawn award winners and game changers.

We used to have a client who used to yell at his junior team, “Keep the agency’s feet to the fire!”, they out of fear would then feel the pressure to constantly squeeze budgets, timelines and enjoyment as part of their job description. A combative relationship developed and nobody won. We would feel constantly exhausted and undervalued. The client received work on time and on budget but rarely that was any good.

Looking back on it, this one client (our largest at the time) set the agency back years. They demoralised the place and nearly caused us to implode. From the outside things looked okay from a business perspective, we were profitable, growing and working with an international household name. Yet if you looked closer you could see all was not well. The work was shit. And that’s because we felt the same way.

Thankfully, we’re now in a much happier place. We have working relationships that actually work – with clients that make us laugh and love the everyday. And that results in solutions that makes both awards juries, clients (and believe it or not), the accountants on both sides who count the dough very, very happy.

Data suggests : Be more than just a number.

Agency people – don’t make yourself obsolete to Ai. Heard that one lately? Thing is, I mean this in a violently different way to most.

News stuff abound regarding the ad industry’s relentless and nervously fought war against data monoliths from Amazon and Facebook to the now defunct Cambridge Analytica.

So how many meetings have you been in lately whereby the presenter is just regurgitating numbers from one or several sources into a PowerPoint slide? For me, it feels like an hourly occurrence.

So when we talk about Ai replacing jobs, aren’t these presentations and their authors just sitting ducks for AI? All they’ve done is to decant one load of figures from one slide into another.

Or put another way, like machine learning is never going to happen.

I’m now numbed to the assertion that creativity is irrelevant nowadays and data rules from people who are merely conduits or couriers for the very information other people extensively (and often illegally) mine and purvey. No imagination, no vision, no originality – just envoys for borrowed info’ incorporated.

I often find myself heckling at the end of these presentations asking ‘where’s the idea that drives all these numbers in the first place?’ to bemused looks – almost as though the data is sufficient in itself. But it isn’t is it? It’s the byproduct of something greater that stirred the pot of daily life and actually stood out. A skill humans do very well if they’re creative, talented incisive and not just orators of the already documented.

If agencies are to thrive, it’s imperative that they don’t inadvertently make themselves obsolete by practicing trendy but completely replaceable and transferable methodology  – and the PowerPoint of borrowed knowledge is the classic because the info has only leapt from one computer to another in the first place – so no human needed.

Agencies provide vision, change and stand out – business skills that can turn the tiller greatly. We aren’t accountants, statisticians or behavioural scientists but we do use our own unique skill set to capture, inspire and persuade – crucial, not extraneous traits in a numbers game currently hijacked by fraudsters.

So next time you stand up and present something, try saying something only a human can and leave the numbers to the machines. That way we might help keep these bloody data fraudsters out of our boardrooms.

Oh, and you might keep your job a lot longer too.

Small businesses : Be bold with figures.

In late 1976, Jim Kipling was senior attorney for a little known toy brand called Kenner. He sat on the seventh floor of a shared office building in Cincinnati.

He was the only attorney at Kenner whereas competitors like Mattel had legions of lawyers, just like Jim.

In May 1977, LucasFilm would launch Star Wars in American theatres. A few months before, at the end of 1976, George Lucas knew he needed a toy range to support his movie but had left it very late in the day. He’d also been knocked back by big players like Mattel because they didn’t think it would be a long term, viable movie franchise in any shape or form.

Knowing this, and thinking they had nothing to lose, Jim Kipling and his and his firm approached LucasFilm and amazingly, they sent Jim very rough sketches of Skywalker and co’ to base toy prototypes around. Kenner modellers then toiled day and night whittling away at existing plastic toy figures already in stores to save time and expense. The jawa figure even had his brown cloak improvised from part of the sock a modeller was wearing hours before the presentation.

Eventually, and with finished prototypes adorning the LucasFilm boardroom table, it was time for Jim Kipling to negotiate a licensing deal. (Incidentally, the figures 3 3/4 inch height would be determined simply by the Kenner CEO gesturing the gap between his thumb and forefinger and enthusiastically booming ‘make ‘em this big’).

Negotiations began – LucasFilm versus tiny toy brand. But Jim didn’t falter. He stuck firmly to his blaster. Kipling boldly tabled Kenner’s demand of 95 cents against every $1 the toys would sell for. One attorney versus the mighty force of Hollywood.

Jim prevailed and got the deal.

To the most successful toy franchise in history.

A deal George Lucas still refers to as his worst ever.

A deal that would later see an inevitable big money acquisition of Kenner by Hasbro.

Small firms just need the confidence and great things can happen – no matter how darkly formidable the opposition may seem at the time.

So here’s to Jim Kipling – what a trooper, what a rebel.

Did you read that report?

In a radio interview recently the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, was being quizzed over her department’s strategy to tackle knife crime in London. In it she was questioned about a study she had commissioned that highlighted the decline in frontline police officer numbers and the possible effect it had on the problem.

She replied by saying she hadn’t actually read the report.

HADN’T ACTUALLY READ THE REPORT that she had commissioned to help guide the policy she was proudly announcing.

An example of lying in order to avoid the contradiction of the solution to the suggestion or quite simply a case of incompetence or even worse, arrogance.

Imagine commissioning and paying for a whole host of people to research the issues, consider the problems and suggest a solution… that you don’t bother reading. What does that do to the morale of those behind all that hard work?

Welcome to the world of agency life… before you say it, I know client’s will be screaming that this happens with agencies ignoring their briefs and planners will accuse creatives of ignoring insights and in turn, creatives will accuse everyone of missing the bloody point. Yes, we’re all guilty.

So here’s a plea for us all to start listening to each other a bit more. But in order to do that we need to stop writing endless reports that nobody reads, creating thousand line spreadsheets that make our vision go blurred and definitely don’t bore everyone to tears with another dreary powerpoint. We’ll all hear more if we have less to listen to.

The world is full of people who avoid creating by holding endless meetings, commissioning studies and basically pretending to be busy by talking the talk. Have you noticed how difficult it is these days to get a meeting room in most offices or find a seat in a city centre coffee shop? Everyone’s discussing what they intend to be doing.

Yes, let’s talk and listen but most importantly, and here’s where I do back the Home Secretary, let’s get on and do something. Sometimes we’ll get it wrong but nothing ever happened by just sitting around talking about it.

Blast:03 The car ad that almost crashed

BLAST:03

At the back end of the last century Rich and I worked on the occasional car brief. Subaru was the client and the ads at the time tended to be about a rally win or a pseudo-posh farming vehicle.

Based on the success of the incredibly popular Impreza, the Japanese manufacturer had decided to introduce a turbo version of it’s sturdy, yet uninspiring workhorse, the Forester.

The account director at the time was George Wallis Jnr (son of the CEO) and as the Creative Director, Geoff ‘Tommo’ Tomlinson was on a shoot, he’d managed to sneak the brief into us pair.

As with all car briefs, it was full of loads of technical data for the ‘car nerds’ and audience insights for the ‘media nerds’.

We had a week to crack it (I know, feels like a lifetime these days) before Tommo would return to his desk and inevitably steal the brief back.

We got to work, tossing ideas back and forth and then into the bin. The usual crap came pouring out. The clichés and puns were abundant and we were struggling. This wasn’t a model launch – that had happened a year or so before and the car had been positioned as a practical, capable estate.

There wasn’t an opportunity to make a massive personality shift and being honest, it was still a practical, capable estate but just went a bit quicker.

Therein lay the issue, even back in the 90s, you couldn’t sell a car on speed. Yet that’s all we should really be talking about. So, we had to do what we do and find a way round the problem.

Then on the Friday morning inspiration struck. Must’ve been the shock of being in the office early as we only had a few hours remaining to solve it or lose it.

Speed camera as a concept was born… originally without an image of the car.

We excitedly called George into our office to proclaim we’d solved it. He instantly asked for a back up. Arrogant little sods that we were, we of course refused. This was the one and he HAD to sell it at the meeting he had that lunchtime with the client.

Out came the Magic Markers and we drew it up ready for presentation. The ink was still drying when the agency MD stuck his head round the door and asked what we were working on. We proudly showed him the DPS visual (back then car ads always started as a double page spread) and he nonchalantly shrugged, said it was okay and carried on down the corridor. Suddenly self-doubt crept in, was it as good as we thought? It had all happened so fast we hadn’t given it the overnight test or even pinned it to the wall to stare at for a couple of hours. We were running on gut feel alone.

The meeting went well, the ad was sold to the client (on the proviso we added a shot of the metal), all we had to do was get Geoff, our CD, to go with it on his return to the office. Thankfully he did.

A few nights later we were up in Manchester for an awards ceremony. After a night of mutual back slapping and copious alcohol consumption we all retired upstairs to our beds.

Except for George.

He ventured outside for a breath of fresh air – at which point he was viciously attacked, leaving him in a coma and fighting for his life.

The agency was in shock and the client inexplicably decided to pull the ad, asking for something safer with the car as the hero image.

Arguments and protestations were made but the client wasn’t budging. That was until Geoff refused to change it. The rationale being that this was the last ad George had sold and worryingly would possibly ever sell – as such, it HAD to run. To his credit, the client surprisingly backed down and a shoot was booked in the forests of Wales with legendary car photographer, Pete Davies.

The following year the ad went on to win three golds at Roses (in the same hotel as the attack). It then later won six silvers at the Cream Awards. Forever the arrogant upstarts, as we came off the stage having accepted the first one we went straight over to the judges, slammed the glassware down on the table and shouted at Trevor Beattie (Chair of the judges) “Silver? You can shove silver up your arse.” The remaining five awards were collected by the agency’s delivery driver, Roy.

Much more of an accolade however came in a phone call one morning. I was in before Rich with my feet on the desk, pondering the previous days scamps all pinned to the wall when reception rang through and said there was a “bloke called Richard on the line who wanted to speak to the creative who did the Subaru speed camera ad” – vague but I took it out of either curiosity or boredom expecting it to be a media sales call or a photographer’s agent.

A softly spoken voice introduced himself as Richard Flintham, a long standing hero of ours. My first reaction was that this was an Elwell wind-up but it quickly became clear it was for real. He went on to say what a fan he was of the ad (this from the guy who was to go on to create Sony Balls and Cadbury Gorilla) and that if ever we were in London, to give him a shout for a beer.

We were on a train the following week and tapping him up for advice on some beer scripts we were writing starring Roger Moore (again doing what we do and answering a brief by saying something the rules didn’t allow). His advice and guidance was great – our ideas were crap and he helped us change them by ripping them up and starting over, even though they’d already been sold in.

It’s difficult to emphasise the impact that ad had on our careers. It gave us a boost and confidence to believe in our abilities (behind the arrogance and bravado we’ve always been a little delicate and sensitive, ask any current client). It led on to us being given the joint CDship as well as enabling us to brave the rollercoaster that is starting your own agency.

Thankfully, George Jnr pulled through but the events of that night were to change his life forever and in a strange way, they changed ours too.

Behave…..or no lift home for you sunshine.

China has a ‘social credit’ system.

Basically, if you play up, mouth off or display any behaviour that doesn’t befit that of a good subject, you can often find your wings clipped when attempting to use the country’s vast transport network. Just one of a few sanctions possible I might add.

This policy has just been further bolstered by Xi Jinping deciding to abolish presidential fixed terms so effectively he could rule forever and even strengthen such laws to restrict the movement of ‘wayward’ citizens.

All this becomes interesting when you consider that ‘Robocabs’ (driverless, electric, automated taxis) are about to be rolled out in American cities like Pittsburgh. Robocabs use lots of Chinese tech’ and the first ones have already been rolled out by Uber – albeit with the safety net of a human ‘attendant’ who can step in if the automated system suddenly goes berserk.

Subject to plenty of plain sailing and no massive pile ups, the worldwide roll out of Robocabs is inevitable with the globe’s largest cities becoming the natural, obvious marketplace.

The bad news is, by virtue that you’re using a device to order a Robocab could leave Chinese subjects exposed to remotely activated restrictions and rendering themselves marooned at the roadside if they’d so much as discarded a cigarette butt. You could effectively be high and dry.

So forget big brother tracking of where you are – you may not even be able to hitch a ride in the first place.

Oh and don’t even think about remonstrating against the huge slight or infringement on your civil liberties because your leader can just change the law. And has done.

So by all means look forward to automated Robocabs and the hugely convenient novelty that brings but remember, what the Chinese Politburo giveth can swiftly become another Chinese takeaway.

iCopy: Will robots be the new writers?

“If you want to be a writer, then write.” – Samuel Johnson

Easier said than done for an 18th century writer. He didn’t have the robots trying to steal his job!

Let me explain. We’re all aware of artificial intelligence. Alexa, driverless cars, SMART-just-about-everything. But, why apply machine-learning to copywriting?

For starters, copywriting bots are devils for details… or, should I say, data. They can study trends in ads, lines and much more and repackage these into copy that drives results.

Goldman Sachs has already invested tens of millions in their automated copywriting start-up, Persado. In its own words, Persado uses scientific algorithms to “generate a precise combination of words, phrases, and images that can motivate any audience.”

According to Campaign, Persado “has used “cognitive content” on more than 4,000 marketing campaigns, through Facebook, display ads, email and mobile, by collecting response data from ad impressions.”

As our Creative Partner, Richard Elwell rightly pointed out in 2016, ‘the hackers have hacked the hacks, you could say.’

So where humans can only do so much, robots have unlimited capacity and unlimited access to data. They have a combination of logic and speed that us mere mortals can only dream of.

Where we, at some point, have to stop – robots only keep going.

They won’t spend a lunch break scrolling through Instagram, tell their colleagues how their new ‘healthy’ diet is supposedly going, go home to their family at 5.30pm, worry about getting a good night’s sleep, plan out their annual leave – you get the picture.

They don’t rely on inspiration or creative juices (or wine) either. All they need is a formula and they can write hundreds of versions of the same ad until they find the copy they know will sell.

The million dollar question though, is a formula enough?

While robots can supposedly be programmed to write compelling copy for humans (Persado now even offers one to one emotional language personalisation), they’re missing the vital human element. First and foremost, we can feel. We have our own lives and experiences to draw on, allowing us to empathise and apply that to our copy.

Then there are the rules, some might say, the copy commandments. Like all rules, there to be followed… and of course, there to be broken. Unlike robots, humans know how to break the writing rules and make them work to their advantage.

Ad Aged’s George Tannenbaum’s experience with Sharethrough is a classic example of how following the rules doesn’t always work. In a nutshell, Sharethrough is a headline recommending algorithm based on behaviour model theory, and neuroscience and advertising research. When Tannenbaum used Volkswagen’s award-winning ‘Think small’ headline, the algorithm scored this a mere 38, with the following suggestions for improvement:

• Increase headline length
• Where’s the brand?
• Use more Alert Words
• Talk about the body
• Try adding a celebrity

Tannenbaum took the suggestions on board and applied every single one. This resulted in the below headline:

“Warning. Alert. When you think about Volkswagen think with both your head and heart, use the strength of your brains and the sinew of your arm, and think about a very small Volkswagen–the likes of which Kim Kardashian would drive.”

That earned 100, a perfect score. Needless to say, a perfect score from an algorithm does not make for a perfect headline.

Humans have creativity and, if you ask me, that’s something that can’t be engineered.

Assaf Baciu, co-founder of Persado, has said that content automation today is more about working with human-produced content to make it stronger, rather than replacing humans with robot-created writing. People are still the wordsmiths. And, for someone who has wanted to be a writer ever since I can remember, that’s a huge relief.

Baciu goes on to say, “We’re not here about displacing, we’re here about enhancing.”

So maybe robots aren’t a threat. Maybe they’re an asset. Think of the days when you’re snowed under with work. We all have them (my catchphrase on these days is ‘why won’t the words just write themselves?!’) and I know that if a robot could bang out some killer copy and ease my workload at the same time, I’d use it.

The more I’ve read into this subject, the more I think that artificial intelligence is only a major threat to the copywriters who are resistant to change. Who want to keep doing the same things and get the same results.

Emma Park at Isobar Australia puts it perfectly in her War of the Words article:

“There’s no doubt AI is changing our industry and outperforming the humble human in plenty of ways. But to make the most of it, copywriters (and agencies) need to reassess what they bring to the table. Our value does not lie in the words we write, but rather knowing how to use them.”

She goes on to explain that this is helping forge new career paths for copywriters, from linguistics officers to dialogue designers, scientific copywriters and language engineers.

The robots are here and they’re here to stay. Fact. And, while the thought of a robot outperforming and even replacing you is scary, I don’t see that happening for another 20 years. If robots can make copywriting more personalised, efficient, and give me more time to focus on the bigger projects rather than the day to day tasks, then I welcome them.

Machine generated. Written by a human. It’s all there to sell and, if you ask me, that’s what we should really be focusing on.