The Jesus and Mary Chain reborn.

I have not made a post in over two months. It's been a busy semester. And I could not help writing about something this morning, even if it is a short entry (there will hopefully be more over the winter break.)
I don't know how late I am to this band, I have not been up-to-date in musical development in the last months but I just discovered how great Atlas Sound is. And from the fist moment I heard a lot of The Jesus and Mary Chain in them. It's worth giving it a try. If you have you can call me out for not keeping up, if you haven't, do so.

The many faces of irresponsability, part II.

A few months ago, right after Cannes to be more accurate, I wrote a blog entry with the same title exposing the oh-so-talked-about issue of JC Penney’s “Speed Dressing” ad.
Today, after the scandal, we are shocked (well, not really) again to hear the news about a Lion being taken away from TBWA/Paris for an Amnesty International print ad against the Chinese Government (Olympic themed.) The reason? Media buying. Apparently the ad only ran once, with the intention to be entered at the festival. Only that the running date was after the Cannes entry deadline.
Again, the issue of “fake” or “ghost” ads strikes back. Ads that are only produced to be entered in award shows. Agencies have been doing this for years, and now even clients do it. Cannes Lions 2008 “client of the year”, Procter and Gamble, has used award shows to test creativity. The ad dubbed “interview” by Tide (where a guy in a job interview is interrupted by a talking stain in his shirt) was a winner in the 2007 edition of the festival, and had a minimal media buy then, it was until it won the award that the client decided to run it with more frequency until it reached the Super Bowl and became very popular. Apparently P&G did the same thing this year with Crest’s “You can say anything with a smile.” Expect the TV ads to be seen on more popular media after they won awards.
The controversy around “fake” ads only gets worse. Leo Burnett India won a Gold Lion for an ad for a brand that wasn’t even on their client roster, Luxor Highlighters.
Is it enough to run an ad once in a cheap place where no one will see it to believe it’s legit and submit it to award shows?
Saatchi & Saatchi’s ad for JC Penney almost cost them the account. The ad was apparently made and submitted by a production company, Epoch Films, although it credited Saatchi people including ECD Gerry Graff.
How stupid are we as an industry (and our industry is conformed not only by agencies, but by third parties such as, yes, production companies) that in the middle of a credibility crisis from both the public and our clients, we play around with brands just to get an award. Gawker.com makes no mistake when calling advertising an "award-obsessed" industry.
The problem is that we let other people play with brands. In the Saatchi case, Epoch Films is a production company that has worked with them in the past. Probably at some point, either the director or somebody from the creative team had ideas that could “look cool” and not be presented to the client. That is, they're meant to be done for the following things: a) Use it in the directors reel/portfolio, b) Use it in the creatives portfolio, c) Use it in the production company's reel, and d) submit it to award shows. The latter carries a certain amount of risk due to client interference. Now there's two ways to deal with this.

1. Since most awards shows require "approval from the client" for every submitted piece, you can go to your client and say in a very political way, "look, we bust our asses here doing everything you ask us to do, and we have this ad that we took the liberty of shooting, it didn't cost you anything, in fact we split the costs with the production company because they really liked the idea, and we want to submit it to award shows, you only have to sign and run the ad once in the cheapest media space possible."
That client may or may not sign the release, depending on his conscience levels. If the client is honest and smart he'll say "no, stick it up your ass, you're fired, you don't give a damn about the brand, you only care about award shows." Which by the way, is what most clients think about creatives. The other type of client would say "what the hell, I already have you do everything I want, go win your stupid awards, I don't give a damn about them, go kiss each others asses and when you come back I'll have you doing the same stupid stuff that I've always asked for."
2. You can skip the client part, talk to a buddy at the award show or create some fake release form and "ta-dah", you've got yourself a shortlist and most likely a winner, because if you're going through the trouble of creating a ghost ad with no client approval it better be as good as to win something. Then you can have the bad luck Saatchi had when a little thing called YouTube spread the ad online until it reached some guy in Texas who works for JC Penney and went, WTF?
There's a third way, which is never to do ghost ads. But that's stupid isn't it, how would we get those awards?
Our industry can be hugely irresponsible, we play around with brands like it has no consequences. Whether we like it or not, when we are empowered with brands we are given a huge responsibility. And I'm not saying we should do what the client says, but we have to be honest about our job, which by the way is not winning awards. Awards should merely be a consequence of great work, not an objective.
Everybody has bad clients and everybody has to get through them, and a campaign that wins awards despite everything is a million times better than the one created as a ghost. It is a very dangerous thing that with the industry being so unpopular there's people gambling with brands. These actions have consequences.
There is light at the end of the tunnel, go trough this years Titanium and Integrated Lions winners. Go through the work of agencies like Droga5, Crispin, Goodby (who has the policy of not entering work to award shows), and others who care more about good work and less about Lions, One Shows, Clios, et al. Awards are not wrong. They are a necessary thing for agencies seeking new business and for creatives seeking career moves. But an award is no longer enough to judge work, it’s the whole story, where it came from, how it came to be and how it is delivered that matters. In the words of Mark Fenske “Our job is to make clients and brands famous for the right reason.”

Lollapalooza 2008 Review.

Lollapalooza is a great festival. Idiots complain about its corporate backup and stuff, I guess there's some people that just can't see anything good in life. If you have over 100 bands in three days of music, located exactly in downtown Chicago, why again is it that you are whining about?
The great thing about Lolla is not only the fact that it has a great environment and very well organized but its very well located. You are close to anything you need in the city like hotels, restaurants, nightlife, public transportation. That's what makes Lolla the most convenient of the large music festivals.

As for the bands, this is what I saw.

Day 1. Friday, August 1st.

I first entered the gates of Lollapalooza 2008 on Friday around 3:15 PM having missed both Rogue Wave and The Go! Team (I still regret not going to the latter) because I couldn't leave work as early as that.

The 1st band on my list was The Black Keys. Pure rock n' roll, one guitar, one voice, and a drum set. That's it. After overcoming a bit of trouble with the voice in the 1st song (which was curiously Girl On My Mind, one of their biggest hits), which we couldn't really hear, the set was pretty good. The sun was up, it was very hot, but the Black Keys managed to pull it off. They played the Bud Light Stage on the north side of the festival, that I have to say, was the stage with the best sound.

The Black Keys.

From there I was ready to fulfill my dream of finally seeing the great Chan Marshall (AKA Cat Power) play live. And I was disappointed. She had it all, the Playstation 3 stage, one of the nicest in the festival, a large group of people (which sadly shrank as the set went by), good sound and a good band. I don't think her set was well chosen. Even though she opened up with Naked If I Want To, included in her latest Jukebox, but also part of 200's The Covers Record. From there she went downhill, playing only a few old songs which included Lived In Bars. She sang two lines of The Greatest before the band went jamming wild to finish off the set. She has a great voice, she has the songs, but that day she didn't have the audience. I'd rather see her perform a solo set.

Chan Marshall AKA Cat Power (in red) playing at the Playstation 3 stage.

After that it was back at the Bud Light stage for more guitar-powered rock and roll with The Raconteurs. Does everything that Jack White does has to be so good? Pure energy, while the sun was starting to hide behind the buildings of downtown Chi-Town, The Raconteurs rocked with perfect live versions off their two albums. Steady As She Goes and a kick-ass version of You Don't Understand Me with Mr. White on the piano while Brendan Benson took care of the guitar, stood out from the rest of the set which was energetic and overall good.

The Raconteurs. Brendan Benson (left in green) and Jack White (right, wearing black).

Quickly drag your ass from the Bud Light stage all the way to the other side (about a 10 to 15 minute walk) to grab a good spot (if possible) to see Radiohead. Even though I wanted to be there as quickly as possible I couldn't help stopping in the Citi stage to see CSS (Cansei de Ser Sexy) who were leading a massive party. I was lucky 'cause I got to see them play Music Is My Hot Hot Sex. Enough to dance for a while and continue my pilgrimage to the AT&T stage.

Radiohead is the best band in the world. Having said that, everything in this festival cannot be compared directly with Radiohead because they compete in a different league. It wasn't the best show or set I saw during the weekend, but it was the best band I saw during the weekend, if it makes any sense. About 80,000 people witnessed what was the biggest headline of the festival. Even though I got there about 20 minutes before the show and considering that there were people sitting down to grab a spot since like 2PM, I wasn't bad located. In a very British way at 8PM sharp Radiohead opened up while the crowd went mad. The set was great overall, they played 2 hours, and not a lot of shows these days surpass the 90 minute line. Sometimes it was a bit slow, but hey, that's just the way In Rainbows works. Speaking of which, they played the album almost entirely. I enjoyed the show very much but, I would have loved much more power in the sound. I could hear the guy behind me talk, and he wasn't even yelling. Maybe that didn't help the crowd to really connect with the band. Highlights included The Bends, Fake Plastic Trees and Everything In It's Right Place played while a firework show went on, There There, Optimistic, Idiotheque, Paranoid Android, No Surprises and Lucky. Weird Fishes, Bodysnatchers and Reckoner were probably the best songs out of the new album. Even with the low sound, it was a great show.

The crowd before Radiohead started playing with Chicago's skyline at the back.

Radiohead.

Radiohead.

Very tired after the 1st day of Lolla, I go t a good night sleep and rested enough to hit the second day of beer and music.

Day 2. Saturday, August 2nd.

I kicked the day off with en vogue MGMT. It was surprisingly crowded, I know they are the cool band of the moment, but I never expected this many people. The good thing is, they delivered. Unfortunately the sound didn't. Again with the sound. Nevertheless, MGMT is powerful and goo on-stage, and as my festival-buddy said about Andrew VanWyngarden, "he has a lot of Wayne Coyne in him." Which is funny, since David Friddman (Flaming Lips' producer) was behind Oracular Spectacular.

MGMT

A funny thing that tends to happen in almost every festival is how surprised you can be about a band that you are only going to see because "it's what's playing at the time." And that was the case with me and Explosions in the Sky. We grabbed a couple of beers and laid back at the Bud Light stage, where there was a lot of people laying on the grass listening to 3the perfectly executed post-rock instrumental music of Explosions... It's one of the moments I enjoyed the most, and I never expected it. They are awesome live, if you ever have a chance to see them don't miss it.

The crowd listening to Explosions in the Sky

Urge Overkkil is a great band that plays good, simple music. No pretensions, just plain simple. And I did enjoy their show, especially when they played Our Life Is Not A Movie Or Maybe and
The Latest Thought. And although my companion didn't agree, I saw some of Jarvis Cocker in Will Sheff.

Okkervil River

Back in the Bud Light Stage it was the moment to experience one of the finest musical moments in the weekend. In fact, it wasn't going to get any better than this. Broken Social Scene is amazing when they play live (and on record). I personally consider Kevin Drew and Brendan Canning (along with producer Dave Newfeld) to be some of the biggest musical geniuses of our time. They brought along the large crew, about eleven musicians on-stage, Amy Millan (from Stars) included. They opened up with the instrumental Pacific Theme followed by a sick version of Cause=Time. The set was heavy on Brendan Canning's album, part of the Broken Social Scene Presents series, and there was some of the previous album from the same series, the Kevin Drew one. It didn't really matter what they played, when the music is so good you enjoy whatever they throw at you. I would have loved to see a longer set, since they only gave the band an hour. A longer show would have given us the chance to listen to Superconnected, Almost Crimes, Lover's Spit, Stars and Sons, Ibi Dreams of Pavement and other greats from You Forgot it in People and their eponymous third album. But in the end, they were definitely one of the best three acts I saw in the whole festival.

The whole gang. Broken Social Scene at the Bud Light stage.

We killed an hour drinking beers after immersing ourselves again through the crowd gathered in the Bud Light stage to see Wilco. While the south part of the festival was in the middle of mosh pit crisis with Rage, the north side was enjoying a nice, smooth and friendly Wilco show. A good show I might add. People were enjoying it and having a great time, and really, it's Wilco. They remind you how simple (at least on the surface) music can be enjoyable and made to sing-along to. I am trying to Break Your Heart made an unexpected early set appearance and was very well received, although the high point was Shot In the Arm. By the time Wilco was finished I realized I was a bit drunk and had to go rest it to avoid having a hangover on Sunday.

Wilco suited in Nudie (even though it's hard to tell in this picture)

Day 3. Sunday, August 3rd.

The final day of a festival has this vibe of people not wanting to let go of it, but at the same time too tired to keep going. And I guess that in paper the last day was the least attractive, at least for me. But the festival closer Kanye was something I was expecting since the beginning. And no, I didn't care missing Nine Inch Nails for Kanye. More on that later.
Tired and aching I started the day splitting between the Black Kids and Perry Farrell. Now, why Perry Farrell you might ask? Because while I was still in the Citi stage watching the Black Kids my friend calls me and tells me Perry is playing Jane Say's with... Slash. And I couldn't really miss that. Plus, the stages were next to each other.

Perry & Slash play Jane Says.

The man himself

Back to the Black Kids, they are good, I really hope the keep it going and deliver a good second album (I know they just released the 1st, but the 1st is always easier), and they do it really good on stage. Of course, I'm Not Going To Teach Your Boyfriend How To Dance With You turned the place into a big party. Really cool.

The Black Kids

We then headed to the Bud Light stage for a nice and kind of flat Iron & Wine show. Not too many highlights but not too many low points as well. Enjoyable and not too much to talk about this one.

Walked all the way back to the south stage, AT&T for Gnarls Barkley. The options were that or Love & Rockets who probably not a lot of people knew and I only know three songs of. So we made the decision to see what Gnarls had. And they don't have a lot. OK, they are good on record, good for partying. But that's it, there's nothing more they bring to the party when playing live. Nothing ever happens. Still, I had a good time while dancing to Crazy and Gone Daddy Gone.

Gnarls Barkley

We headed back north to see the National and we did see the last two Love & Rockets songs which were rather good.

The National have a great album. But they still need to learn the stage. Especially Matt Berninger, who sometimes thinks he's Ian Curtis. But he's not. And he's not Paul Banks (Interpol) either, so he has to build a charisma of his own. They need a strong frontman. Nevertheless the music was good. The sound took a while to get there, but it did. If they keep it up we might be looking at one hell of a band in the next few years.

The National

Again, walked all the way south.

On the journey to see how Kanye was going to take over the world we passed by the MySpace stage where Mark Ronson was playing. Now, you can say all you want about Mark Ronson. But live, he's nothing but about having fun. And that's good. He had a very big band playing, plus inviting different vocalists to sing. Kanye, by the way, was backstage. I got there right when they were performing their version of Just (from Radioheads' The Bends), and the vocals were by Alex Greenwald from Phantom Planet. Yes, the ones from that song California. Yes, the one from the O.C. Yes, Mark Ronson invited the whole band on-stage. Yes, they played the O.C. theme song. And it was so funny and weird, that it was amazing. People went crazy, partly because they thought it was ridiculous and partly because (and you should accept it too) they really like the song. After that Mark Ronson and his band returned to perform Valerie (by the Zutons) while people danced and had fun. A lot of people were walking by at this point, it was only like 15 minutes before Kanye began. The sound of Mark Ronson's band was amazing, and even though I was having a good time I had to leave to grab a good spot for Kanye, so I left shortly after their rendition of The Smiths' Stop Me.

Mark Ronson and (part of) his gigantic band.

And then the magic began.

I have never been big on hip hop. It's not that I don't like it, it's that I don't know a lot about it. I know the basics, but nothing too deep. But I know Kanye, and for that you don't have to be an expert.
This was probably one of the best shows I've seen in my life. The man is amazing in front of a crowd, he really knows how to manage the stage and the people and his intensity and energy are unbeatable. With a 90-minute hit-packed set Kanye ruled Lollapalooza. And the idea of regretting being there and not north with Nine Inch Nails never crossed my mind.
Kanye does hip-hop like a rock band. There is a DJ, but there's also a band, and a large one. Needless to say is that the best moment of the gig was when they sampled/played a version of Don't Stop Believing by Journey (which by the way must have been the most covered band in the weekend, Gnarls Barkley gave their rendition of the same song andGirl Talk sampled Faithfully for a wrapper.)
When Kanye was done we were all left wanting more. You can't get enough of this guy.

Kanye closes Lolla at the AT&T stage.

All in all this was a great festival. Great bands, great moments. I hope next year's line-up keeps building, but after lining Radiohead, Kanye, NIN and Rage, there are big shoes to fill.

The Talented Mr. Hoffman.

I saw Charlie Wilson's war recently and found it to be a fine movie. It has a good story, good acting and great dialogs. I really enjoyed it. But the high point of the movie is definitely Phillip Seymour Hoffman's acting. Hoffman was not only nominated for an Academy Award that he should have won for this role, but actually is one of the greatest actors of our time, and sadly, many times unappreciated by most.
If you take a look at his career we're talking about a guy that hardly gets a leading role, and when he does, like in Capote, he pulls an amazing job and takes the Oscar home. But even in films like Almost Famous and The Talented Mr. Ripley he helps the entire story playing natural, supporting role characters with brilliance.
I'm going to let the man talk for himself. This scene out of Charlie Wilson's war may well be the finest piece of acting he's ever pulled in his entire career. It's funny, intense and acted with such a natural skill that makes me think that Gust Avrokatos (Hoffman's character) may be one of the best created characters I've seen lately. Enjoy.

* I cannot post the youtube video for some reason so just click here to see the video *

When I grow up I want to be like Jarvis.

Think about it. He's very well read, a great writer, a great songwriter, very stylish, probably has a killer musical taste and knowledge, not to mention hanging with very interesting music and arts people from the UK and the world. I mean, in everyday terms, Jarvis is the man.

He not only lead Pulp, one of my favorite bands and arguably the best band in Britain during the 90's. Yes, the same 90's of Britpop (which Pulp is a huge part of) and the same 90's dominated by bad pop and grunge. Britpop was the best genre out of that decade and Pulp was the best band, so screw you Damon and Gallagher's.

A few weeks ago I was working on an entry about the greatest songwriters of our time and realized that maybe he is my favorite one. As "our time" I mean mid 90's forward. And there's been a lot of great ones, that's why I now finally publish my list.

There's been many great songwriters in the history of music. But only a few of them stand out to influence the newer generations of musicians. And every era of music has one of these virtuosos of songwriting.
Songwriting isn't only about putting nice words into a verse. That's writing.
Songwriting is the ability of mixing the perfect words in the perfect melody. Sometimes the words are awesome, even poetic, but when put in a song they feel forced. Music and poetry are not the same thing. That is why good writers not necessarily make good songwriters and vice versa. I don't see Jack White writing a perfectly well written poem, book or novel (maybe he could), but he sure as hell can write songs, good songs.

In the future, these songwriters will inspire the coming musicians. As they have been inspired by the great songwriters of the past. To name a few of the old lions:

Bob Dylan (arguably the greatest)
John Lennon
Leonard Cohen
Nick Drake
Ray Davies
Morrissey



My list of the best songwriters of our time.

Jarvis Cocker
Elliott Smith
Jack White
Ryan Adams
Connor Oberst
Damon Gough (Badly Drawn Boy)
Thom Yorke


I might have forgotten some names, if I do come up with more I'll post them. Until then, enjoy.

What do you do when you conquer the musical world?

A solid fourth album.



That's what Coldplay did. Yes, I like Coldplay. Is that wrong? Maybe it is to some Pitchfork-loving people who don't wander outside what the Bucktown reviewer tells them (and believe me, I like and respect Pitchfork, but I don't trust them blindly on everything.) They've been throwing stones at Coldplay ever since A Rush of Blood to the Head, and so has all the "hipster/indie" tribe. Why do we feel that when a band starts being successful (in this case, very) they are stolen from our pick-up conversations and we suddenly loose a step of coolness by saying we like a band that everyone likes. What is son wrong with big bands these days?

I love Coldplay, I think they're a serious band, a band that everyone likes, with their own style that maybe they have exploited too much (but who hasn't, not everyone is Lou Reed, and believe even Lou can get pretty boring around the 80's.)
I mean, they make good songs. Commercial? Maybe. Easy to listen? Yes. But, is that so bad? Sometimes we tend to over-analyze music and we don't realize that it's just about enjoying it. If you are doing that it doesn't matter if they went commercial or starve to death, you either like it or you don't. So, don't hate Coldplay for what they are, hate them if you really don't like the way they sound.

Viva la Vida is a good album, maybe not their best, yet good and consistent in most times. I do have to say that Mr. Eno's hand behind the controls is evident, and while adding some The Edge-like guitar reefs every now and then, the band maintains their own sound, the one they have been building up, and perfecting, since Parachutes. For the most part the songs are very Coldplay, except three tracks that run longer than 6 minutes, quite unnecessary and out of their style. But, good try.

I will see them live next Wednesday at the United Center in Chicago. From my two previous experiences with Coldplay live I'm expecting a pretty good show. I'll tell you all about it. Until then, Viva la Vida.

Too many kids (and keys).

A few months back my younger brother wrote to me if I had heard of the Black Kids, which I rapidly took as a typo and assumed he was referring to the Black Keys, whom I obviously know and like a lot. But he wasn't.
Shortly after that e-mail I saw him and he asked me again, emphasizing that he wasn't referring to the Black Keys, but to the CMJ praised band out of Florida that once again, and to prove everyone else that DIY is the way today, became known through the Internet, more specific through MySpace.
The Black Kids, who by now I have heard a lot of, play amazing, simple, fast, guitar-garage rock. And they are unpretentiously good. Really worth listening to. Their debut album is yet to be released (I think this month) and it's called Partie Traumatic. But you can get a taste of their songs on their web or MySpace pages.

Enjoy.

And BTW, not to be confused with the Cool Kids.

The many faces of irresponsibility.

So by now you must have heard about the infamous JC Penney ad called "speed dressing" and that some have dubbed as a cheer to teen sex, which I believe to be an overreaction. Nevertheless, I do agree that a company like JC Penney would never do it deliberately. It just doesn't fit the brand. That's the way things are in this business, it might be good for say, Harvey Nichols, maybe, I don't know. But not JC Penney.

Just to put you in context, just in case you are not familiarized with the ad it won a Silver Lion in Cannes. Then the client stated that it was an unapproved ad and even Saatchi NY (JC Penney's agency) said they had nothing to do with it, even when Saatchi employees, and even Gerry Graf are credited in the ad. Although the entrant company is not Saatchi, it's production company Epoch Films.

Here's the ad and below the credits as they appear in the Cannes Lions 2008 winners.



Type Of Entry: Product & Service
Category: Retail Stores
Title: SPEED DRESSING
Advertiser: JCPENNEY
Product/Service: JCPENNEY RETAIL STORES
Entrant Company, City: EPOCH FILMS, New York
Country: USA
Advertising Agency, City: SAATCHI & SAATCHI, New York
Country: USA
Executive Creative Director: Kerry Keenan
Copywriter: Craig Love
Art Director: Shayne Millington
Agency Producer: Zamile Vilakazi
Account Supervisor: Natasha Williamson
Production Company, City: EPOCH FILMS, New York
Country: USA
Director: Mike Long
D.O.P/Lighting Cameraman: Stephen Blackman
Editor: Joe Guest
Other Credits: Agency Executive Producer: Colin Pearsall / CCO: Gerry Graf

How stupid are we as an industry (and our industry is conformed not only by agencies, but it includes third parties such as, yes, production companies) that in the middle of a credibility crisis from both the public and our clients, we play around with brands just to get an award. Gawker.com makes no mistake when calling advertising an "award-obsessed" industry.

Now the problem is that we let other people play with our brands. Turns out the production company that did this ad has worked with Saatchi many times in the past, working on, yes, JC Penney ads. Probably at some point, either the director or somebody from the creative team had ideas for the brand that could look cool and not be presented to the client. That is, they're meant to be done for the following things: a) Use it in the directors reel/portfolio, b) Use it in the creatives portfolio, c) Use it in the production company's reel, and d) submit it to award shows. The latter carries a certain amount of risk due to client interference. Now there's two ways to deal with this.

1. Since most awards shows require "approval from the client" for every submitted piece, you can go to your client and say in a very political way, "look, we bust our asses here doing everything you ask us to do, and we have this ad that we took the liberty of shooting, it didn't cost you anything, in fact we split the costs with the production company because they really liked the idea, and we want to submit it to award shows".
That client may or may not sign the release, depending on his conscience levels. If the client is honest and smart he'll say "no, stick it up your ass, you're fired, you don't give a damn about the brand, you only care about award shows". Which by the way, is what most clients think about creatives. The other type of client would say "what the hell, I already have you do everything I want, go win your stupid awards, I don't give a damn about them, go kiss each others asses and when you come back I'll have you doing the same retarded stuff that I've always asked for".

2. You can skip the client part, talk to a buddy at the award show or create some fake release form and "ta-dah", you've got yourself a shortlist and most likely a winner, because If you're going through the trouble of creating a ghost ad with no client approval it better be as good as to win something. Then you can have the bad luck these guys had when a little thing called You Tube spread the ad online until it reached some guy in Texas who works for JC Penney and went, WTF?

There's a third way, which is never to do ghost ads. But that's stupid isn't it, how would we get those awards?

Now the speed dressing ad is ranked number one in Creativity's top 20, although they do mention that it's a controversial "supposedly fake" ad. Anyway, this is not the first time Creativity features ghost ads. Here's another example of an ad done by the same production company for the same brand and that never ran. I first saw this on Creativity's top 20 some months ago.



I'm not going to go into the moral issue of the ad, whether the kids are too young or not, or if it directly condones teen sex and if that is bad or not. That is another issue. The one I'm trying to touch here is the fact that the industry can be hugely irresponsible, we play around with brands like it has no consequences.
Whether we like it or not, when we are empowered with brands we are given a huge responsibility. And I'm not saying we should do what the client says. But we have to be honest about out job, which by the way, is not winning awards. I've said it before and I'll say it again, awards should merely be a consequence of great work. Work that's been approved and that's been out there to communicate with people.

Everybody has bad clients and everybody has to get through them, and a campaign that wins awards despite everything is a million times better than the one created as a ghost, no matter what the creative says. It is a very dangerous thing that with the industry being so unpopular there's people gambling with brands. These actions have consequences.

Here are some links to other articles on the matter.


Creativity Online article here.

Ad Age article here.

Gawker.com article

The rebirth of the concept.

Yesterday I wrote a rather aggressive entry about the Cannes 2008 winners. And I stand by it. I just want to add that although there is a concept crisis in traditional media (print, TV, radio...) I have recently been reviewing the work awarded with Titanium and Integrated Lions, which if you don't know what they are, here's an accurate description from the Cannes Lions site:

"As introduced in 2007, one jury will judge two different types of entry - Titanium entries for breakthrough concepts and Integrated entries for state of the art integrated campaign entries.

Integrated Lions and one Integrated Grand Prix will be awarded to the highest standard state of the art Integrated Campaigns using three or more different media.

Titanium remains in its purist form and stands for breakthrough ideas. It’s for work that is provocative and points to a new direction. It’s for work that “causes the industry to stop in its tracks and reconsider the way forward”.

Titanium entries are not restricted to a set number of executions or types of channel and there is no limit to the lengths of execution or the media used.

The jury may award Titanium Lions and a Titanium Grand Prix if appropriate to entries in this section.
You don’t have to specify whether you are submitting to Titanium or Integrated when entering. All campaign entries will be considered by the jury for Integrated Lions or Titanium Lions.

There are no categories in Titanium and Integrated Lions. The idea is everything, whether it’s for a car or toothpaste, telecommunications or charity, big budget or low budget."

It must be added that the Titanium Lion GP is also the award that carries the most points with it. Here's the Lions point chart.

Titanium Grand Prix: 12 points

All other Grand Prix: 10 Points

Titanium Lion: 10 points

Gold Lion/Design Lion/Integrated Lion: 7 Points

Silver Lion: 5 Points

Bronze Lion: 3 points

Shortlist Position: 1 Point

These are clear examples of work directed to real people with engaging messages and innovative thinking. Plus, it creates communication and culture. This is the future, this is what we must be learning and thinking. It doesn't matter if it's a TV ad, a print ad or a web thing, a great idea will live anywhere, and will outlive any media.

Take a look at the GP's and winners in the link below. It's also worth taking a look at the short list and while you cannot see the entries on the Lions page, you can go to each agency's website and look for the case study there.

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE WINNERS.

The death of the concept.

Well, the worst happened. We are now officially living an era in communications in which to communicate has been forgotten and it's all about the cool for coolness sake.
I'm no expert, and I don't want to sound arrogant here, but the supposed best creatives of the world, those who make up the Grand Jury at Cannes, have decided (for all of us) that the Cadbury Gorilla from Fallon London is the best piece of communication made for film this year. The best. Along with Halo 3. There was a tie. But still, the best. Wow. Let me recap here, it's 60 seconds of a Gorilla playing the drums (I think I'm quoting myself from a previous post) to a Phil Collins song (the sarcastically best detail of the ad), and then the tag line says "a glass and a half full of joy". So there's no connection to the product, they are saying nothing. It doesn't communicate anything! And when we've come to a place when we don't do the one thing we are supposed to do in an ad, we are really fucked as an industry. You can be boring as hell, but you always have to communicate something. The best ads are those that communicate, and are fun, entertaining, relevant, memorable and innovative. But the first requirement is to communicate something.
This ad could have been a dancing bear and it wouldn't have mattered. It could have been for Sprite, and still the same. The same happened to a lot of this years print winners, awards are being given out to whatever is cool, no matter what the concept is. Hell, it doesn't matter if it even has a concept. There's clearly a big crisis in advertising these days. And the funniest thing of all is that the only ones not aware of it are those involved in advertising. While we are all padding ourselves in the back with our awards (which by the way no one cares about, not the client, not people), there's a world changing out there by the minute. And I hate to sound so old school in here, but this is about talking to people, not creatives, not advertisers. Communicate messages to people to make brands famous. That's it. Everything else comes extra. Awards are cool, they're actually awesome, and everybody loves them, plus, like it or not, they might be the only way to measure creativity. I agree to all that, but awards should be part of the process and not the end of it. I hate to hear "this agency is client driven... Oh, these guys are really creative driven... Such and such agency is strategy driven..." Bullshit. Who is consumer driven? I hate that word, let's say, people driven? Who cares about not what the client says, not what award shows say, but what people really like and want. And it's not about giving them the power or doing entirely what they say, we're supposed to be the experts here, but it's about stopping to patronize them and begin an engaging communication process.

These will illustrate my point better.

Inspiration, anyone?
by geertdesager

The saddest thing of all is to see so many agencies doing ghost ads to win awards. And the worst thing is that there's people who think that this is fair and OK. I just had a recent discussion about this with a co-worker and they said that it was the only way of getting around the client, and the only way of doing good creative work. If this is the way the future generations of the business think we're in deep shit. It's an ethical thing, but the problem is that no one seems to think they are wrong when producing them, but everyone thinks they're wrong when inquired about their ethical nature. Sad thing is, big agencies, small agencies, good and bad and even the best do ghost ads. There's a handful of agencies that believe that the nature of this business is to communicate to people, and if a piece is not created for that purpose then there's no reason for it to live. Even if the client is stupid and the idea was the best one ever, they won't do it. Everyone deals with bad clients, everyone has to get around them. So the problem is that when in an award show a ghost ad wins, an ad that didn't have to go through every filter of the process, it's leaving out other ads that had to, and those have more merit. Ghost ads are the easy way out. If every agency did them, then we'd all have tons of awards. But that's not the point, is it?

The bottom line is we have to wake up as an industry. It's not that there is a creative crisis these days, it's that we're blind. There's more tools towards creativity now more than ever, more ways to communicate, and I really have to say that most of the web and interactive work awarded these days is really good, awesome in some cases. We only have to open our eyes and stop being so arrogant and self indulgent. We have to stop talking to ourselves and start connecting with people. Stop thinking that a complicated print ad is cool and arty because "you have to really work it to get it". This is not art. Disappointing to many but it's the truth. This is communication, and when art may be included into it, great. But communicating is more important. Let's see how long it takes us to wake up as an industry because we've been asleep for a while.

Nick Drake is alive.

He reincarnated in the form of Alexi Murdoch, a Scottish resident of LA who I recently discovered by way of Pandora.

He has a similar voice and melancholy to Nick Drake, it's worth giving it a try. If you want to hear really really sad music.

Oh, Woody.

I've always been a big fan of Woody Allen. I may not be a die hard fan, but I consider him one of my favorite directors, I like his style. And when it comes to Woody Allen there's no middle line, there's either people who love him or people who hate him.
Annie Hall and Manhattan may well be amongst my favorite movies, I even like his 90's era, like Deconstructing Harry, even Small Time Crooks made me laugh. And I've approved his latest movies like Melinda and Melinda, Match Point (which I think is one of Allen's best movies ever) and Scoop.
Now, I recently saw Cassandra's Dream, last year's movie starring Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell, and I have to say that it has been one of the worst movies I've seen lately. The plot os so slow and irrelevant, it even makes the actors bad, a really strange thing about Allen, who can make almost anyone perform well. I had to finish the movie because I always like to see if anything happens, it never did. My wife left me alone with the movie about halfway through it.
Just a piece of advice if you were thinking about seeing it, don't. Or do and prove me wrong.

Not much has changed. From Mr. Whipple to Papa Johns.

A few days ago we served as company to our friend Charles (AKA 'chuckles') as he ventured in a local bar's open stage night in which he performed a couple of songs plus doing a small stand-up comedy set. In the latter, 'chuckles' was talking about how the Papa John's pizza commercials always star the company's owner, founder and CEO (I would guess he is Papa John), and at the end of every ad he says "better ingredients, better pizza, Papa Johns".
Charles was so right. And I was sitting there thinking of all the times I had been annoyed by those commercials. Every time I was sitting in my couch thinking 'why do we need to see this guy? Why does he have to tell me anything? Who is he? I care about the pizza, not the CEO of the company. They make pizza, not insurance. So, why is this guy making the ad better? How, in their minds, can they think that by starring the company's president they will sell more pizzas? Why do I need an asshole telling me that they have better ingredients? If they do, don't I find that by myself when I order the pizza?

But at the bar, I found myself alone. Nobody seemed to care.

Maybe Luke Sullivan was the only one who found Mr. Whipple so obnoxious. Hell, maybe someone even liked Mr. Whipple.
And here's the big dilemma, the stuff that we find so annoying, all that we think shouldn't have been even thought of at an office, the stuff we say 'how can they pay someone to do that?'. That stuff, is being liked by people. And that's scary. It's scary that people like it as much as it's scary that there is a creative director out there approving this shit, and of course, clients who are buying it.
I guess that even though we find ourselves alone in our interests and in what we think is good and exciting work, we must keep pushing towards more quality in the concepts of advertising, and into a world where CEO's don't have to tell people what their product is like, but that we can show it to them in a cool engaging way. People may still not care, maybe they won't notice it. But we'll be happier. And less annoyed.

The Cadbury Gorilla

What is all the fuzz about with the Cadbury Gorilla? When I first saw it about 8 months ago I thought it was very stupid. Then people began talking about it, blogs were being written, Creativity and other important publications were writing articles on it, and the I thought maybe I was stupid. But no. I couldn't be. It's only a fucking gorilla playing the drums. Oh yeah, and then it announces chocolates. At least I'll give them the sense of humor for picking the song.

So then I thought it was me who never got it, since I realized that the commercial won important prizes like the ANDY's, London, and now it won a gold CLIO. That pretty much lines it up for a metal prize in Cannes. Wow. But no, it wasn't me, I saw it again, and again and this is what I came up with.

It's a gorilla playing the drums trying to sell chocolates.

Alright, so advertising doesn't have to be all 50's style sell-the-product and talk about all the benefits for 60 seconds. I agree. But say something for God's sake. You have a brand, who is trying to sell chocolates, and they spend their air time and money on something like this? I just don't buy it.
Maybe it's me, maybe I'm too ignorant, maybe I don't know shit. But I'll dare to make a judgment by saying that those who have awarded this commercial or those "we're very creative" types who love it don't even know why they do it. "Because it's cool" they say. Cool? What's cool? Is this what we have come to? What is it doing for the brand? What is it doing for a consumer? Its' not even funny! I understand that there can be ads that just aware about the product and merely entertain, but at least they try to say something. How is a fucking gorilla helping the product?

I might sound old school. But this is another case of advertising done for advertisers. It's only for us nerds in blogs and judges in award show to see and understand. Real people, yes, the same ones who don't give a damn about advertising or how artsy and creative we think we might be, those people, they don't get it, they don't like it. And, sometimes sadly, they are the ultimate judges of out work.

Anyway, if you still doubt my intelligence, please see the ad for yourself. Don't be deceived, it might pull a smile off at first, specially when the animal starts playing the drums. But then, it's all vacuum.

No, you don't have to hate advertising.

I've been hearing lately this quote that people within the business like to say, "you have to hate advertising to truly love it." Besides it lacking any sense it would be stupid for anyone in the business to think that way.
Earlier this semester we were sitting at a breakout session with Brandcenter board members. Important advertising people. And we are going around the room introducing ourselves and we each said why we are in advertising. Then a guy blurts out "well, I first have to say I hate advertising...", I'm sitting there thinking what a pretentious comment. Think about it, do you really hate what you'll be devoting your career to, do you really hate what you paid a large amount of money to go into grad school and learn?
To my surprise, this guy is not the only one who thinks that way, I've seen this motto in many blogs, and people think they are so cool and so interesting by thinking so. I will just say that it's very pretentious and makes you sound stupid.
We are not in this to save the world, or make art or find the answer to the worlds problems, although some of these may come as consequences. We are here to make brands famous and talk to people about them.

Airlines.

Technology is making our life simpler. Everything in our lives seems to be easier. Think about it, technology is about comfort. You don't carry 200 CD's anymore, you carry an iPod. You don't have to go to the supermarket, you shop online.
The world seems to be turning into a more convenient and comfortable place. Everything is getting easier, except traveling.
My recent travel experiences have just confirmed my theory that while everything else in our lives tends to be easier, air travel tends to be more and more complicated.
It's not only the fact of having to arrive at the airport hours before your flight because of the lines, the security checks, in which is not only uncomfortable but invidious, the fact that you have to almost strip or that nothing can be carried on board anymore. But also the fact that airlines keep making travel more expensive and less convenient.
Most airlines don't even give you a meal anymore, they charge for it. And, are tickets getting any cheaper? No. You know how much an airlines saves just by cutting costs for food?
And now three airlines, as of May 5, have included the genius policy of charging for the second checked bag. So now if you want to take a second piece of luggage you will be charged 25 dollars for it. That is, of course, plus any heavy or size extra charges.
So while airlines keep cutting costs, giving us less and making our experience worse, we keep paying the same, or even more for air tickets.
I guess we'd have to call for a "no travel day", would it be possible? I don't really think so. They can't be fought, and that's the worst of it all. Conclusion, airlines are "the man", but we trust them with our lives.

What's wrong with the Oscars?

Sorry, rhetorical question. I know the Academy Awards were like three weeks ago (or longer) and all the buzz is gone. But I'm just catching up with all the nominated movies I hadn't seen.
I saw "Into The Wild" yesterday, and I know it wasn't nominated for anything, and I'm not saying it should have, although I really enjoyed the movie. What shocked me though, was to remember the songs nominated for Best Original Song. There were three super corny horrible songs from "Enchanted", one song from "August Rush" which I honestly don't remember, and the song from "Once", that is not half bad, at least it was written by two very humble for-the-love-of-the-art musicians, who made a movie with two handycams, acted in it, wrote the song, sang it, and ultimately took the Oscar home.
But then I see "Into the Wild" and I realize what an amazing soundtrack Eddie Vedder co wrote and interpreted for the movie. And just to make things clear here, it's not just because this is Eddie Vedder we are talking about. Sometimes, people like soundtracks or scores by default just because they're written by a good musician. Sometimes they are good, other time they are not. And I'm not even that big a Pearl Jam fan. I mean, I like the old usual stuff, I saw them live once, which by the way was awesome, but that's it. I haven't really paid much attention to their last two albums. Anyway, I think grunge is dead, but that's the subject of a future entry.
Back to my point, regardless of who Eddie Vedder is and what he has done with his band, the outcome of the songs composed for "Into the Wild" is excellent. But when a bunch of kiss ass Academy members get together to vote music, (who said they know about music anyway, what do this guys know everything? It passes completely unnoticed.
While I listened to the songs during the movie, I realized that they were far better than anything else from the past year. This is yet another reason not to trust the Oscars. I take them as a reference and let's be honest here, I can't stop watching them, otherwise, what would I bitch about afterwards?

Is Microsoft finally fighting back?

I just found out that Microsoft hired Crispin, Porter + Bogusky to be their new agency. Apparently the objective is to portray Microsoft as a cool brand, opposed to the way Apple has characterized ¨PC¨in their "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" campaign.

Desperate measure from Microsoft that despite of being a much bigger company than Apple, they have never achieved the loyalty and coolness the latter brand inspires.

Anyway, it'll be really interesting to see what can Crispin come up with, and we might expect a good advertising war here, from two excellent agencies, TBWA/Chiat/Day LA (via Media Arts Lab), and obviously Crispin.

Can they bring a brand with no soul to life? We'll see.

Click here to see the article on Ad Age.

Gigs

Heres is my complete list for gigs I must see before I die.

1. Radiohead
2. David Bowie
3. Bjork
4. New Order
5. Led Zeppelin
6. Belle & Sebastian

Here are some others I want to see, but are not yet a "must".

- Arcade Fire
- Cat Power
- My Morning Jacket
- Phoenix
- Bright Eyes


Here's some that were on the list, but I've had a chance to see.

- Bob Dylan
- Morrissey
- Paul McCartney
- Roger Waters
- Rolling Stones
- U2 (5 times)
- Depeche Mode
- The Cure
- Pearl Jam

Radiohead is coming to NoVa.

I was recently making a list of the artists/bands I must see before I die. Radiohead was on top of that list. Two days ago I bought tickets for their May 11 show outside DC.
Why is Radiohead the number one on that list? Because I consider Radiohead the most important band in terms of their contribution and influence on music, from the last years. Yes, there's Grunge and Nirvana, yes there's Britpop, yes there's rock's revival in the early 00's with the "The" bands (The Strokes, The Vines, The Hives, The Yeah Yeah Yeahs... you get it.) But Radiohead has been an inspiration in some form or another to all the before mentioned.

I have to recognize they are not an easy-to-digest band. Some people have even told me that they've found it difficult to get into Radiohead. But their greatness is there, even though not being the mainstreams' favorite, they have influenced every band that has been inside or outside the mainstream since the early 90's.

But, if your not that into them or haven't found a way, there is hope. Here's the way to start out on Radiohead, and then continue going until you find that you've become a fan.

1. The Bends: This is Radioheads' best album. Everyone will say otherwise and even say OK Computer is one of the best albums ever (some critics and magazines have even named it THE best, above Sgt. Peppers and others.) But reality is, The Bends has never been topped. The band has evolved and changed, but this album remains as their greatest. The funny thing is, it's their easiest. So if you get through this one, and you will, you're on the right track.

2. OK Computer: A piece of art. A "must have". It's not as easy as The Bends, but in terms of production values it might be one of the best produced albums ever, courtesy of Nigel Godrich. This is the album that told the world "we're doing something different".

3. In Rainbows: Yes, from their two most famous, go to the new one. It's great and lighter than the ones I'll mention next.

4. Hail to the Thief: A little underrated, but still a great work.

5. Amnesiac & Kid A: I'm counting these as one because they are similar in some ways. Both are tough, weird, but include some great tracks and moments. These are the two albums for true fans, that's why they are at the bottom of the list.

NOTE: I'm not listing Pablo Honey, mainly because it's the least Radiohead album of all. Forget about Creep, they hate it, don't play it live and consider it the biggest mistake in their career.

What's new.

I was talking to a friend today about how I've been kind of falling behind on new music in the last months. Since I got in the Adcenter (now Brandcenter), I've had little to no time to really research new music. Yes I still check Pitchfork and CMJ like twice a week, but I'm not in the look for new bands as I was before coming to Richmond. Maybe that explains why for the first time in years I wasn't able to come up with a best of the year list for 2007.
That said, I hear Vampire Weekend is coming up big now. I just started listening to them so I don't have a veredict yet. But I found this in Pitchfork today: Guest List is a section they do where every week a different artist or band is requested to fill an interesting questionnaire. Vampire Weekend is this week's band. Let's see what this New Yorkers have to say.

Click here to go to the article.

By the way, "In Rainbows" by Radiohead was my 2007 top album.

Dead Hard Drives and Pulp music.

This morning I was informed that my computer's hard drive is dead, or at least dying. There is a big possibility that I might loose all my data. And what hurts me the most is the fact of loosing my 6,000 song music library. Too much technology trusting. I'm pissed and I can't think.
The worst part is that the last time I downloaded songs to my iPod I decided not to download my whole library so that means that I don't have my songs backed up anywhere. So my iPod right now has around 1,000 songs. The ones that made it.
One of those playlists is one by Pulp, one of my favorite bands and definitely one of the biggest bands of the so called 90's movement, Brit Pop. That means I've been listening to them a lot lately, it's almost as if they've helped me through this whole crisis.
From many conversations I've had with peers, there's a lot of people that don't know Pulp, either too well or at all. So here it is, the ultimate Pulp playlist, a good way to start liking this great band. Enjoy.

- Common People
- Do you remember the first time?
- Pink Glove
- Sylvia
- Joyriders
- Something Changed
- Babies
- Lipgloss
- Help the Aged
- Underwear
- Bar Italia
- Razzmatazz
- Like A Friend
- Disco 2000
- Happy Endings
- This Is Hardcore.

This should get you started. By the way, you'll commonly see the album "Different Class" listed as Pulps' best, or even in some "best albums of..." lists. Don't believe that, their best album is by far "His n' Hers".

The other 80's

It's MLK day. After having breakfast I sat down to work for a while on some ad concepts. Sometimes when I get stuck I turn the TV on to clear my mind or just to have some noise around and then keep working. This morning I caught a VH1 Classic special called "The Best 100 Songs of the 80's". It was bullshit! George Michael, Nena, Falco? Come on! The people doing the reviews on the show were like people taken from The E! True Hollywood Story. A few good music critics participate.
Most people remember the 80's for one-hit wonders and that horrible sub/genre mistakenly labeled as "glam".
What the mainstream will never tell you about the 80's is that it was one of the most exciting eras of music. The so overused term "indie" was born back then. Except they didn't have a name for it so it was just "alternative music".
Yes, a lot of great songs from that time came from the mainstream, but this VH1 list forgot that in the UK Manchester was going on, and punk, and New York, and the CBGB. Todays music has more influence from the 80's than from any other era of music. That's why the 80's are so important, even though people only remember the worst part of it.

My Best Songs of the 80's List.
Songs are listed in no particular order.
- Hong Kong Gardens - Siouxie and the Banshees
- Killing an Arab - The Cure
- How Soon is Now? - The Smiths
- Love Will Tear Us Apart - Joy Division
- Age of Consent - New Order
- 24 Hour Party People - Happy Mondays
- Ceremony - Joy Division
- Blister in the Sun - The Violent Femmes
- This is the modern world - The Jam
- London Calling - The Clash
- It's the end of the world as we know it - REM
- Hounds of Love - Kate Bush
- Teenage Kicks - The Undertones
- Ever Fallen in Love? - The Buzzcocks
- Melt with you - Modern English
- Heart of Glass - Blondie
- Purple Rain - Prince
- The Killing Monn - Echo & The Bunnymen
- I Am The Resurrection - The Stone Roses
- Head On - The Jesus and Mary Chain
- Bad - U2
- Billy Jean - Michael Jackson
- Back on the chain gang - The Pretenders
- Teen Age Riot - Sonic Youth
- Wave of Mutilation - The Pixies
- Once in a lifetime - The Talkingheads
- A New England - Billy Bragg
- Boys Don't Cry - The Cure
- I Want Candy - Bow Wow Wow
- Jane Says - Jane's Addiction
- She Bangs the Drums - The Stone Roses
- Fight For Your Right To Party - The Beastie Boys
- Pretty In Pink - The Psychadelic Furs
- Where the Streets Have No Name - U2
- I Melt With You - Modern English
- Synchronicity II - The Police
- The KKK Took My Baby Away - The Ramones
- Need You Tonight - INXS
- Modern Love - David Bowie
- Road Runner - The Modern Lovers

These are not all the great songs of the 80's, there's a lot more songs I like, but this is a pretty decent playlist. If I had my way, I would have put the entire Smiths discography.

Meet the Brandcenter

It happened. The formerly known as VCU Adcenter has now officially changed it's name to VCU Brandcenter. And we are a part of it. There has been a lot of talk about the name and building change, about what it means. I think all changes are for a reason. And most changes are good. I was telling one of my classmates this morning that maybe we don't experience the change as hard as other people due to the fact that we only spent 15 weeks in the old one. And we are young (hell yeah), it's easier to adapt. That said, I'm thrilled. Maybe the functionality of the place still has to be proved, and it will, and I'm sure it'll come good. But it definitely feels like the place for our kind of school. It feels like an agency. It has a creative environment. The previous building was old, small and felt like some random office space that was once a cool place to start an ad school, 13 years ago. That doesn't mean we didn't have memorable times in there, and there will be some things we will miss. There's nostalgia. But there is also a feeling of excitement towards the new era. Our class (2009) will spend the next 18 months in there. By the time we graduate 80% of what we'll remember will be inside these walls. I'm happy to be back in Richmond, start another thrilling semester, and be able to do it in a place like this.