Erm.

Well, it's not exactly 'hilarious' and it uses a couple of 100% VO talents that scream out 'Aussie radio ad.'

And 'custom number plates?'

Could be a lot better.

love your work jimmy & carls

Carly and James rule! We love them because they are good!

They are the sex symbols of the new generation of creatives. Come on creatives!

They make stuff that is not creative - um, creative!

Knarly and Orrsome you are gnarly and awesome.... congrats guys!!

Me love it long time.

Good on ya Jimmy & Carls

If this is the standard of entries it's time to think of another way to get creatives interested in radio.

I should refer to the judges comment....

“In this age of Facebook, MySpace, customised ring tones and every kind of way to force your personality on other people, the idea that 'the real you' isn't always fit for public consumption was not only totally refreshing, but downright funny."

Since when is the bloke in a dress so refreshing? Or funny? A great opportunity to do something really great and it's squandered.

The first post is partially right. Let's go back to the judge for some insight shall we....

"The voices sound authentic and 'live', which is still a refreshing break from the over-produced sound of most radio voice-overs"

Sorry mate but authentic voices come from authentic writing and this aint it. It's about time lame writers stopped blaming the talent and production for ads that sound like the first idea that popped into the writers head. As for the comment

"not only because it contains a great new thought for a challenging brief, but each spot was as good as the next"

Wrong again. Each spot was the same as the next.

I'm sorry to be so negative but this is really wrong. Almost as silly as the super sonic tone!!! Woof.

Sean, your ultrasonic yelping has woken me like a flea dancing around under my collar. Or perhaps that's a swarm of bees?

Yes, you hit the nail on the head re the Sirens judging criteria and ruthlessly exposed its inadequacies. I mean, the only criteria for being a Siren judge is winning the previous round. Not exactly a good system, or one that promotes higher creative standards.

And while I'm at it, you're right on another count - it seems to be recently that ads are being praised because of the novel 'approach' taken (dog whistle springs to mind), rather than the writing and production. I mean, unless we're told, who really knows or cares if there's an ultrasonic frequency or that people were actually prank called or not? The consumer certainly doesn't. It's an interesting aside at best.

I support the concept of the Sirens, but i fear that unless the judging is overhauled, it'll go to the dogs. Woof to you Sean.

I've judged Sirens, and from my perspective at least, the tough thing is that some months, there just isn't a really good entry to choose from, and in other months, there's plenty of good stuff. But you still have to pick a winner.

Like any system that has monthly or quarterly winners, sometimes the winner is going to be a bit underwhelming. But at the end of the year, when they hand out the metal, there's always enough good stuff to go 'round.

If you don't rate this month's winner, don't automatically assume the judges got it wrong. Maybe they really did pick the best of the bunch.

The inadequacies of the judging was highlighted two years ago when the Boags St George campaign (rightfully) won overall best campaign despite not winning its round. If that wasn't an eye opener, I don't know what is. Saying that, if the right ads end up winning in the end, it can't be that bad.

Erm Sean,

You make it sound like you could have scooped the pool with an entry into the Sirens that would have knocked us flat with its cleverness.

So where was it?

A comp is only as good as the standard of the entries. So if there's something out there better, let's see it next month.

Fair call Curious. Problem is I'm not a writer. I'm in production & so don't enter. I'm one of the poor bastards who has to polish the proverbial turd.....regularly.