Bray: Let’s stop the anonymous slagging
Peter Bray, GM and director of digital at The Brand Shop, Sydney believes every agency does some great and some average work to various degrees; “But we all try to do work that we are proud of. That’s why we sometimesput work out there to be scrutinized. However, this doesn’t then givepeople a green light to savage it.”
There are very few ads that I vehemently dislike. There are also very few ads that I really love. But most ads I see on Campaign Brief and other blogs I can usually take something from, whether it is information about the brand, a bit of inspiration or a “watch out”. I’m open to learning as much as I can from others, and encourage those around me to do the same.
My basic assumption, however, is that because an ad has been producedby a professional agency, and had the approval from the client, thenthe end result must be doing something right. Therefore, withoutknowing the practical rationale behind the ad, for me to have a strongopinion about whether it is great advertising would be kind ofarrogant. There is a reason that awards shows ask for information aboutwhy an ad was created: they are rarely judged on end product alone.
So as someone who enjoys watching the work that our industry creates, Iam stunned at the level of vitriol stemming from some people’s commentsin both this blog and others. I don’t know whether it is something thatis peculiar to advertising, but certainly there is a far higher levelof support for other people’s work in the purely digital agency worldthan there is in the “integrated” environment.
For some reason, the ad industry seems to have a disproportionatenumber of people that seem to enjoy putting down other people’s work.However, I am hoping that it isn’t that there are more negative people,it may just be that there are more negative people that feel the needto be heard.
Many commenters are not simply critiquing work, but often attackingindividuals, agencies and agency groups. Shallow, anonymous comments,like schoolboys in the yard trying to outdo each other. Critique servesa purpose, but most of what is served up is just plain tripe.
Whether it is instigated by envy or personal issues I don’t know, butso much work gets savaged like the fate of the earth depends on it.Advertising as a profession is an indulgence. There are far moreimportant things in life. Sometimes we come across an idea that canchange society, but this is the exception not the rule. That’s not tosay we should be passionate. I would love to see far more passion, butmisdirected passion ends only in disappointment and angst.
The net effect of vehemently negative comments isn’t that the agency inquestion looks bad, as we all know how much gravitas anonymous commentshave. It just makes the industry in general look like a joke, anddiscourages many people from entering such an at times snarkyprofession.
Judging from the comments on various blog sites, there are a lot ofpeople who verge on obsessive when it comes to following industry news.I just don’t get why people would feel the need to attack any work thatis hitting the industry press, let alone the agency. To say that thereare good and bad agency brands is to trivialize what makes up anagency. Every agency does some great and some average work to variousdegrees. But we all try to do work that we are proud of. That’s why wesometimes put work out there to be scrutinized. However, this doesn’tthen give people a green light to savage it. But some people’s realcharacters tend to shine through.
To think that we are able to judge the end work on the basis of a pressrelease or the creative seems plain crazy to me. As outsiders, what docommenters know about the process that was involved in creating thework? Did they see the brief? No. Did they see the business strategy?No. Did they know the personalities involved? No.
In this climate, actually producing work that is aired publicly in anychannel and has been approved by clients should be applauded. Manypeople want to do award winning work, but at the end of the day allthat matter is whether the work works, and whether the client happy.
Our opinions on production values, creativity etc are just that, and everyone knows the saying about opinions.
If I was a client and I knew that people in my agency were even capableof writing some of the comments we see, I would run a mile. And assomeone heading up an agency, those same commenters would be welcome toleave by the nearest exit. At the end of the day, everyone is trying todo his or her best. And even if you may think someone’s best isn’t goodenough, what does slamming them or their work really achieve?
I am a firm believer that at the end of the day, nice guys win.Critique work fervently, but do it in a way that challenges your ownmethod of analysis, which in turn hopefully improves your work as wellas theirs.
Build, don’t destroy.
58 Comments
Too long. Did not read.
agreed, + started using vehemently, wtf? as a gen Y’er, did not read too.
We gave up after noticing the diatribe went for longer than one paragraph.
Let’s summarise: commenting anonymously breeds an unhealthy negative attitude to agencies PRing their work.
See, wasn’t that hard was it?
Why are the other logo’s photoshopped out of this picture?? Looks different to the one on Mumbrella.
http://mumbrella.com.au/lets-stop-the-anonymous-vitriol-32596
Anyway- Peter needs to harden up a bit.
What a coward. Wearing a dark suit like that so we can’t recognise his body.
Oh god, if I took to heart what’s been said on here about me I would have topped myself long ago.
For people to read something that long it needs to be interesting. Something rewarding, a journey, up & downs.
This website is by assholes for assholes.
Thats why we don’t bother anymore.
Back in your box Peter.
Sorry.
Yay for everything!
he’s got a point…
I’ll give him a wrap just for being honest here. He’s sticking up for all the agencies that get hammered by people hiding behind their computers and the anonymous tag.
r.e.s.p.e.c.t for peter.
You ain’t no one until you’ve been ripped to shreds on the Brief.
My finest hour!
You want to take that away from us?
I guess it’s just easier to destroy than create.
And I guess that’s what I like about it.
Could’ve worn a clean suit.
Oh, and ‘Advertising as a profession is an indulgence. There are far more important things in life.’
Way to shit on your own industry. Awesome.
The logic behind this appears to be that because it’s hard to get work up we should all praise anything that does.
“In this climate, actually producing work that is aired publicly in any channel and has been approved by clients should be applauded.”
We work in a frustrating environment and getting work up is hard, granted, but this not a reason to approve of everything that does make it out the door. It is however the reason people can be hard on stuff that’s presented to the industry.
We all know how infrequent the chance to do good work can be so we look poorly on work that squanders those chances and then asks for approval. If a client kills the idea, don’t show the mangled remains and ask for a treat.
Creatives have their work rejected everyday, that’s part of the job description. These pleas for consideration of the client’s needs, the climate, the marketplace, the fact that ‘it will stand out’ before passing judgment on the idea behind it, are most often made by people who do not live and die by the quality of their ideas. Instead, they get (well) paid for killing ideas on the basis of client concerns. That’s their job, not ours.
So, if something turns up that has been weakened to the point of dishwater by rationalizing cowardice, it’s our turn to set the standard to remind you what the point of good ideas is. They need to be good.
“For some reason, the ad industry seems to have a disproportionate number of people that seem to enjoy putting down other people’s work.”
They’re called Suits & Clients.
If you don’t like the game, find another playground.
xxoo
Line 9,230,084,473:
‘happy’ should read ‘crappy’.
“But we all try to do work that we are proud of.” That’s a lie. Only a few of us do.
Nice lean towards logo, mona lisa smile and crossed arm attitude. But speech was, well….
Sorry Peter, it’s sooo been done…
http://www.campaignbrief.com/2010/05/2010-madc-call-for-entries-now.html
And more succinctly too.
The truth is, we work in an industry where 99% of what we create gets rejected.
Some we reject ourselves, some is rejected by our peers, some by our clients. Rarely does anything get produced that is exactly the way the creator initially intended. That’s not an excuse for bad work, it’s an explanation of what happens to all of us.
We should also keep in mind that a lot of what we create almost certainly deserves to be rejected for one reason or another.
The work that is “discussed” on this blog is rarely the mundane or just average stuff that’s churned out on mundane or average accounts, it’s usually high profile stuff. When you work on that stuff, you’re getting a great opportunity. With it comes the chance of glory or death by a thousand negative comments.
The truth is, most of the comments here are inane. That’s life. That’s our industry. Enjoy it. You could be holding a Stop/Go sign for VicRoads.
Advertising isn’t indulgent. Bad advertising is.
If you’re going to interrupt someone’s day with an ad, it’s a trade-off. They sit through our brand message and we make them laugh or entertain them along the way. Ads that don’t repay viewing are self-indulgent and make people hate our industry.
So it’s simple. We know self-indulgent advertising exists, just don’t submit it to these blogs expecting a pat on the back for helping to erode any good will that still exists towards the industry.
‘Advertising as a profession is an indulgence. There are far more important things in life.’
That’s crap.
Advertising is an essential part of the private enterprise system that has brought so much prosperity to the modern world. Without mass communication there could be no mass production, and mass production is the key to low prices and product accessibility across wide income streams.
Yes, there are more important things in life: your family, your friends. But an indulgence? Try having a free, democratic, competitive economy without it.
12.44 said:
“But we all try to do work that we are proud of.” That’s a lie. Only a few of us do.
And those few would include…you?
Hey, if you work in advertising, you learn to be flexible. Otherwise you don’t work in advertising for long. So you fight the winnable battles. The rest of the time, you do your best. It might not be great work, but we try to make it professional and we try to do something that works, that sells stuff.
So we DO all try to do good work. Even when we compromise, we try to do the best we can with the cards we’re dealt on any particular job. Sometimes we succeed, sometimes wed don’t.
Or are you actually believe that some people intentionally do bad work?
(You see, this is why it’s important to stay anonymous. The moron who made that comment might be my CD.)
Stop complaining and start doing some great ads.
‘My basic assumption, however, is that because an ad has been produced by a professional agency, and had the approval from the client, then the end result must be doing something right.’
There’s so much wrong with that statement it’s hard to know where to start, so I’ll just leave it at this – you don’t make ads for clients, nor do you make them for your own agency’s pleasure. You make them to reach an audience, and they will decide if it flies or not.
It’s astounding how frequently senior industry people are overcome by the sheer importance of themselves.
I agree with Peter.
You see I work in an agency which previews all of its work to agency staff before the ads go to air.
Sometimes a planner stands up and talks for 20 mins about the strategy behind the TVC that’s about to be shown and research results etc. After he’s done they play the ad.
The ads which are preceded by this planner’s introduction are always boring and void of any idea, but somehow the preamble does make them seem a little better.
So I propose that every 30 second ad that goes to air must be preceded by a 20 minute explanation.
This will not only make all ads seem slightly better, but it will allow the viewers to truly understand the ad and all the thinking behind it.
2:15 pm you’re on the right track but I think also that the creatives who came up with it, and the shirt tailers who will claim credit if it becomes famous should also give their rationale. If it’s TV lets have the catering people tell their story too. After all they are the ones who really matter at a shott. Then maybe those morons who watch the advertising might realise the sacrifices advertising people make to bring them their art..
12:14 & 1:21 – advertising is the most important thing in your lives huh? You two would make a really cute, vapid couple. Swap numbers!
@2.37
I’d love to see that. And I reckon it’s an idea that would go down really well in research too.
Should we book a room?
been done already. Only marginally worse.
http://thebrandshop.ca/
3.00, did you actually read my comment before making yours?
Of course advertising isn’t the most important thing in my life, or anyone else’s life.
But it is a vital part of how our economy works. The free market doesn’t work without a free exchange of ideas and open communication – which is what advertising is.
An indulgence is having a big dessert after a big meal. But advertising is part of the food chain that helps keep the economy working – and everyone eating.
Peter, you’ve got your target market wrong. You need to be speaking with the people at Campaign Brief who authorise the so called slagging off comments. Perhaps you can ask them what happened to the rule about not posting negative comments in regards to new work.
Sorry, 9.02, but you can’t have an open forum that bans negative comments.
That’s a bit like the Greens idea (agreed to by Labor) or a Parliamentary forum on Carbon pricing – they want that to be open too, but only people who agree with them 100% will be allowed to attend.
All you get with that kind of forum is a lovefest, with everyone furiously agreeing with everyone else.
And as General George Patton said: “if everyone is thinking the same way, then someone’s not thinking.”
Of course, pointless insults and swearing should be deleted, but negative opinions are what make the world go round.
“In this climate, actually producing work that is aired publicly in any channel and has been approved by clients should be applauded.”
Ummm, no it shouldn’t.
If you want to see what a blog populated by named posters is like, check out Brand Republic in the UK. Do it quite late at night. When you’re having trouble getting off to sleep.
Advertising is an indulgence? Pete, right there explains why you guys never have anever will nail it. Advertising is a responsibility and a priveliage. The work you should aspire to doing is the stuff that wins the strategic, creative and effectiveness accolades. Anything short of that is just a waste of money and just deserves a ‘please try harder’. Your SAFCOL stuff was a classic example of just pure laziness and apart from the blog it’s invisible work. And don’t give me any crap about well ‘the mums blah blah blah’. Did it win an Effie at the very least? No? Wake up and get serious about advertising Peter. There is a definite art to persuasion. Where’s the impact in your ads? You know, the bit that makes people want to watch your stuff? Where’s the relevance? The brutal truth is that ad agencies like yours give us election results like we just had. You spend too much time pandering to a client. People ‘want’ to be lead. If you’re writing ads purely for clients rather than writing to your audience then you’ll continue to get slammed on this blog. The work that you guys do can be written and sold in a day. Get serious Peter. Great work takes time. (But that hurts your margins doesn’t it Peter.) I’m guessing all of your briefs have two to three weeks in the planning/account service department and a week in the creative department. And you guys for the most part are 5 days a week and leave the office for work life balance. I can see how you think it’s an indulgence. You get paid good money to do a half hearted, half arsed job. If you don’t like what I’m saying then do something to change your agency’s ways. Try hiring people that actually believe in what they do and work hard to really connect with an audience. It’s not rocket surgery you just have to have good solid intentions. Advertising is hard fucking work!
I wonder if you would be saying the same if your work was any good?
Safcol anyone?
Hey 10:09,
I believe you can have a forum based on constructive criticism without all the unnecessary negativity and slagging off from second-rate creatives with nothing better to do with their time. But don’t let me stop you from posting your negative opinions if that’s what makes your world go ’round.
Can you 10:29? Can you propose how this imaginary forum of yours will ensure only top-shelf creatives get to say constructive things? If the answer is for everyone to register and use their real names then I think you’ll find the debate will be reduced to the level Peter is advocating, “Ooh, you made an ad! Congratulations. Hurrahs for all!”
Hey 10:43,
Your comments don’t warrant a response. You really need to get back to your job hunting…good luck!
Pretty poor effort 10:29 from someone who wants to raise the standard of debate.
Why bother inferring that I’m unemployed? Why not just go with, “nyah nyah, you are smelly!”
What I love about working in this industry is that you get to work with and meet brilliant, intelligent and creative people.
But you wouldn’t know it from reading some of the comments that go on these blogs. If any outsider reads these blogs (and lets face it, there’s a growing interest in our industry) we’d come across as a bunch of whining, abusive wankers.
I think is criticism is great! I also think anonymity is fine – if it’s not abused. What isn’t necessary are personal attacks and abusive critiques. I think we’re all better than that and it isn’t truly reflective of who we are as an industry. Let’s try to keep it classy guys, let’s stop abusing anonymity as an opportunity to start slagging matches.
Peter, to be honest, I don’t think your agency’s work should be featured in Campaign Brief. It’s not creative advertising. Like the wall paper ads knocked out by Oddfellows, the kind of stuff you guys make should probably have its own publication, or stick your work up on Mumbrella.
That way you won’t continuously be slagged off by creatives trying to produce stand out, memorable and therefore (as you continuously like to point out in defence of your bland efforts) effective advertising.
Peter, you’ve already generated far too many column inches for your anonymous agency. And I really do mean anonymous. You say your work is effective, but I’m not aware of any of it.
Let your work speak for itself instead of trying to generate self-publicity with your shameless ideas to make the blog as bland as your work.
Ending anonymity would clean things up immediately. Commenters would have to extend the same courtesy they – reluctantly perhaps – have to extend in face-to-face conversation.
But it would be the end of the CB blog.
This is the real me.
Please. Just provide ONE good ad the brand shop has done in the last few years.
The Brand Shop. Don’t they do the Brand Power ads too?
They’re effective I suppose.
I’m guessing Monty is still there?
I don’t care if someone slags off my work or anyone elses for that matter. Everyone has their opinion of what’s good and what isn’t and you don’t need anyone to tell you. Leave that to the judges at Cannes.
But if someone wants to post nasty, slanderous, personal attacks because they have nothing better to do with their time, that’s a whole other kettle of fish and I am dead against that, as are a lot of other people.
Keep it about the work.
Weak article Peter.
“As outsiders, what do commenters know about the process that was involved in creating the work? Did they see the brief? No. Did they see the business strategy? No. Did they know the personalities involved? No.” (parargraph nine for those of you that didn’t get to this part of the long-winded article).
At the end of the day, consumers are the real judging panel – Do they see the brief? Do they see the business strategy? Do they know the personalities involved?
11:47
Good call. The Bland Shop is simply trying to excuse itself from the dreary work it produces. Time for a new CD, not articles on CB.
I had a kick ass idea, the thing is looking at good work
can only make you feel OK. but slagging off truly bad work
actually makes you feel good. i think we just need clarifying
who’s criticising a bit like ebay so you can earn a rating
like – power heckler
9:48
Excellent heckler! AAAA+++++!!!!!!! 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 ONE OF THE BEST!!11!
This is awesome!. I invite Peter to post a response see if he’ll man-up
Peter you are SO RIGHT and dirty suit or not one hell of a sexy man!!