Comments on: Hey! That’s A Good Point!

By: Whome?

Whome? — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:25:52 +0000

Toad,

Hence why I caveated with “At least theoretically”

In practice, it sometimes doesn’t work that way. But that doesn’t mean the whole concept is flawed. We just need to be tougher judges, both of what’s real/fake and of what’s just following a formula.

By: RT

RT — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:22:36 +0000

@s.copywriter: some awards shows/juries are better than others. i like this perspective: http://www.clioawards.com/juries/index.cfm?juryid=2

By: Schrodinger's Copywriter

Schrodinger's Copywriter — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:32:12 +0000

Not sure why this thread turned into an award show critique, but what the hell-
The top award shows are important. They push good agencies and good creatives to continually do better work in an industry that greatly rewards mediocrity.

Also, clients that respect compelling ideas do pay attention to who is winning awards. It’s not the most important factor, but it is a factor.

Saying “We don’t want to win awards, we want to sell product” is a disingenuous argument, as there is no dichotomy between the two. And if all you really want to do is sell product, just sell all your products for dirt cheap. Smart, compelling ideas add intangible value to a brand, which results in people willing to pay a higher price.

With that said, it is really sad how many fake ads end up in award shows. And i think it’s also totally fair to say that there are alot of award-winning formulaic ads that you see over and over again in some shows. I think they need better judges.

By: RT

RT — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:27:50 +0000

cool. but i dunno, i’m just not feeling your whole “prevailing aesthetic” point. seems like you are taking the approach of a tiny (tiny) sub-set of ads and presenting them as some sort of common practice. maybe i’m just thick, but i don’t see it.

By: Toad

Toad — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:50:02 +0000

@RT & WhoMe: Do award shows really reward “original, interesting, and innovative thinking?”

Or do they (mainly) reward work that, while certainly excellent, also spits back the formula-du-jour?

I’m by no means suggesting that we reward or acclaim trite or clichéd advertising ideas. Just noting that there are valid aesthetics beyond the prevailing one.

By: RT

RT — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:53:32 +0000

@whome?: i agree 100% with your second and third points, but you’re mistaken on the first one. i was using “good” in toad’s original context (eg, hipster created/approved), not good as in having substance/quality.

By: Whome?

Whome? — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:12:57 +0000

Shitty movies sell tickets. Does that make them good movies?

Award shows are there to honor and promote original, interesting, and innovative thinking. At least theoretically.

They’ve never been about what the public likes the best. They’ve been about pushing the industry forward. What will the public like the best 5 years from now? That’s the question.

By: RT

RT — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:59:49 +0000

@toad: i hear ya. but by that logic, you’re also saying a very tiny percentage of ads are “good” (in the hipster sense), while the hugely vast majority of ads are the middle-of-the-road/boring type that actually connect with joe six-pack consumer and actually sell product. in which case…um, it isn’t that compelling a point. also, it’s kinda tired to blame all industry woes on awards shows. who cares?

By: Schrodinger's Copywriter

Schrodinger's Copywriter — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:21:04 +0000

Ads are created that way because they’re made by a bunch of upscale urban 30something white male hipsters, chosen by creative directors and account folks who are or wish they were, and then judged in award shows by upscale urban 30something white male hipsters, which rewards the whole practice.

But i’m totally different. I’m a 29 year old white male urban nerd who could afford to be upscale but would rather live on the budget he lived on in college.

By: Toad

Toad — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:55:07 +0000

Hey Spy– thanks for the shoutout – I’ve been writing at BMA for about a month now, in addition to my regular Toad Stool blog. And though the whole “Not Everyone Is An Upscale Urban 30something White Male Hipster” thing is a not infrequent feature on my blog and my DailyFix column, the BMA post seems to have hit a nerve. Different audience, I guess.

@RT: Exaggeration as a rhetorical tool. It’s less about the actual number of ads that fit that description as it is the way that aesthetic is our sole definition of what constitutes “good” advertising. As in what you see in the award show books.