Name game fame shame blame
Here’s an article that endeavours to explain the disappearance of ‘names’ in the world of advertising (thanks, V).
It’s an interesting theory but I’m not sure I buy it.
The main hole lies in the assertion that the credit is spread throughout many names these days because integrated campaigns are the result of many people’s contributions. But that suggests that people have stopped making successful work in conventional media. Although there are still people producing good (if not classic) work in these areas, they have little fame or standing to show for their skillz.
I’ve mentioned this before, but in the context of this article it’s probably worth repeating that the most successful TV/print/radio ads of the last few years have not made ‘names’ of the teams behind them. Why? Well, there are probably many reasons, but I think one of them is the Campaign Big Awards. Before they existed there were five easily digestible award schemes in this country – Campaign Press, Campaign Poster, D&AD, Creative Circle and BTAA – you knew what they were for and a handy book or booklet (free with Campaign in the cases of the first two and the last) let everyone in adland know what the good work was and who was responsible for it. If someone’s name featured several times it was plain to see and that contributed to the status of the ‘name’.
Now Press and Poster have been taken away, along with any status they could afford, to be replaced by a new scheme which has zero status. It’s prohibitively difficult to find out who has been nominated before the Campaign Big awards and prohibitively expensive (the Big Awards book costs a tenner and I have no idea how you go about getting one) to find out who has won. But then nobody really gives a monkey’s anyway. This is because the Big Awards cover digital and, sorry my digi friends, but no one who works in above the line advertising really gives a shit who has won any of the digital awards. No one. Absolutely fucking zero people.
So the guys and gals who win these worthless digi awards get the same prize as the people who win the TV and print versions, which means that if you see one on someone’s shelf you have no idea if they made a very good TV ad (unlikely in recent years) or a banner you didn’t hate that much. This means that two sources of ATL creative prestige have been replaced by one source of creative apathy (the Big Awards have planners on the jury FFS! Who gives a fuck what they think about ads? Nobody in an ATL creative department. That’s right: absolutely fucking zero creatives in above the line agencies give a shit about planners’ opinions on finished ads, and before the planners among you get all testy about that, number one: it’s true, so live with it, and number two: I’ll bet a day’s salary you don’t give a fuck about what we think of quant versus qual or whatever the fuck it is you spend your time debating with a copy of Monocle shoved up your arses*).
True, we still have the BTAAs, but they’ve been devalued in recent years by a lack of truly great TV ads. Creative Circle enjoyed a brief renaissance under Mark Denton but took a step backwards this year by awarding Campaign some kind of prize and allowing a pair of dolly birds to choose their favourite ad of the year and award it a Gold, devaluing entirely said Gold. And that leaves us with D&AD: foreign jurors none of us has heard of means we can’t value the opinions of the juries. What have you done, Mr. CD of TBWA Hockenheim? Madame ECD of Publicis Djakarta? To be honest, we can’t be fucked to find out. If it was something really significant we’d have heard of you, but it isn’t, so we haven’t, so meh to the lot of you. And now that the Annual is online, the hard-copy book isn’t really worth waiting for. We already know what’s in it, and it can’t play TV ads or integrated case studies like the web version can.
So there aren’t really any creative awards worth giving a shit about anymore, ergo, it doesn’t matter who has won them, ergo there are very few opportunities for creatives to gain status in 2011.
That’s why, in the UK at least, there are no Names.
Interesting to hear that it’s happening elsewhere.
*Smiley face made out of punctuation
Thank you for writing this. Faultless.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Gasp and Paul Ray, Ben Kay. Ben Kay said: Famous ad creatives are rare as rocking horse shit. Here's why: http://ow.ly/3G3Cy […]
No doubt the big awards have been greatly diluted. For me their magic spell was broken when I realised some creatives don their desks with gongs won for model making and such.
But going back two posts, I think a big part of this is the lack of progress forward from the likes of Webster and Co. There just aren’t enough people doing good enough good stuff to warrant any new ‘Names’.
I agree, Paddy. But this post could be about 10,000 words long if I really dug into it. The devaluing of creative awards is part of a vicious circle that means creatives care less about them and are less inclined to go the extra mile/have the extra row that might be required to win one. The awards are then further devalued and the whole thing continues.
But yes: there are other reasons behind this. Another post, methinks.
Or that difficult second book.
Get an award from a jusy consisting of John Webster or David “The Bot” Abbott and it’s worth picking up. Getting an award from a jury consisting of almost any of today’s creative dirctors/planners/douchbags and it just doesn’t seem worth it. I simply don’t care what these idiots think of my ads. Good or bad. In fact if they thought they were bad I’d be more reassured that they’re probably quite good.
That said, I have problems of my own. Russian shells are landing on The Reichstag.
glad you liked.
the bit i personally found hilarious was the very notion that many people could come with an idea. and the programmer was somehow going to save the day. Ha…ha…ha!
it’s ALWAYS only one person that has the idea. and it’s USUALLY the one practiced in having the idea on a regular basis.
that article was about as full of shit as it could possibly have been. thanks for calling it out.
and i agree, UK advertising is still going a bit wobbly over “digital”. it’s 2011!
Vinny, that is another part that needs in-depth analysis (with lots of swearing).
Shit, I have a lot of writing (and swearing) to do.
Traudl, this is going to end badly. Take the cyanide now.
British advertising has fucking tanked. So prized were the lauded creatives who won gold for TV that we completely ignored the rise of digital – I struggle to name one truly brilliant digital campaign that came out of the UK.
Pay no attention to digital awards if you like but the irony is you, us, whatever can’t even make decent TV ads anymore.
Anon 8: another point that really needs expanding.
But far from being ignored, there was a widespread arselicking of digital around 2006/7, yet still no decent UK digi work.
Yet another post to write…
Let us suppose advertising is not a team game. Then everything that is wrong with it is down to a few, lets say it is the Creatives. Their fault for not arguing their case clearly with their bosses and with their clients and for not making good ads. They caused the mess because they could not argue that they were the most important asset in an agency, so someone else took the lead and made a better case.
—
I have a feeling I have not saved you those 10,000 words, Ben.
—
Traudl – don’t forget the dogs.
I just spat out my flat white over my MacBook Air, Moleskine and iPhone 4 with imported carbon fiber case.
or maybe contemporary creatives are anonymous because they are almost universally rubbish? Are they perhaps mainly Watford schooled half-wits with withered little imaginations?
@Traudl
Keep an eye on Magda would you? I’ve a feeling she may do something stupid. Sieg Heil etc…
Also, re: the article. It doesn’t matter anymore. Nothing that used to ‘matter’ matters anymore. The world is about to undergo a seismic change. Just keep your heads down and hope that you come out the other side.
Advertising died the minute a generation saw that it was where the money was. And greedy oxbridge intellectuals without discernable talent wanted their slice of the pie. Some of them assumed legitmacy through the back door of planning. Others assumed legitimacy through the back door of digital, social media – and to a lesser extent, dm (though the IPA and TED’s adorable ‘adman’ rory sutherland never really worked atl did he? he was Ogilvy btl). The careerists have drowned out the talented and the true lovers of advertising.
But that’s what happens when money is involved. It’s why a bellend like Gary Cook is involved in something like football. Or why something as amazing as music now consists of a little blond childcunt singing “touch my tits and fuck me” in a song that ends with a keychange.
When people know something is where the money is, the quality dies. IMO anyway.
btw is it just me that *hates* the D&AD ‘president” stuff this year?
Arselicking, yes. And believe me it felt good. But now I feel somewhat empty. Like the whole thing was a soulless experience, not really heartfelt. I need something more than lip service. How about backing it up with some proper action?
I’m just too busy playing with robots and thinking about how ideas spread (like fire, or bonfires, obviously) to think about your piddly TV ads. *cough*
Anonymouse – Spot on. Look at the state of pop videos, which I only ever see at the gym anyway. Plastic birds dancing about like strippers. I am torn. I like what I see but the tragic lack of imagination of them depresses me. It really does.
“It‚Äôs ALWAYS only one person that has the idea” Spot on Vinny. For some reason the business has grown to despise the fact that the most value is created by a very small group of talented people.
Got a leaflet from D&AD the other day featuring the (presumably) same message in many languages. I can’t comment on the Cantonese, but the English was pretty poorly written.
…all the digi CDs that I’ve met on my travels are the people who were a bit shit at college. They then spend their time writing TV ads and trying to persuade the real CD to approve them.
I liked Campaign Press & Posters. Even if you didn’t win you could see your stamp-sized ads free in the mag the next day. If you won it was postcard size and you knew all your peers would see it. These days, there’s an unopened Big Awards book behind every ECD’s desk, usually on the floor – no other fucker has one or wants one. So apologies to the anonymous winners who probably have beards.
Its only advertising.
‘It’s only advertising’.
It’s also our livelihood.
Freddy freelancer, at least they’ve got full time jobs.
The most talented people I met at college are producing the same crap as the ones that were a bit shit these days.
i think courses like watford have helped create a creatively bland soup.
also, as soon as you give an oscar to sex in the city 2 (return of the slags) you devalue every oscar that went before it.
DandAD shot themselves in the foot with a fair few of the pencils dished out in recent years. check out the first year ‘digital’ became a category and laugh yourself dirty at how easily you could have got a pencil that year.
…they’ve got more than full-time jobs. They’ve got power. And now they know my name…
k, i havent even read all the comments and the post only briefly yesterday…
so, one question: why would it be important to make yourself a big name in the first place? money? fame?
shouldnt the work speak for itself? and as you say, awards are rubbish. my take is that awards are rubbish and pointless in general. you ben, and others want them to be a real measurement for quality again. thats what im guessing anyway.
which came first:
~ the chicken or the egg?
~ great work or award shows and notable juries (maybe that twat from hockenheim or jakarta has done some great shit)?
hypothesis 1: whatever might be the case, they somehow depend on each other.
furthermore, fame and great work… well, how often do you get sent stuff you think is good but you havent heard of or seen before?
just because something is good, doesnt mean you would automatically see it. the internet being big and filled with stuff and such…
GOUT LEGS. I disagree that ‘courses like Watford’ have created a bland soup. Watford students in my experience are the only students that get taught how to think strategically in an environment that mirrors a creative department. In fact I believe the course is now taught in different ad agencies every week. Its also very cheap and is taught for love not money.I think the biggest problem is the bigger 3 year type ‘advertising courses’ that are doing the industry no favours, costing loads of money and churning out students that haven’t a fucking clue how to write an ad, who mac things up to look like ads but who have not learnt how to think strategically. Unfortunately nowadays lots these clueless students are given placements and jobs far to easily (you should see just how terrible some teams are tha I’ve seen get hired in agencies that they would not even get a look in 10 years ago) because, well fuck it, its cheap brain power. They go up the ranks as unlearned creatives and the cycle continues. Again, all about the money not the creativity.
When you yourself have slimy skin, pairing a few declines
of tea tree fat, lemon oil and ying-yang oil with all the witchhazel generates a customized toner to your skin.
Organizations incentive loyal enthusiasts, which means you don’t wish to lose
out.