Hegarty on what’s wrong with advertising
Read the article here.
Interesting theory that throws up a couple of interesting questions:
Does Sir John believe his own agency’s creative output has deteriorated in recent years?
If there’s been a problem with advertising getting to grips with new technology, how come truly great TV work was still being a produced a long way into the digital revolution? How come advertising has suffered most in the last five years and not the ten before that?
Why did the person who wrote the article think that BBH produced the Pregnant Man ad?
And ‘…one of the other problems I have today is people have retreated to the edges of advertising. You know, they’re happy to do some small little campaign somewhere or they’re doing something on the net that hardly anybody sees and they’re getting awards for it and everybody’s cheering. But they’re not changing the way people feel or think.’
Amen.
At some stage Sir John and Eric Schmidt are going to meet up (assuming they haven’t done so already).
It’s fair to say that they don’t see eye to eye:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/10033473/Eric-Schmidt-television-is-already-over.html?fb
I’d take Big Hegsy in a fight. He’s nails.
funny, i just blogged this same article.
I suspect that now he’s out of the holding company chains, he’s just speaking his mind and calling bullshit on the bullshit.
I think he’s saying that digital advertising has been largely a mirage in terms of creating demand and building brands. which is demonstrably true.
remember that time BBH NY had buskers singing the songs of a new Oasis album (not the first two) in the subways of New York? And it was somehow a good idea? i remember that.
That Oasis idea is a brilliant example of something that sounds good on a case study but didn’t hold up to any scrutiny.
So you walk past a busker playing a song you’ve never hear on instrumentation nothing like the Oasis version…
Why would you notice, give a shit, or feel like buying the Oasis album?
You could read both the articles (I’m including Mr Gash’s linky thing) and say “well, they *would* say that, wouldn’t they?” But Schmidt has a vested interest in TV being “over”: Google don’t own it. Hegarty isn’t constrained by that. BBH could sell advertising on any medium. Hence I’m more likely to buy into Sir J’s perspective.
Have you seen the new Robinson’s ad from BBH? Unoriginal and strangely creepy.