Ad Caulk

(Temporary difficulties. Catch the spot over on Ad Teachings) EDIT: fixed. 

And it keeps getting better the more I watch it. The credits say that only three creatives worked on the ad. If this is true then it's certainly a testament to what a small group of individuals can do when they don't have "the crowd" to listen to.

Thanks to Dan Goldgeier for finding this and tweeting about it.

It's back and more disconnected than ever! Enjoy.

Text and Audio Thangs

- Dave Trott on Boardroom Tycoon. This'll turn into a full blown post sometime down the road.

- An interview with Helmut Krone, the man behind the VW ads.

- Charlie Kaufman and Dan Harmon have teamed up to produce a stop-motion movie. They're funding it on kickstarter. I mean, WE are funding it on kickstarter.

- Ben Kay on HBO's consistent quality. (It's about not bending to trends, including viewership)

- "Try to be true to yourself and the feelings you have about a problem or brief, and try to capture that emotion and reaction in your work." Sell! Sell! selling the importance of emotion in making work.

- Drive out smarminess. An edict from the always astute Simon Billing.

- Charlie Saatchi as cheery as usual in this interview about his new book "Be The Worst You Can Be."

Visual Aids

Adam Savage, yes the Mythbusters guy, builds things. Lots of things.

Watch this and try to not be inspired. In our world of cynicism we forget these simple things.

It's alive! Clam eats salt. 

When this ad popped up in my tumblr feed I nearly fell out of my chair. Black and white? Long(ish) copy? Posted without comment?

(Okay that last bit wasn't all that surprising.)

I eagerly launched into reading the ad—and its siblings—but was consistently left flat.

For starters, It lacks the finesse of the ads it harkens back to. In terms of writing and art direction.

One of the most significant breaks from the copy style imitated here is the lack of line breaks.

Had the copy been parted out into individual sections it would have been punchier.

But it wasn't.

The paragraphs are almost nonsensical and don't add anything to the overall aesthetic.

I'll admit that some of the writing did make me chuckle. It was certainly interesting enough to make me check out the website.

There's also the matter of the "Thoughtful Intelligent Canadian" tagline that just sits perched atop the logo.

We won't get into that.

The effort to do something that respects the audience is there. Had this been tinkered with a little more it could have been a great ad.

It's commendable that the agency didn't simply stick a walrus on the page (like so many would be tempted to).

In fact, "Avoid Walruses" is a pretty good reminder to NOT go after the easy solution.

So avoid walruses. And check out Neil French's Chivas campaign if you want to see some great copy ads.

via Jay Mug.

There have been quite a few people passing along this video of a robot that can always win at rock-paper-scissors. What an accomplishment! How mesermizing it is to have technology beat us at a game.

The problem is that the robot isn't playing the game. The game ceases to exist when it is the explicit purpose of the robot.

It's also playing outside the confines of the game. It works by analyzing your hand and responding a few millisecond after. This is a fantastic display of technological adaptability, but it isn't playing rock-paper-scissors.

It doesn't have to weigh options about how the other player will "shoot." It is always responding to an action.

In fact, put two of these robots against each other and you might end up with an endless loop of draws. Or constant re-adjustment trying to make the right decision.

As I wrote above, the fact that a robot does what it's programed to do isn't all that magnificent. The potential should still be celebrated.

A friend lovingly informed me that it has been over a week since my last post. It is, in fact, bordering on two. So it's only right that I thrust myself back into the white light of blogging with a post about why (to a certain extent) I haven't been writing.

For a long time, almost as long as I can remember, this blog was fueled by anger. Anger, as we learned from the X-Men series, can be a powerful tool. The unfortunate thing for you, dear reader, is that I became exceedingly happy. You may have even read about it.

As a result my writing has stalled. I took a break to let myself decompress and explore a world that was alien to me. I also tried desperately to get back a modicum of routine in my life.

In that respect I've failed miserably. There are days I wander aimlessly through the streets of Chicago (probably not the safest of hobbies) or throw myself into obscure topics. But I haven't had the same urge to Blog! Blog! Blog! that I once had.

It used to be a little morsel of knowledge would stumble into my life and it would be here after a flurry of fingers striking keys. Not sure why this was born out of hatred, but it was.

However, there is a second lesson that we learned from the X-men series. Although powerful, hate is sometimes not enough. We need to pull from a different place to understand true power. A place of love, even.

Thankfully I still love advertising (however strange that may be). I still love interesting things and the pursuit of them.

This is a very long-texted way of apologizing for my radio silence. And a promise that the things to come will be from a brighter place than they were in the past. Thanks, as always, for reading. You make this thing worth writing.

Like I said, I didn't really intellectualize it. I mean I spent my 20s reading screenwriting books and going to screenwriting seminars—It gave me writer's block. And it made me feel that everything I did was wrong. That I was getting some science wrong. So I just forgot all that and did what felt right. What I wanted to see. So I really didn't think about it like that.

- Joe Cornish, Director/Writer "Attack the Block"

Could it be possible to have too much knowledge? That appears to be the case in creative endeavors. So many books, blogs, talks espouse Best Practices on how to "do it." Very few are willing to say that what has worked before might not work every time, or for every individual.

It's a problem I've run in to more than a few times. The treacherous thought that nothing I create will be as good as what come before. Or that it will be a pale imitation of interesting things that already exist.

The problem lies in learning too much about approach your endeavor, and not learning enough about the world. In another part of this interview Cornish talks about sitting down with the script and actors to make sure the language was consistent with what you'd hear on the streets. A whole scene was written around a conversation he had with a kid during the casting stages.

Learning is important. Especially starting out. But in order to make new, interesting things you have to cast aside a bit of what you know. Unless you want it to look and feel like everything else.

And make sure to see Attack The Block if you haven't. It's Sci-fi in a way that should happen more often.

Wow, would you look at that? Colors! Names! URLs!

Shame it's all pretty much meaningless.

Let me explain. All this chart tells us is that the internet is big. We already knew that. Or, at least, we should.

It would be just as easy, and meaningless, to put together a collection of sites about pets. Pet forums, pet advice blogs, pet commerce sites.

Our job, contrary to popular belief, is not to act as complicators. It's to act as simplifiers. We need to make things so easy for business to understand that they'll trust us to make our ads.

The problem with the internet is how easy it makes complicating things. You can throw thousands of bits of information at a client to bully them into running your online initiate. Get those "impressions."

Or you can be a friend to the client and guide them through the crazy wilderness. Have them do what you want because they trust you. Build a solid relationship.

pssst....choose with the second option.

chart via Angela Natividad

In as few words as possible:

The Drake advertising program is broken. I've known this in the back of my mind for a long time, but now the symptoms are glaringly obvious. The education that drake students receive related to advertising is incomplete at best. At worst it constitutes theft.

One of the most distressing problems is the outlook this program fosters towards the ad industry. Advertising is one of the most exciting and enjoyable professions in the world. Our experience over the past 4 years has been anything but. It may be unprecedented in that Drake's program makes advertising miserable. Students are made to hate advertising rather than love it.

Something is clearly wrong.

The creative side needs to be overhauled—if not shut down completely. Job placement rates are dismal. Students getting creative jobs in Agencies of Note (those who are recognized on a national level) is unheard of. Simply getting a job in any creative capacity outside of the Des Moines market is next to impossible. Ask any of this year's seniors.

In the past six years I know of two individuals who went on to work as creatives in agencies outside of Des Moines. One of these individuals is now in Portland, the other has left the industry and returned to portfolio school. Both graduated in 2007.

Chad Baker, now VP at The Meyocks Group, was the professor for their copywriting class. Chad is an ad creative. Chad had a curriculum that required students to bring in work frequently. Above all, Chad made students realize what it would be like to work in an ad agency. We no longer get that, and the program suffers for it.

So, at the core, the problem is simple. You have a professor who is unfit to teach creative classes. She lacks the experience and knowledge to adequately prepare ANY ad student for the professional world. It is a problem when a professor who teaches creative has never been a creative. The curriculum reflects this. More weight is given to filename conventions than actual creativity.

We produce a very small amount of work in our four years, none of it portfolio ready.

This is not right. The lack of emphasis on portfolio and professional development shows a misunderstanding of how the job market works in this industry. I have long heard from professionals that the NSAC competition is not a selling point on a job application. Rather than acknowledge this, the professors continue to extol the virtues of taking part in the competition. Meanwhile students are left without time to work on their portfolios—the key to any creative job.

This letter is not, as you have probably dismissed it already, a letter from a disgruntled, jobless student. I realized early on the the only way to get a job was to work completely outside the program. In June I am extremely happily returning to a scrappy little ad agency in Chicago. The people I worry about were those who put faith in your system, listened to the lies from professors who ”know” what takes to break in, who cried over the NSAC competition for fuck all.

Running a good advertising program is not easy. However, you could do worse than look at the programs at UT Austin, BYU, Oregon and portfolio schools across the nation. Also, look at their faculty lists. Creative classes should be taught by people who have been ad creatives.

My experience as a Drake advertising student has been lousy. Many others of my peers will tell you the same. I sincerely hope this is not the case for future students. However, If nothing changes I have no doubt it will be.

Sincerely, and with great concern,
Jeff Kwiatek

"A printed card means nothing except that you are too lazy to write to the woman who has done more for you than anyone in the world. And candy! You take a box to Mother—and then eat most of it yourself. A pretty sentiment."

After petitioning to make Mother’s Day a national holiday, Anna Jarvis spent most of the rest of her life fighting against what it had become. She hated the commercialization of it which, as you can see above, extends to greeting cards.

Think of something nice/sweet/unique to say to your mom today. Chances are she’s done a lot for you.

And to my own mom, I love you.

(This post written in honor of Jamie Kwiatek. The best mom I've ever known.)

There's been a strange thought that's been troubling me for the past few weeks. Maybe it was watching the pitch, maybe it was reading about Gerry Graf storming off state, maybe it was something else. What I've been thinking is this: in order for there to be good work, bad work needs to exist.

This is not a new idea by any means. What really brought this back to mind was an interview with Ava Duvernay. She talks about the divergent paths black filmmakers can take, bringing up the notorious Tyler Perry himself.

She says that you couldn't have Sundance award winning films, like hers, without movies like Perry's. And Tyler Perry is vilified because he's the only one consistiently making black films. The solution is more black filmmakers making quality films.

So much breath is wasted (at least in my case) decrying bad work. Not understanding how someone could attach their name to something so bad? How someone could disrespect people's time and attention? How could someone waste that much of someone else's money?

There is a positive side to this. Without bad local ads, or bad national ads, my heart wouldn't sing when I come across something great. The exhilaration of stumbling across a new idea would disappear. Not to mention it would be much more intimidating to make ads in a world where everything is "The Man Your Man Could Smell Like."

It's not our responsibility to be collectively ashamed of the work of the ad industry at large. Our only responsibility is deciding what kind of work we want to do. And doing it.