Was my work cited as one of the 17 most brilliantly creative projects in any medium this year? Sadly, no. However, this was, after all, the first-ever incarnation of the Creativity Awards so they can't be expected to have gotten everything right.
Among other things they didn't get right: leaving the open bar open while attempting to give out the awards and facilitating a Q&A. Otherwise, though, it was relatively thought-provoking evening. The big grand-prize winner was part of the Dove campaign and featured a real woman being made up and then photoshopped until she looked like a supermodel; which is a good and valid message for the women of the world and an ironic one for the advertisers, considering making things and people look preternaturally appealing is part of what we do. But I won't tell the American public if you don't.
Rounding out the rest were, without getting too specific, a video for a primarily-fashion brand that featured nil fashion and tons of politics plus a tv spot for a car that focused on the sounds the car makes. Despite the fact that I liked both for the entertainment value, I have to stop and ask the question "Is entertainment enough?" Is a brand ever so well branded that its advertising can mostly eschew an important message about the product in favor of entertainment or oddity?
Here's what I'm thinking: no. No matter what your product may be, you've got something to say about it. If your message is that your product weird or edgy, maybe we have a different verdict. Otherwise, weird or edgy or entertaining just for the sake of being "different" is a waste of advertising dollars when you could be finding a way to communicate a message in an equally compelling manner. Even product placement in movies conveys a branding story about the product.
So, in summation, strategy uber alles. I like a little message-minded reasoning behind my advertising. I'm just saying.
No comments:
Post a Comment