Two “best of print” displays highlight stark contrast between effectiveness and creativity.
April 29, 2011
Deemed most effective…
Deemed most creative…
Have a look at the “most effective” print ads of 2010, as determined by GFK MRI Starch Communications, a specialist in print-advertising research. According to a report by Michal Galin in AdAge, Starch looked at nearly 90,000 print pieces in order to find the work “that did the best job of moving consumers, as a result of seeing the ad, toward purchase.”
Now look at the award winners for the 2010 Magazine Publishers of America (MPA) Kelly Awards for best magazine campaigns in terms of “creative excellence and campaign results;” a show, by the way, that I helped judge.
There is not one ad that appears on both scorecards. Not one. If I were a reporter my inclination would be to ask: what gives? If “results” are a primary category in both situations then shouldn’t there be considerable overlap?
But I’m not a reporter; I’m a copywriter and creative director blogging about a subject near and dear to my heart. And I wouldn’t ask such a question (at least not sincerely) because I already know the answer. For better or for worse, creative excellence and marketing results have little in common, at least when it comes to CPG and other big categories. The decisive results of these two shows are indicative of a decades-old reality that creativity and results are as different as Republicans and Democrats. This reality is by no means limited to print advertising but exists for all forms in all channels. And it always has. Always.
While creative awards shows have tried to add results as part of the judging criteria, it amounts to little more than lip service. We, and I speak for the vast majority of the creative community, just don’t like making or giving prizes to time tested, research driven advertising campaigns. We ding the work almost as soon as we see it. Why? Just review the slide show from the Starch test. In terms of aesthetics, most of those ads suck, featuring uninspired headlines and huge pictures of people and products. By every creative measure, they fail at surprising and delighting us, at breaking new ground.
On the other hand, the Kelly award winners show a high level of craft, defined by concept, writing and art direction. They are beautiful. They are stunning. And, in their own way, they have probably demonstrated solid results. But according the Starch, they are not the best at driving results.
If this is news to anyone they are either rookies or living under a rock. As I already noted, the dissonance between creativity and selling has been a back and forth argument for eons. There is no easy solution. Obviously, agencies try and ‘do both’ but in the end we either tend to make work that errs on the side of creativity or we push for salesmanship at the expense of aesthetics. Nothing sums it up like the old saw: Make the logo bigger!
And there are those of us who do fake ads to try and win awards because the real ads we make appease only our hack bosses and clients. This is a dangerous attitude and demeanor and I don’t recommend it.
Ironically, I worked on campaigns appearing on both lists. Not sure what that means but at least I’m not predictable.
Alex Bogusky bid’s adieu to his namesake shop and the industry he changed forever. (Part 2)
July 13, 2010
The winning creative team at the MPA Kelly Awards, 2005: Rob Strasberg, Andrew Keller, Alex Bogusky and Rob Reilly
.
.
Alex Bogusky leaving his company and advertising is news. The fact that he’s leaving while at the top of his game makes it even more intriguing.
Everyone aspires going out on top. Yet it hardly ever happens. First of all, you have to get there. No easy feat in this business, or any other. Then walking away that hard-earned spot right when it’s most lucrative? Off the top of my head, I can’t think of many people who’ve done either, let alone both. (I believe my father did, albeit quietly.)
Ego often gets in the way. Recall Michael Jordan’s inability to retire, when he should have, after his last championship. Unlike Michael (or Alex), most of us work past our prime because we have to. There are bills to pay, families to support. Plus, we likely don’t see the top when we’re on it. Still, the fantasy of going out that way burns in our hearts.
Whether Alex returns to Ad Land or figures out a way to end world hunger (both?) is anyone’s guess. Likely, he doesn’t know his next move either. And that’s the thing about him I bet most folks don’t realize: for all his credentials, he’s not driven by ego. Even a funky new job and promises of yet more cash did nothing to hold him. (In my opinion, Mr. Nadal made up the fun-sounding title, Chief Insurgent Officer purely to keep Alex in the network. That lasted two or three months. And with serious coin already in his pocket, even the promise of more money held no sway.)
Telltale signs of Bogusky’s inevitable departure began appearing last year, when he handed over the reigns of his creative department to Rob Reilly and Andrew Keller, along with Jeff Benjamin. (By any measure they’ve done a stupendous job.) In addition, Alex began pursuing personal projects like writing books and various social media experiments. His tweets became more about the stuff of life than work related. All evidence of a man preparing for what’s next.
A few 24 hours ago, I had the pleasure of conversing with Alex Bogusky before he became Alex. I kid you not we were at a pool party in Cannes. Both of us, however, were not really digging it. He seemed to prefer talking about life versus living it up in the pool or, for that matter, the festival itself, in which he would ultimately win a pride of Lions, including a Grand Prix, I believe for Ikea “Lamp.” But at that moment he wasn’t interested in prizes. Like a lot of us, he’d come to Cannes because he could. However, he admitted to now being unsettled by the attention he and his agency were getting. He then confessed that this would likely being his last time at Cannes. “Steff,” he said, “we’ve got plenty of swimming pools in Miami. Besides,” he added, “I like doing the work more than celebrating it.”
I’m paraphrasing but that was the gist of it. Ironic commentary coming from the man whom would later write “Hoopla” not to mention win more Lions than probably any other person or agency in the United States. Yet, to me, it seemed indicative of some higher power working in his life, or trying to, the idea that achieving goals was more important to him than drinking champagne at the end. The conflict with hedonism is worth noting as well.
For another even more telling exchange, read this paragraph from a very recent interview with Chuck Porter in AdAge:
He (Alex) sent me a blog post he wrote about advertising to children and asked me what I thought. I said it was well-written and made some great points, but I also said he needs to make a choice because it’s not [compatible with the business we’re in]. And the next morning he resigned and sent me a note saying, “I resigned like you recommended” and I was like, “I didn’t tell you to do that!
Without probing deeper, it seems Alex began applying his focus on other things besides selling. Perhaps even to the consternation of his peers. Maybe his Higher Power got the better of him. That and a sizable earn-out check from MDC.
The only other time I engaged with Alex was during a pitch. It was down to two agencies: his and mine. We would win that day but, obviously, Alex and CP&B would win a hell of a lot more times than I, or anyone, in the years that followed. CP&B became unstoppable, to the point where they could turn down clients. Regularly. They still do. That’s not arrogance, folks. That’s a blessing.
Alex and his partners built a juggernaut, a magical place. Some call it a sweatshop. But whatever it is it can never be captured in a power point presentation. There are no “proprietary tools” at CP&B. Just like-minded people busting their ass to do great work. And since the beginning, the mind they were aspiring to be like belonged to Alex Bogusky. So powerful is the zeitgeist he established that his predecessors haven’t missed a beat. Indeed, Keller and Reilly are as skilled as they come.
In the end, I applaud Alex for doing his thing: in this business, to this business and now going out of it. He’s done more with and for advertising than almost anyone alive. And so maybe he’s just done. For now, anyway…
Three of the winners…
Earlier this week, I attended and helped host the MPA’s 2010 Kelly Awards in New York. The Kelly Awards celebrate the best magazine advertising in North America. I also served as a judge for this year’s competition, an activity that I wrote about on a previous post. In addition, my agency, Euro RSCG was lucky enough to be one of 25 finalists for our work on Valspar paints.
Historically, The Kelly Awards are known for the substantial cash prize given to winners of the Grand Kelly, for best print campaign in America. When I won it for Altoids, the prize was 100 grand! This year’s winner will receive 25K. Considerably less, yes, but still nothing to sneeze at. Part of why the number shrank is that more categories were added to the winner’s list. A mixed blessing, I kind of liked them having 25 finalists and one winner.
I owe the MPA a debt of gratitude, and not just for the hundred grand 😉 but also for providing me what has to be the highpoint of my career thus far. I’ve written about this before. The year Altoids won the Grand Kelly, my brother, Jeremy and father, Larry, also had finalist campaigns. That all three of us were in attendance at the ceremony was pretty special. Me winning iced it! Suffice it to say, this year I was honored to judge and help host the show.
More intimate than prior celebrations, this year’s Kelly Awards, at the Prince George on 27th Street, was clearly pared down for economic reasons, indicative of myriad challenges facing the magazine industry. Nevertheless, the MPA and its primary supporter, RR Donnelly made a game show of it.
The Kelly Awards continue to be about one thing: the best magazine advertising in America. Maintaining this focus is key to the show’s integrity. The crowd may have been smaller than in past celebrations, but there was still plenty of creative talent in attendance. Agencies up for prizes included Crispin Porter & Bogusky, Goodby Silverstein & Partners, BBDO, GSD&M and numerous smaller shops known exclusively for creative excellence.
image from Grand Kelly winner, Haagen Dasz
Creative director, Margaret Johnson, from Goodby won the Grand Kelly for her work on behalf of Haagen Dazs ice cream. I applaud this choice. It’s a delightfully simple, fresh campaign emphasizing those very same characteristics of the brand. Other winners included the lovingly crafted Taylor Guitar campaign from Vitro, The Martin Agency’s work on behalf of the JFK Museum and yet another brilliant execution in the “Truth” campaign (public service) from Arnold. No surprise all three have been here before, as finalists and winners. They’re good.
That’s the other great thing about the Kelly’s. Nothing in this show even flirts with mediocrity. All 25 finalists are best-in-class examples of their craft. With the exception of Cannes, most advertising award shows don’t have this level of quality control. Advertising creatives have always known this, which is why we consider the Kelly’s among the top tier of award shows.
For a complete list and showcase of winners go here.
The MPA Kelly Awards. Judging from the judges, magazine advertising is still a big deal.
March 11, 2010
When I was a wee pup scratching at the doorstep to Adland, I fantasized about writing my first big, national magazine ad. I dreamed of making a glossy back pager the way other men lusted at the Playboy centerfold. Back then centerfolds and magazines were the shit. And not just for consumers, but copywriters too. For me, nothing symbolized the art of copywriting more than a really good magazine ad. While most of my peers at Leo Burnett coveted television assignments, I felt happiest attacking a print brief. Receiving the Magazine Publishers of America Kelly Award for best print campaign in North America (Altoids) was more satisfying than even winning Lions in Cannes for TV (Heinz Ketchup). Of course, the hundred grand prize may have had something to do with that! And while I’ve jokingly called the out-of-home medium my mistress (so immediate and so bodacious!), to this day I still carry a torch for print. Print is my wife and I love her dearly.
Thanks to the Internet, like all mass media magazines are in jeopardy. Maybe not as much as newspapers but for many “books” the situation is dire. Last year, two magazines I subscribe to went out of business.
So I have to wonder the tone of this year’s Kelly awards, of which I am honored to be judging. I know the MPA well. As you’d expect, they feel righteous about their industry and can point to various signs of relief. Certain publications continue to thrive, for both consumers and advertisers. Who doesn’t love People Magazine or Vanity Fair? Still, the challenges magazines face are real and some unsolvable. Suffice it to say, the golden age of magazines is over.
But that doesn’t mean the medium is finished. Not by a long shot. Frankly, I’m guessing the pubs that remain will be better than their predecessors. Only the strong survive, right? In terms of advertising, it seems to me any truly great integrated campaign will have magazine ads in it. We’ll see.
Judging by the caliber of judges for this year’s Kelly Awards, I am not the only ad man with a rooting interest in magazines. Jeff Goodby. Stan Richards. Steve Hayden. Dave Lubars. Men of a certain age, yes, but they are doing as well today as ever.
Despite the difficult environment magazines now live in I look forward to seeing the work and to meeting so many distinguished judges. For complete information about the MPA Kelly awards including the list of judges please visit: MPA Kelly Awards
The Happy Soul Industry
The Last Generation
Gods of Advertising 