June 25, 2007The day after yesterday
Filed Under: Pithy Conversation Catalysts
|
|
Baby Jaffe is 1 (day) and all is beautiful with the world. Thanks again to everyone for all their wonderful wishes (except the A-listers who are all full of themselves)
Here are some links and random thoughts as I attempt to keep my head above water:
- Check out Flight of the Conchords on HBO. Really brilliant stuff
- Dove's Evolution wins both Cyber and Film Grand Prix. Consider this the first day of the new era of creativity. Ding Dong traditional creatives, you are well and truly dead.
- What's your blog rated? Mine is PG (Thanks Ariel Waldman)
- Interesting commentary on Leno's Live Advertising experiment. But will it blend?
- Techno//Marketer - this guy IS good. What a summary!
- Barack Obama Ringtones. This one you have to hear to believe (hat tip to Jon Stewart)
- Wonderful story of Paul Potts who won Britain's Got Talent. He's a mobile phone salesman with an opera voice extraordinaire. Not sure the new marketing angle. Just a nice story
- Hilary Clinton Soprano's spoof and accompanying commentary by Simpson, 'eh. Haven't discussed this much, but probably worth doing so at some point
SPONSORSHIPJaffe Juice – brings a fresh new marketing perspective and commentary from industry thought leader and author Joseph Jaffe. Click here to find out more about sponsorship opportunities. Jaffe Juice continues below... |
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/307546/19600920
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The day after yesterday:
Comments
Ahh, good on you for pointing to Matt Dickman. That's one smart dude...
Posted by: Paul McEnany
>>Dove's Evolution wins both Cyber and Film Grand Prix. Consider this the first day of the new era of creativity. Ding Dong traditional creatives, you are well and truly dead.>>
Except of course for the fact that it was done by "traditional creatives." And moved to the correct category to win the Grand Prix by other "traditional creatives"
What's troubling Joe is that while the lines are blurring rapidly here in the trenches, you insist on playing it as an "us vs. them" thing.
Granted there are still plenty of Luddites out there who dismiss anything new, but the skills that enabled the creative team to come up with "Evolution" were the same skills that enabled them to come up with great TV commercials in the past.
And I'd guess that its strong resemblance to a TV commercial made it a lot easier to sell to Unilever and made it easier for the traditional ad guys who make up the Grand Prix Jury to realize how good it was.
Evolution Joe, not Revolution. It's just advertising ;)
Posted by: tangerine Toad
Toad,
That comment was specifically for you, you know that right? :)
I say that because traditional creatives aren't reading blogs;it's below them, really. Doesn't look like a :30 or should I say "viral" spot, now does it?
In all seriousness, your comments are taken, but these moments and people are still in the vast minority.
On my part, I'm curious to see how both Ogilvy and Unilever "evolve"/transform (or not) as a direct result of this. Any thoughts or predictions on what we'll see from both Ogilvy and Unilever from hereon end?
Posted by: Joseph Jaffe
Just a quick thought from someone who has a fair bit of inside information on Evolution, as the decision maker at the time. We are obviously over the moon with the success and much has been written on why this wonderful film was successful.
Ultimately, it was from a brand with a great mission, executed brilliantly from a remarkable idea by some very clever and passionate creative people (I will avoid the new vs. old debate), and brought to life in the new world of media and communities.
The transformation with the participants is already well underway, and this success will only propagate this journey for us and many others. But ultimately, it starts with an idea and knowing what we have in the hopper, I will bet on the "traditional creatives" who work on the business to continue to pioneer in the new environment.
If only in the world of betting there was a sure thing!
Posted by: gvc
Joe
I don't really care who is winning the current battle between the traditionalists and the newbies. That's not the point, because in five years it will be something else people are arguing about. BDA's such as Ogilvy will not change in any reasonable way because their business model will not allow them to. If you are part of the conglomerates your whole working premise is to make those quarterly numbers. The bean counters don't care if you do it with TV, digital, or sandwich boards... But TV will always be the big revenue earner. That's why it will ALWAYS be the first thing a BDA sells its clients on. Anyway, "Evolution" was created as a viral video. The fact that it was translated into a TV spot had NOTHING to do with whether that was the most effective way to reach an audience... It was all about winning an award at Cannes. And, to me, that is not something to get excited about, particularly, as I've posted on AdScam, the whole voting thing at most of the shows now is outrageously and blatently fixed.
Posted by: George Parker
George convenient argument for your perspective, but not true. "Evolution" was put on tv selectively backed by great PR to spread the brand message utilizing a great piece of creative, thereby capitalizing on the moment.
Contrary to some people's beliefs in the heat of battle one defaults to building brands versus winning awards. The later becomes a delightful by-product!
Posted by: gvc
Geoff,
Love the fact you're commenting/responding on the blog. Awesome. Take this as an open invitation to come on Across the Sound (my new marketing podcast) to talk about Evolution and anything else on your mind.
e-mail me directly: jaffe [at] crayonville [dot] com
Posted by: jJ
Forget awards and new media for a second. Since this campaign also brings into question what it is we call real vs. fake beauty as we’ve been exposed to it through traditional and new media, and to continue the discussion the ad started, can I suggest that Unilever refuse to Photoshop any of their models and only shoot people who don’t have a ton of make-up on?
Try it for a year. Consumers might appreciate a brand that walks the talk like that.
Posted by: makethelogobigger
Geoff:
Both Danny G on Adpulp http://www.adpulp.com/archives/2007/06/dove_evolution.php and High Jive on Multi-Cult Classics http://multicultclassics.blogspot.com/2005/08/essay-119.html and http://multicultclassics.blogspot.com/2006/01/essay-340.html have some major issues with the campaign- their main points being that (a) how can a company that makes skin-lightening cream then go ahead and do "Evolution" (Adpulp) and (b) why are the women on the Dove box still airbrushed beauties (High Jive)
Care to comment?
Posted by: Tangerine Toad
