Brilliant spec work.

I'm not sure what to make of companies with 'in-house' creative departments, seems a bit anti-ad agency to me, and if every client followed suit we'd all be in the shit.

Can't fault this little viral from Spec-Savers though...

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1600158118/bctid2225054001

Good send up guys.

RKCR/Y&R+M&SXMAS=A+++

When i read today's news that the new M&S Christmas ad featuring Take That, Twiggy, Erin O'Connor, Lily Cole, Myleene Klass and Noémie Lenoir was about to be released i'm not afraid to admit i shuddered in horror (except for Ms Lenior of course).

But having watched the ad, i'm happy to say i was shocked for all the wrong reasons. Or is that right reasons? Because i bloody liked it. Really liked it. It's genius. Have a look here:

http://www.brandrepublic.com/Campaign/News/861754/join-festivities-M-S-Christmas-ad/

And why is it genius? No dialogue.

Nice one Pip and Chris at Y&R.

How Stella got her groove back

Love the new ad for Stella 4% from Mother, they're so hot right now...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2008/nov/04/advertising

Any thoughts?

Hotel, Motel...

Isn't it weird how sometimes an ad campaign can have it's awful executions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7kQkGDprzw

And it's brilliant ones:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pjbKV8tQLQ

Well done, and not-so-well done Fallon Minneapolis.

WPPeed all over.

Hope none of you are dithering over a job offer from any WPP owned agency:

http://www.brandrepublic.com/Campaign/News/854855/WPP-orders-hiring-freeze-amid-client-spending-cuts/

Wouldn't it be nice if a top agency came out and said "Fuck the credit crunch: we're doing great and we're hiring".

If anyone knows of any behaviour of this kind, please share it. It's good to talk.

Absolute-ly not sure.

When it comes to ads, I'm an opinionated git (although i think that's healthy for someone trying to get into the industry) so there are always ads running on the telly box that i love (Bud Dedication - "Now throw in an Arbitrary Refrain" - genius) and some that i hate (the Trainline.com - don't even get me started).

But every now and then an ad (or campaign) appears that I'm really not sure about- this time it's the Absolute Radio launch campaign:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2008/oct/10/commercialradio-radio

I really wasn't sure whether i thought it as clever usage of actor Jordan Prentice, or whether it's exploitation of a dwarf to represent a crazy security guard.

And then i read this from Absolute Radio brand director, Chris Lawson:

"The idea was to create something that sums up the brand, we are trying for squirm humour like you might see on My Name Is Earl or Curb Your Enthusiasm."

Hmmm, 'squirm humour' it is then. But what exactly are we squirming at? And where is the humour? Are we supposed to laugh at the notion of a dwarf security guard? Or is that the squirm factor?

Like i say, i'm not sure whether i think it's funny and irreverent, or just in poor taste.

I'd love to know what the vast sums of readers of this blog think...

Are you taking the piss, Mr Pringle?

If you read Scamp (and you do) you'll have seen yesterdays post referring (kind of) to an aptitude test that has been designed to identify 'Diagonal Thinkers', which is being run by the IPA. 'Breaking into advertising' was the cover story of the Guardian Work section on Saturday, and if you missed it here's the gist of what a Diagonal Thinker is:

"(Diagonal Thinking) is the ability to switch effortlessly between linear, logical thought processes to lateral creative ones... and it seems to be one of the defining characteristics of people who do well in our industry".

According to the IPA, only 10% of the population can think diagonally. And if you score more than 90% in the test, you can print off an IPA certificate, which, says IPA director general Hamish Pringle, you can then attach to your CV as proof of your talent, which will become your "passport to adland".

So if you really want a job in advertising, chuck out your portfolio, get on www.diagonalthinking.co.uk and show off your shiny certificate around Soho instead.

PS. If you're wondering how i did, my PC crashed half way through the test, and you only get one chance, so i'm buggered.

Are you really hungry for advertising?

If you're one of the many dole-mongers looking to get on the ad-ladder you may or may not be aware of a new scheme known as the LHA. Sound pretty cool? Well it's not...

The LHA is the Local Housing Allowance, a new scheme which is used to determine how much housing benefit you are entitled to whilst looking for one of those cleverly concealed jobs in adland.

And guess what? They've capped it at something like £84 a week, instead of covering your share of the rent like they used to. So let's say your rent is £110 a week - you're now £26 a week poorer. Take that from your job-seekers, and you're left with a princely sum of around £34 a week to live on.

Minus all your other outgoings (utility bills etc, we're not even talking food here) and yep you're left with pretty much... fuck all.

So now, more than ever, it really is down to who is hungriest for a job in advertising.

I'm off to eat some mud.

You're not wrong there, Wal.

Chances are, if you read this blog you read Creative in London. The latest post from Wal caused more than the usual vitriol from the anonymous commentors out there.

I think Wal has a good point though.

I know a team who have been rocking an agency for months now on placement, getting out more work than most of the creative department combined. But the ECD wont hire them because he doesn't think their book is strong enough.

Go figure.

I always thought your book was to get you on placement, then your performance on placement would determine your chances of getting hired.

I hate knowing nothing.

It's not me, it's you...

If anyone noticed, i've not posted recently, and this is because I've recently become a single creative again. And since divorcing my old AD i've found the whole process of finding a suitable replacement quite time consuming, and a real eye opener as to just who is out there on the singles scene.

And it got me thinking about why in London juniors are expected to arrive at agencies in ready-team format. I know there is an arguement that agencies can afford to be picky who they take on and they don't need the hassle of matching ADs to suitable CWs.

But taking on teams with a combined portfolio surely disguises the fact that one member of the team probably carries the other member to some extent, and therefore you are employing less than what you are paying for.

If an agency employs CWs and ADs seperately, as they do in the states, would you not increase the chances of hooking up a brilliant writer with a brilliant artiste, with the combined effect of producing brilliant advertising?

I guess it's left for the team to be brilliant before they arrive together at an agency and can produce work from day one, having presumably already worked together on briefs for some time.

Still, it seems a false economy to me. If creative budgets are so small, and with all this credit crunch bullshit, why don't agencies seek out the best single juniors and try and match them up within the agency, rather than telling them to 'come back when you've got a partner'.

Just a thought.

Getting hired: a marathon or a sprint?

After pounding the streets for two years, a certain someone I know has now reached a fork in the road and doesn't know which direction to head down.

Down one street lurks a little known integrated agency that may be willing to hire after a few weeks of hard graft and cracking briefs.

Down the other street rows of big ass ATL agencies sit side-by-side with offers of placements galore, but with the same sign hung on the front door: WE'RE NOT HIRING.

Now here come the pro's and the con's:

Small agency.
Pro's: Opportunities to be hands on, including travelling to exotic locations (not that that should matter, although with an August like this I'd be tempted), a salary you can actually live on and buy clothes and stuff (like loan cheque day at uni), and pay the rent on time. People know your name.

Con's: The work. You'll never ever produce any work worthy of putting in the book - obscure, safe clients with no desire to push boundaries or do anything remotely interesting. Boss sits about five desks away and meddles in everything you do, buggers up the briefs, directs the creative (although not a creative director).

Big agencies.
Pro's: Working alongside some of the best people in advertising, learning from the best. Opportunities to work on great briefs (you may have to steal them though), with massive clients, and under the guidance of top CD's.

Con's: No one cares who you are, you can produce more work than runs than the entire creative department combined but you still wont get hired. You're poorer than when you're on the dole, and people think you're rude when you decline after work drinks - oblivious to the fact you need that £20 for food for the next two weeks.

So here's the dilemma: Do you take the first job offered, or hold out the the job you've been aiming for for the last two(+) years?

I can't remember who once said it, but they said: In advertising, first get a job; then get the job.

I'm not sure i agree with this. Do teams from tiny little agencies get hired by big bad agencies? If you don't get hired through a placement, can you get hired through a book/reel of spec work? Is taking a job in integrated detrimental to getting that dream ATL job? Should you keep on doing the placement rounds and wait for your lucky break?

Sorry this post raises more questions than answers, but I'd love to know what the few of you that read this blog think about this subject.

Formula One.

Just thought i'd share the process of how i come up with campaigns for the portfolio. I'm not big on formulas (they remind me of those massive marketing textbooks at uni) but this is definitely one i'm glad i came across once upon a time. I don't know where it came from or who devised it, but it's pretty simple and it works for me:

So firstly pick a product (sometimes the hardest part for some reason).

Then write down everything about it, good and bad. Try to avoid obvious selling points, find an insight.

Look for a human benefit that could occur due to one of these insights.

Turn this into your strategy - the sentence that your ideas and executions will adhere to.

From your strategy come up with a strapline.

Turn your strapline into a full-blown integrated campaign.

I know i'm not going into any depth here but i think it's a pretty good basis for idea generation for your book. Who ever said advertising isn't easy?

The sneakers maketh the creative?

I've just bought my third pair of Chuck Taylor Cons in a row, mainly because i like the way they look (not the best pumps for pounding the streets, are they?) and the bonus that they're fairly cheap (£4 from ebay this time round), so when they inevitably fall apart after a few months it's not too much of a big deal.

They also happen to be pink. Oh yes. Pink sneakers. And i think you'll agree they're pretty sexy:

Then i found this cool blog: http://www.hipsterrunoff.com/2008/08/which-shoe-company-represents-u.html that tells you what your footwear says about you. Here's my new sneakers judged in all their glory:

"Quirky coloured converse - You were probably in a ska band in high school and are attached to your image as 'the smart kid who was also artistic and also had a quirky side that his teachers absolutely loved!'"

So what relevance does this have to do with a blog about advertising? Well in an ideal world it wouldn't have any relevance, but we live in the real world; and in the real world people judge people and form opinions of them by what they look like and what they wear.

And i've got a sneaky (pardon the pun) suspicion that when you go for a crit, you are not only being judged by the standard of your work and how personable you come across, but for your choice of attire too. And the first thing 'critters' (as opposed to us, the 'critees') look at when they shake your hand? Your footwear.

Although i've heard some critters say it makes no difference what you dress like, i think it does. Especially at the 'cool' agencies. And maybe they're right to do so. I'm not saying you're going to walk into Wiedens and get a placement for wearing pink pumps (though that would be nice), but if you call yourself a creative, surely you naturally surround yourself in all things creative and expressive. Including what you wear. That's why creatives don't have to wear suits, right?

Anyway I may well be completely talking crap, but if you're still not convinced, go to your next crit in Reebok Classics (with your tracky bottoms tucked into your socks, of course) and see how well they go down...

Shopping bag philosophy.

Bought some literature in Waterstones yesterday, and got some free philosophy thrown in courtesy of W.H. Auden:

'Some books are undeservedly forgotten; none are undeservedly remembered'.

Although Auden probs wasn't referring to creative portfolios, he pretty much sums up my last point, but in nine words. Damn.

Make your book outstanding.

Being read my last rites at my JWT placement, Mike McKenna had some great advice: Make your book stand out. Not the stuff inside it, the outside cover.

Mike mentioned that he sprayed his book red when he was doing the rounds, purely to make it stand out. Then when it was handed in for crits, shows, and competitions, everyone knew it was Mike's book. Didn't matter what was in it, Mike had a point of difference. His book stood out without even being opened.

I remembered this advice when handing in our book at The Talent Business for Cream 2008, as our black book was taken in by the lovely receptionist and added to the pile of black books.

Thanks Mike, if only i had bothered to listen...

How do you reach Andy Sandoz?

There's an interesting article in the 08/08 edition of Campaign written by Andy Sandoz of Work Club fame.

In the article Sandoz mentions a widget available on Firefox called Adblock Plus, which "installs at the click of a button and promptly turns off 99 per cent of all ads". He also mentions that through iPlayer, iTunes, Sky+, etc the consumer needs no great digital wizardry to view TV and online content without seeing any ads.

Sandoz goes on to say that it's "the shift in control from advertiser to consumer that has changed; fortunately, the insight and impact of a good idea hasn't. What's important is what you now do with that good idea to make it interesting, make it innovative and make it of value to me... so I seek it out and engage with it".

I think this is a great way of gauging the ideas that you have in your book. Say you are going to see Andy (and take it from me, this guy pulls no punches) or any other CD for the first time and you have no idea whether your book will be showered with praise or shot down in flames. You may have got the strategies for your campaigns nailed, but have you made these good ideas interesting? Have you been innovative? And are you giving the 'consumer' (or CD) value to the point where they would seek out your ideas to engage with them? Be honest with yourself and you will find your answer.

And as well as traditional book crits, it's also worth thinking about how you are going to be interesting and innovative to grab the attention of a CD who sees good ideas every hour of every working day.

As Sandoz says to conclude his article: "Advertising, come get me."

New kid on the blog.

See what i did there? Welcome one and all (just one for now probably - hi Mike) to my blog.

I am creating it with a view to providing a platform for those unemployed junior ad folk (being one myself) to debate, discuss, and express themselves in all matters ad related /unrelated.

I am hoping that you good people will use this blog to share your experiences, gossip, and junior wisdom.

I'm also incorporating a no Wal bashing policy. So there.

Hope you get something from this blog. Thanks for stopping by...