Disqus - Latest Comments for tangerinetoad

Re: The Stubborn Mule-Like Tendencies of Reactionary Thinking

tangerinetoad — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:35:05 -0000

Agreed. Excellent point: technology changes so rapidly, that by the time the rest of the world catches up, it will likely have evolved into something completely different. Good to hear from you. (Assuming this is Dave C.)

Re: The Stubborn Mule-Like Tendencies of Reactionary Thinking

tangerinetoad — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:33:22 -0000

Thanks Matt for providing more insight into a topic I admittedly don't know a whole lot about.

Re: The Stubborn Mule-Like Tendencies of Reactionary Thinking

tangerinetoad — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:12:35 -0000

Thanks for the thorough and illuminating explanation Ben

Two questions:

1. Are the stats you're citing fairly consistent across industries and
types of products/services?

2. Can a distinction be made between banners than function as DR
vehicles (e.g. contain a specific offer such as "click here to
download a $10 coupon") vs banners that function as animated print ads
whose sole call-to-action is something to the effect of "click here to
learn more?"

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:43:20 -0000

You're having a different argument HJ
Which has always been part of your unique charm.

Nasty anonymous blog comments on gossip sites are a lot different that
"Congratulations, buddy" on Adweek.

As for Disqus, it's one of the most widely used commenting platforms.
But given your evaluation of it, I should be quite flattered you've
taken the trouble to respond.

Twice.

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:16:18 -0000

Still not following you.
Not talking "negative commenters." Did not mention it in the post at all.
Just wondering why POSITIVE commenters were afraid to leave their names on a message as banal as "congrats, buddy"

Nothing more. Nothing less.

BTW: What sort of spam did you get from Disqus. I've near heard of that before. They are having some issues this week, it may be part of it - if you can forward the email to me, I've found they are quite helpful in clearing these things up.

Re: The Stubborn Mule-Like Tendencies of Reactionary Thinking

tangerinetoad — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:55:48 -0000

@Ben: Thanks again. That's quite an education there (for me, anyway.) Really appreciate you taking the time to spell that all out in a clear and concise manner.

Re: The Stubborn Mule-Like Tendencies of Reactionary Thinking

tangerinetoad — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:24:26 -0000

Thanks for the thorough and illuminating explanation Ben

Two questions:

1. Are the stats you're citing fairly consistent across industries and types of products/services?

2. Can a distinction be made between banners than function as DR vehicles (e.g. contain a specific offer such as "click here to download a $10 coupon") vs banners that function as animated print ads whose sole call-to-action is something to the effect of "click here to learn more?"

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:13:29 -0000

You're having a different argument HJ
Which has always been part of your unique charm;)

Nasty anonymous blog comments on gossip sites do indeed come from anywhere and everywhere, but they are a lot different that writing "Congratulations, buddy" on a news story on Adweek

As for Disqus, it's one of the most widely used commenting platforms. But given your evaluation of it, I will deem it a high compliment that you've taken the trouble to respond. Twice.

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:32:18 -0000

Thanks for chiming in HJ, late or not.

Your post, sadly, reaffirms how behind the times most BDAs are. The world has changed a lot in the last two years. Most of the digital agencies I work with expect their employees to have a robust social media presence and are baffled by the notion that a BDA creative director would be furious to see one of his minions congratulating a former co-worker.

Hence the title of the post "Fear and Loathing in Adland"

Re: More Magic Advertising Words

tangerinetoad — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:35:37 -0000

@Yikes: Even if they offer something beyond the typical print or TV-based campaign, I'm not sure what effect it would have. Or are you suggesting that Goodby get involved in product development and R&D, the two areas Yahoo needs to work on before they can advertise in any medium?

@Josh - welcome aboard. You raise some interesting points, but I suspect it all hooks back to not having the right product: if Yahoo wants to help consumers "use the web more easily to navigate their life" I'm not sure how the current site does that or why it's preferable to say Facebook or Google.

As I'd noted, the reaction from the tech press (and I'm talking consumer tech press, not the hardcore geeks) to Yahoo's new offerings was underwhelming. So while the Ogilvy campaign could have done a better job of directly communicating the message Yahoo wanted, the proof points still seem to be absent.

@Wade - the change to the home page was fairly dramatic... it just did not seem to be the sort of change people wanted. The main ding I saw in reviews (both user and blogger) was that it took too many clicks and that the ads were both confusing and in the way.

Re: First Ad Age Column

tangerinetoad — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:19:15 -0000

I think you may be misinterpreting the column Ben.
Or perhaps I wasn't being clear.
Because I really don't disagree with anything you've said.

To your first point, I specifically pointed out that ad agencies
generally do a poor job of finding the sort of content their consumers
want (that line about the Teutonic techno king) and that it's a
delicate dance that requires balancing uniqueness with mainstream
appeal a la "Slumdog Millionaire."

So yes, you'll brook no disagreement from me when you note that most
CMOs (and their ad agency counterparts) will make poor judges of what their customers are looking for in terms of content.

As to your second point: where you read "As consumers outside their
core audience grow increasingly frustrated with the banality of the
content their peers are sharing..." to mean ALL or MOST consumers, I
was talking about a very small percentage of consumers, the sort who
may be attracted to niche brands and niche markets-- not mainstream
brands and mainstream markets.

So again, I am in complete agreement that the vast majority of
consumers love cute kitten videos. But there's a percentage that don't
and the article outlines a way to reach them.

I'm not sure if you read the article in haste or if I wasn't clear
enough: perhaps others have some input.

Re: Welcome To The Hive Awards

tangerinetoad — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:21:23 -0000

This is a test comment

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 08:51:45 -0000

Excellent synopsis of the great divide Nick. Nothing more to add - you've nailed it.

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:45:12 -0000

Ana: while everything you just laid out is by and large true, at least in my experience, the fact remains that large clients are equally complicit. They give lip service to digital, but still spend the bulk of their budgets on print and TV. As such, they're still looking for creative directors who can deliver in that medium and they're the ones who give the agencies the money to pay them.

Re: Fear and Loathing in Adland

tangerinetoad — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:50:59 -0000

@Ana - that is the crux of it. That Ad Age article is pretty eye-opening - senior partners at big NYC law firms pull in around $750/hour. Despite a slew of evidence to the contrary, agencies have convinced big-spending clients that certain creatives will give them results that are markedly different than others. This may have been true in the days before cable television, when there were 3 TV networks in the US, but it's of dubious value now.

Still, the bulk of the money is still flowing to traditional agencies for traditional media and despite getting the lion's share of press, the budgets given to digital agencies is considerably smaller.

@Craig, Stephen, Len, Galen & Nick: It is indeed too bad that advertising types can't have a civil conversation online. As I said, I suspect that's a function of the subjective nature of our business and the widely-held presumption that "anyone can do this."

When people are being paid lots of money to do something with no real measurable results (e.g. doctors save lives, lawyers win cases) there's bound to be a lot of insecurity. The changes wrought by the Real Digital Revolution may indeed change all that, but it'll be a slow change, not an immediate one.

Re: The Power of Buzzwords

tangerinetoad — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:31:41 -0000

@Ben (the inestimable Ben Kay, author of the UK's best ad blog, "If This Is A Blog, Then What's Christmas?) Good to have you back buddy. And in rare form too-- love the 324-degree thing- actually made me LOL. Agree about Just Do It moving beyond sport.
But 100% agree about buzzworders getting annoyed when you ask them to explain the buzzword or what they meant. And while it probably wins me no points, I love being the guy who raises his hand and with a slightly blank look asks "I don't get what you mean by "brand personalization" Can you explain that a little more." And they all just get flummoxed and angry at that question, because it means you're not buying in to the Conspiracy of the Buzzword, which says that you'll all keep quiet about not know what the catch phrases really mean and so long as you all keep using them, it's okay

@Warren-- another big welcome to an old friend: Warren Berger is a former Adweek columnist (he was the Brian Morrissey of his day) and an established author. I checked out your list and it's well worth reading both for buzzword value and as an insight into the mindset of the design industry. Looking forward to the book.

@Raafi: You raise a good point- the ability to appropriately (as opposed to correctly) regurgitate a buzzword is definitely part of getting into the club and is often used to telegraph an insider's knowledge of a certain topic. As to your corollary about buzzwords as defense mechanisms- definitely. How many times have you disagreed with someone to be met by a barrage of acronyms in response.

@Tom K: that's what's so frustrating about buzzwordization (to coin a phrase) - most of the words have valid and concrete origins that have gotten lost as the word takes on broader meaning.

@Michael - Inbound Marketing is a good one. Not sure what it means, but I know that two familiar-but-seemingly-unrelated terms (crowd sourcing, for example) make a great buzzword

@Chapin (RGA) - that's very funny - you should join forces with our fellow Jerseyite Steve Woodruff (here's his version: http://twitter.com/swoodruff/statuses/4481114778) And a big welcome to you too, since this is your first comment on The Toad Stool.

Re: Magic Advertising Words - A Brief Update

tangerinetoad — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:27:50 -0000

Very true Ben - that's an excellent point about consumers having long memories about products. It's sort of how I feel about FPGs (Familiar Packaged Goods) - our memory of them and feelings about them are often fixed at the time we first tried them and if that experience was negative, the brand has a lot to overcome.

Re: Magic Advertising Words - A Brief Update

tangerinetoad — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:03:33 -0000

Good catch Raafi. I was 100% thinking about Hyundai and that post and figured no one would remember it.

But it's exactly the case-- Hyundai's brand and sales are heading up without any memorable "big idea" type ad campaign in place... it mostly seems to be WOM, DWOM and people noticing them on the street and being surprised that the good looking car is a Hyundai

Re: Crowdsourcing Is Just Creative Gang Bang 2.0

tangerinetoad — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:55:55 -0000

@Edward: Crowd sourcing is not evil or wrong per se. And having no idea how Mullen (which is not a big agency) uses it, I can't comment on your particular experience with it.

But for big agencies, which thrive on the notion of "more is more" the idea of being able to tell their clients that they had hundreds of designers working on the logo rather than just one, has their eyes lighting up.

And your point on the amount of time and work on the part of the sourcer is at some level the crux of my argument: despite the time and effort put forth in managing the crowdsourcing --or the creative gang bang-- the end result is rarely (if ever) any better than it would have been by tasking one or two people whose talent you trusted. The main benefit is the dog and pony show for the client, which may have been what you were referring to by "creating participation and propagation" two up and coming buzzwords ;)

@waqueau - the companies that manage the crowdsourcing usually have some sort of "I relinquish all rights" document that people sign before they submit. Which is not to say that lawsuits won't happen, but my understanding it that there is usually some CYA mechanism in place."

Re: Crowdsourcing Is Just Creative Gang Bang 2.0

tangerinetoad — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:54:34 -0000

@Jeff (jvini) and Josh: Apologies: I should have been more clear here. What I'm referring to is crowdsourcing creative, e.g. logo design and whatnot. It was heavily discussed/promoted by Mullen's Edward Boches and CPB's Alex Bogusky on blog posts - http://bit.ly/2l0VXo - and it is likely to be used by more and more agencies.

In a nutshell: the agency contacts a crowdsourcing "wrangler" that they're looking for a logo for Client X. The wrangler puts out the word. Dozens of freelance designers work on a logo. The agency picks a winner and that person gets paid and gets credited for the logo.

Hope that clears things up

Re: Suggested users by @jsmakr

tangerinetoad — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:24:09 -0000

Thank you my fellow Jerseyite - that's some esteemed company you've put me in, though proud to call many friends. Valuable list.

Re: The End of "Creative" Hegemony

Subbu — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 05:40:57 -0000

"Problem is compounded by lower salaries for what's becoming an increasingly female-dominated side of the business." Ditto in India! I wonder why no one is interested in doing anything about it.

Re: The End of "Creative" Hegemony

tangerinetoad — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:46:04 -0000

Hey- thanks all for keeping the conversation going on this.

@Carl (Loebster) - "in portfolio schools; often, the only audience young creatives learn to impress is old creatives" - exactly. And so rather than speaking to the people buying the product, who are likely not all that hip, they're talking to a bunch of CDs, who are.

@Dave (JetPacks) & ImageText - Crowdsourcing seems like it's just the ultimate "gang bang" (may need to do a whole post on that) - but it's that notion that if you throw enough monkeys with enough typewriters at a problem, they'll eventually stumble upon it. Anyone who's been through an agency that loves gang bangs knows that the final result is rarely more than a few degrees away from the initial efforts and is often actually worse.

@Stuart - Direct Response : Web 1.0 = PR : Web 2.0 -- agencies can learn a lot from PR agencies, particularly how to charge for their time and expertise rather than charge for "making something"

@Mark - I think familiar packaged goods are very much about image, but the Real Digital Revolution (the ability to research products and DWOM about products online) has changed the ability of brands to create images without products to back up the image. (see my post about VW the other other day) The whole premise of social media is that you will be able to build brands off of buzz and fan-love, slowly but surely vs having a giant ad budget. Truth is currently somewhere in the middle I suspect.

@Subbu - thanks for sharing your experiences in India. They are not very different from what I see in the US, where the problem is compounded by lower salaries for what's becoming an increasingly female-dominated side of the business. The solution is that the internal structure of agencies will change and old titles like "copywriter" and "account manager" will be replaced by different, as-yet-to-be-invented ones that match the new responsibilities agencies will have.

Re: Magic Advertising Words

tangerinetoad — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:26:08 -0000

They were just being nice to you Mike ;)

Seriously though-- VW had a good reputation for many years. But when
people go out to buy a car, they're finding the experts are less than
thrilled. I suspect that for most people, that's the only time they
pay attention to sites like Jalopnik or Consumer Reports or Car &
Driver: when they're at the active purchase stage. VW is not the only
brand that's been able to glide on its former glory.

Re: Magic Advertising Words

tangerinetoad — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:52:12 -0000

Thanks for the input Carl.

For those of you who don't know Carl Loeb (aka loebster1), he was a key part of the creative group that did the great Volkswagen work at Arnold in the late 90s and early 00s. So his take on what VW is going through is very well informed and much appreciated.