In my last post I asked the question, what if brands were more like Lady Gaga? I suggested that modern brands should be adopting the digital practice of Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V- rapidly evolving, conceiving new ideas – discarding and adopting as required. To do this, I suggested communications should be rooted in smaller, personal communication with customers using the plethora of data which we, the public, make available about ourselves online – brand preference, bands we like, films we admire, purchase behaviour, web usage data – to tailor messages to our target and ensure relevance. These smaller, more personal, fleet of foot messages should be used at the expense of broader, monolithic branding campaigns.

Now, this was perhaps a little foolhardy of me. Big, broad, monolithic branding campaigns in broadcast media environments still do have a huge role to play in modern communications, and are still wildly successful in some instances. X Factor is great example of the power of broadcast media, and TV is often the first choice on an advertisers wish list – look at Yeo Valley, or dare i say it, Compare the Market.

So coming back to the idea of CTRL+C, CTRL+V – the thought is based in a brands ability to rapidly evolve, cutting and pasting around itself, it suggests a change of role for broadcast media/broad branding, not it’s exclusion, because as i’ve said – it’s far from being dead.

Below is how alot of communication plans are currently formed.

Given what i’ve said about the need for rapid evolution, messages that are based in data, and targeting rooted in actual rather than claimed behaviour – this model probably wouldnt work. Campaigns take time, from brief to finished product, to develop. Broadcast media has long lead times. So, we would need to move to a model more akin to this:

It’s all the little, digital bits which bring you in, and warm you up to a brand – with the bigger, broader brand type stuff in big, broadcast media channels that keep you with the brand. Broadcast media and branding becomes about consumers justifying their choice – anyone familiar with Behavioural Economics will have encountered this notion. It’s what many car advertisers do, using gloriously lush TV creative so that people tell themselves that they’ve made the right choice.  As Toby pointed out to me today, brands such as o2 have been doing this successfully for a while, with a “conversations overheard” strategy – little proof points constantly reassuring people they made the right choice – tickets to music concerts, being one of their little hooks. It doesnt matter if the customer ever uses the service on offer, but it reassures them it is available.

As with last time, this idea will continue to take shape, but at least its got a name – CTRL C, CTRL V.

Gerzema and Lebar worked at Y+R in the states, and conducted years and years of work on their BAV (Brand Asset Valuator) database. Whilst trying to work out which brand measures move stock price for companies, they stumbled upon something – something potentially quite horrifying. They realised that whilst the value of brand’s on the stock market was steadily increasing year on year (i.e investors considered brands safer and safer bets), consumer opinion was actually heading the other way – people were becoming more and more cynical towards brands.

Listing a number of household names, they identify that actually the majority of companies value is made up of intangible assets – brand value; Google for instance, 50% of their market capitalisation is made up of brand value, not actual profit or revenue, but brand value – essentially the idea of Google that lives in peoples minds. A timely example of this is the recent valuation of Facebook at $50bn. So, if consumer opinion – and therefore, usage (on a long enough timeline) is indecline, then what happens when the brand value collapses? Potentially another recession, I guess.

Gerzema and Lebar suggest that certain brands buck this trend, with consumer opinion increasing – these are brands which are “irresistible” – these are brands which will continue to have both book value, and brand value – who will eventually beat the impending bursting brand bubble. Gerzema and Lebar define an “irresistable” brand as the following:

- Highly irrational, yet entirely irrefutable - they are provactive and daring, they create envy and lust

-They convey the sense there is something to them, they create evangelists

-They constantly reinvent themselves, they cant sit still. They refresh their meaning

-They address people on their own terms, in a language all of their own

-They dont force devotion, the compel it.

-They move culture as well as categories.

So far, so simple. Loads of brands do this – Apple and Nike being two good examples. In my very simple mind – i drew a parallel with Madonna. Madonna is a brand – a construct of the imagination of Madonna Louise Ciccone, an idea which we, the public understand and interpret. She’s known for many of the tenets above, the tenets of “irresistible” brands – she’s known for her varied musical output, her chameleon like styling, she has over time  consistently reinvented, or evolved the idea of what it is to be Madonna. A lad called David Jones sort of got this too.

Roughly speaking, we get one Madonna look or theme a year, or when she releases a new album, or goes on tour. From a communications and advertising perspective, traditional brands do this too. We get campaigns with a given look or theme or message once every year or two. Agencies work to planning cycles, looking ahead to the next year.

But, as we know the world has changed. People live their lives at breakneck speed. Social media platforms allow people to update their status on an almost constant basis, they also mean that interactions between people is as likely to take place instantly and digitally, rather than traditionally and face to face. We can tailor our profiles – the bands, movies and books that we profess to love – we are now the masters of our own personal brands. Geo-location based apps allow us to tell our friends where we are, and what we’re doing – all instantly, as it happens.

The explosion of media channels – TV, Radio, News and Magazines, Websites, Online retailers; has meant people are able to tailor everything they consume and can do it at the touch of a button. No longer are they restricted to what, in the olden days, traditional and linear media and retail allowed them to consume.

So, with this in mind, is the idea of monolithic, one size fits all advertising campaigns that evolve slowly over time (like Madonna) redundant? Should brands become more like Lady Gaga?

I would recommend watching the next video with the sound muted.

Lady Gaga, also a brand, created by Stephanie Germanotta has had as many, if not more, iterations, or incarnations as Madonna in the two years since she rose to fame. Madonna, the brand, has been in existence since the mid 80s.

She is constantly evolving, day by day, she cuts and pastes different ideas around the core of her brand, Gaga. She is a reflection, albeit at an extreme level, of the way modern people live their lives – constantly in flux, constantly assimilating new and varied data, connecting to others hundreds and thousands of times. So the question i’m asking is this – should modern brands be more like Lady Gaga and less like Madonna?

Should brands be using the ideas of cut and paste – rapidly evolving, assimilating and casting off dynamically – talking to people in personal rather than broadcast ways, using information to understand what will land best. David Hackworthy of Red Brick Road spoke about the idea of Sex and Death at this year’s APG Battle of the Big Thinking – and this has sort of informed the idea behind this piece – but should the timeline be shortened, quickened? If we cut and paste, evolving our core ideas, brands keep up with consumers – and what are brands if they’re not a reflection of consumers behaviour and desires?

Disclaimer – all ideas my own unless otherwise stated, and largely cretinous. This idea is work in progress and may yet be taken down from this blog.

I’m not a fan of New Year’s resolutions, in fact I actively despise them. My dislike of them largely stems from the fact it throws into stark relief exactly how bad my lifestyle is, and when i’m not successful I end up beating myself up about it – so a double whammy of bad feeling. No one likes making them self feel bad, not even those who watch Eastenders week in week out.

Typical resolutions of mine would be do exercise, be a vegetarian for a month, no drinking, stop smoking, run a marathon – all largely based in punishing myself.

So basically i’ve stopped with the hard, target based SMART style resolutions.

In their place, i’m replacing them with nice, warm, fluffy things. Cultural Resolutions.

1) Develop an appreciation for classical music

2) Do more creative stuff – i used to take loads of pictures, i used to write – i need to do more, and apply it – so something like this blog, however haphazard and crudely written it is.

3) Be More Optimistic – though I’m unsure i’ll keep that up

4) Listen to more Radio 4

5) Spend more time thinking and contemplating – rather than running around “doing” stuff

6) Finish the remaining 800 or so pages of Ulysses

7) Not to worry if I dont manage to do any of the above

It’s usually one of the things i ask people when i meet them for the first time – who or what do you read? You can learn alot about someone I think  from their taste in books – poetry, history, classical literature – all lend handy insights into the people we are.

It troubles me greatly when people say they don’t read – my brother for instance, he considers reading to be a quick glance at the sport section of a popular red top. One of my closest friends has read about two books in his life – both of which are by ex SAS soldiers, and from my snobby literary loving castle this rocks me to the core.

I do most of my reading on my way to and from work. Increasingly on the tube in London you see people looking down at an electronic device, rather than a paper back  - it may be more convenient, and indeed perhaps it is the way culture is going – but for me, you’ll never to be able to replace the complete sensory experience paper and ink gives you as a “reading medium” – i spend my day reading off a screen, reading real books or newspapers gives me a divide between my time and work time. A kindle full of ebooks doeesnt have a smell, it doesnt impress people when they walk into your house, it doesnt start conversations.

So, with 2010 done and dusted, I thought i would do a dull list – the books I read in 2010. Hopefully, when inspiration runs dry (as it can) you will find something of interest to you here. It may also allow you to reminisce, remembering a book you read – and how you felt the first time you picked it up.

The Men Who Stare At Goats – Jon Ronson

Kill Your Friends – John Niven

Mephisto – Klaus Mann

Clockers – Richard Price

Mother Night – Kurt Vonnegut

The Reluctant Fundamentalist – Moshin Hamid

Dune – Frank Herbert

Hollywood Babylon – Kenneth Anger

It’s Only a Movie – Mark Kermode

For Whom The Bell Tolls – Ernest Hemingway

Less Than Zero – Bret Easton Ellis

From Russia With Love – Ian Flemming

Portnoy’s Complaint – Philip Roth

The Average American Male – Chad Kultgen

The Spy Who Came In From The Cold – John Le Carre

Cat’s Cradle – Kurt Vonnegut

Do Androids Dream of Electronic Sheep – Phillip K Dick

Our Kind of Traitor – John Le Carre

Tinker,Tailor,Soldier, Spy – John Le Carre

The Honourable Schoolboy – John Le Carre

Smiley’s People – John Le Carre

A Call For The Dead – John Le Carre

Imperial Bedrooms – Bret Easton Ellis

Blink – Malcolm Gladwell

A Confederacy of Dunces – John Kennedy Toole

In Defence of The Realm; The Authorised History of MI5 – Christopher Andrew

Walking to Hollywood – Will Self

Merchant of Venice – William Shakespeare

Putting it in print, i realised that i read a lot of John Le Carre – probably too much, but the Karla Trilogy is excellent – which a tremendous narrative arc and one of my favourite literary discoveries of late – George Smiley.

Anyway, hope you find something on there of interest if you do read regularly, or if not – something which encourages you to pick up a novel.

Suede were playing at the o2. I first saw them at the Watford Colosseum in 1997. It was the first concert i attended.

In 1997, I was 13 – in 2010, on a Tuesday in December, I was, and am, 26.

In 1997, the 13 year old me attended wearing awkwardly fitting jeans, an adidas t-shirt in the style of Louise Weener, and perfectly, or perhaps inperfectly, gelled hair.

I didn’t drink, because beer made me wretch at the time.

Live music for the first time was exhilarating, it was loud and brash – people behaved differently to normal.

The people assembled looked like a club – all dressed in variations of the same uniform – they looked like they belonged together.

On Tuesday, i attended wearing brogues, a cashmere jumper over a check shirt, and some sensible indigo denim.

No gel graced my comparatively thin hair.

I sat, rather than stood, and on a number of occasions (usually when vessels full of an undisclosed liquid flew across the auditorium) was extremely glad of this.

I wore earplugs. During my time at university, I DJ’ed alot, I was also foolish – and on more than one occassion have been found asleep against speakers by friends during particularly heavy evenings. Subsequently I think my hearing is damaged, and earplugs stop my ears from hurting.

The club members from that night in Watford were also present – though not all were still sporting club colours as it were.

One thing did remain constant, in those 13 years – I didnt drink beer; not because of my palette this time, but because it was a school night.

Why the story then? The story, I guess, is because mentally I also compared how the 13 year old and the 26 year old me think about themselves. It made me feel old. As a 13 year old, the world was my oyster, ready for shucking. Noise and flying pint glasses were exciting. You are a ball of energy.

Now, the world feels a little more solid, things – or more to the point life – is beginning to run it’s course. You need your sleep, 8 hours at least. Getting out of bed is harder, my hearing not what it used to be – i think about tomorrow, and not tonight.

Boring isnt it?

So, it’s been a while. The lesson learnt is that maintaining habit is an awfully important thing. As soon as i got out of the habit of regularly updating this blog, the importance i attributed to it’s maintenance dwindled. It wasn’t that I haven’t been thinking about stuff – in fact quite the opposite, i have reams and reams of notes squirreled away in notebooks here and there- it’s just the motivation to put pen to paper, or typeface to blog, in this case, over a long enough period of inertia dwindles to zero.

So, with the feeling of a patient attending the dentist after a lengthy absence, i am tentatively doing my best to rectify the wrongs of abstinence.

Yesterday i attended the APG’s annual Battle of Big Thinking at The British Library. The yearly event pits demi gods of the advertising world against each other – giving each contestant an open brief to deliver a 15 minute presentation outlining their big idea for the future of the industry.

So, whilst this probably isnt a suitable forum for a summary of all those who spoke – one idea did really jump out at me as tremendously important. Derek Day and Helen Edwards of Passionbrand put forward a concept to the APG as a group, that they/we as a planning community should put our money where our mouths are and buy and run a brand. Not only a brand, but more specifically the business behind a brand.

This idea stuck with me – perhaps too often we (the planning community) can be accused of thinking that ads and comms will change the worlds of out clients. Sometimes they do. But actually brand communications is only one part of a clients business – they have supply, distribution, overheads, staff, product, R+D to think about – often way in advance of thinking about how to communicate what it is they have to offer – and really what experience do most of us have in real, genuine business practice? We are full of endless suggestions about how clients can improve their businesses away from advertsing – when really we have little experience in these matters.

If we, as planners, were to take on a challenge of the one being proposed – we may learn how to add value, and may even learn some humility along the way – running a business is difficult, and sometimes we simply don’t know best.

Of course, on a more positive note – this would be a great learning experience for the planning community – our business insight and acumen would develop, and perhaps then, once we have walked a mile in our client’s shoes would we be able with any meaningful authority, to tell them how to run their business.

Once again, i have allowed this blog to fall by the way side – so consider my own wrist well and truly slapped.

Thankfully, I havent just been doing nothing with my spare time, staring at a blank wordpress posting screen pondering what to write or nuffink – I have been doing stuff. Mainly reading, a lot of driving, some lifting of garden waste, some sport – but mainly reading – but in my book that should never be considered wasted time.

I demolished The Reluctant Fundamentalist – which i would recommend everyone read, perculiar mode of address, a great narrative arc – its a shame it isnt longer.

I also finished Clockers by Richard Price, which was adapted to the screen years ago by Spike Lee – lengthy, but worth the effort – especially for fans of The Wire.

Currently whizzing through Hollywood Babylon by Kenneth Anger. Anger is a perculiar one, clearly very bright and witty – his avante garde filmmaking wont be to everyone’s taste – but if you do like his work, i would recommend this account of the sleazy side of Hollywoods underbelly during its formative years – sort of like Heat magazine with Garbot, Mae West et al.  

I have also been on holiday, but more of that later.

Aside from reading, i like to fill my free time by watching TV – my fairly catholic taste and insatiable thirst for TV is quenched by a wide range of programs – US dramas (some girly, some not so), Documentaries, Sit Coms, Danny Dyer style exposes of hard men, Cookery shows, televised sports – the slower paced and more “boring” the better. You will notice that nation wide reality talent hunts dont feature anywhere on that list – so whilst I am delighted that Steve Davis is enjoying a rebirth of sorts at the Crucible this year, I am not so delighted that the cultural black hole of Britains Got Talent has returned. Again.

We wouldnt have shows like Britains Got Talent (BGT) or the X factor, or IACGMO (I’m a celebrity get me out of here) if it wasnt for Big Brother – C4′s show effectively changed the way we think about not only television, but also what our cultures view on celebrity is. All of a sudden, after Big Bro – getting famous was easy – you pitched up an audition, behaved like a bit of a loon, demonstrated that you were prepared to degrade yourself in the worst way imaginable and Robert’s your father’s brother – you were a celebrity. Now, this isnt a criticism of Big Brother – the show, at first at least, was an excellent social experiment – almost in the vein of the Stamford Prison Experiment. It’s the legacy of Big Brother on our TV schedules that bothers me.

Now, nearly all TV stations have taken the idea of a reality contest, and progressed it to the nth degree.

Some of the people, who do enter X factor / BGT are clearly very talented and do deserve a platform with which to share their gifts – but they only account for about 1% of the applicants, and little more of the on air time these shows occupy.

What the producers give us, and what they give us lots of – are those with no talent, or the A Factor (does that work? I dont know, but seemed logical, being as far away from X as i could manage). Why do they do this? Because they know, that the great british public will lap it up. We will sit in the comfort of our front rooms, or round the water coolers laughing and laughing at someone who is only slightly normal – and in all likelihood is probably actually mentally ill.

I dont know why, but it just makes me a little bit uncomfortable. Its basically asking the “special” (horrible term, so pardon me) kid at school to constantly do that thing where he walks round the classroom with his genitals between his legs pretending to be a girl – which everyone laughs at. Then videoing it, and putting it on your schools website. When your school is the Open University.

Even worse, is when one of these slightly deranged looking people, actually can sing/dance/does have talent. The looks on the judges faces, when Susan Boyle broke into song was unbelievable – “my god, your a hideous cat lady, who has the voice of an angel…… I mean, you dont look like Leonna, but you can sing” is probably what is playing in Simon Cowell’s head. How dare he. It is actually an insult, to react as if only platinum blondes with big tits, legs up to their armpits and a smile like a solar panel can sing.

Even worse than the vexed expression on Cowell’s little boat, is the emotion which she-devil Amanda Holden tries to demonstrate through the layers and layers of colligen or whatever other in vogue treatment there is to fix a second rate mug that she is using these days. As an aside, Holden’s rise to fame is surely testimant that if you do really want to become famous, you can do it – you just need to be a sycophantic shit and live up Cowells arse like a hideous type of nocturnal judging spider thing – talented or not, this is enough.

Even worse than the sheer suprise on their faces is the aftermath. Surprising as it is, you arent told how to deal with press/papps in school – so when the pressure of the baying masses became a bit too much for Susan, she was fair game. TV producers of shows like this, as a matter of social responsibility owe their contestants a level of respect and care – to ensure they are properly equipped to handle the pressures of fame should they rocket to success.

Anyway, I am off to make my cat wear a jacobian ruff and play fetch with a flaming bananna.

Oh dear

I dont know what to think about this – it just leaves me a bit cold. As i have mentioned on this blog before – he is a human being, and as such prone to making mistakes – these were mistakes in his private life and the issue should largely remain private(if it wasnt for those pesky kiss and tells it may have).  The one thing people could rarely accuse this man of, is making mistakes in his professional life – on the golf course.

Brands need to establish whether the risk of a brand champions private life can be offset by their professional prowess – Peaches Geldof anyone?

Surely Nike would have demonstrated their continued support better by simply not dropping him – this piece of communication was completely unwarranted – why even attempt to rebuild brand tiger – when its not Tiger the sports star that needs rehabilitating?

“Did you learn anything” – the last lingering line of the advert – yes, I did – that any situation, however tangential - can be twisted into an opportunity to try and sell more stuff 

I managed to catch a little bit of South Bank Show Revisited : Billy Connolly on Sunday evening. Mr Connolly said something quite interesting which I think can easily be applied to people working in a planning function across marcomms.

To paraphrase him, it went something like this “There is a big difference between a comedian, and a joke teller….. a comedian is able to observe the absurdities of life”.

Thought provoking stuff, although perhaps not very radical. A great planner will be the one who can use his or her eyes and ears, as well as research, to generate real insights – moments which make their audience sit up and think “why couldnt i see that when it has been staring me in the face”. A bad planner can often end up being a bit like the “joke teller” – reciting stats off the page, stuff which often the client has supplied – there may be some craft in the recital, but essentially anyone can do that job.

Obvious it may be, but i found it quite inspiring at least.

Also made me think comedians would make pretty good planners…… ladies and gents, i present you with ”The Man Drawer”