Between the Briefs

In Response: We Deserve Better. Please.

Shikha — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:25:46 +0000

Well, hello.

It’s been a long time and all that. I keep thinking of staying more frequently and deeply connected with my nine subscribers. Recently my conscience and later my friend asked me to update the blog, lest it die a slow death. But sloth be eternally mightier than the leeetle angel on my left shoulder. So angel was ignored for a very, very long time.

But today, angel won. However, after staring at a blank screen for some time, I realised there was nothing to be said. I suppose I could write about the hugely controversial Benetton Unhate Campaign, but everyone from L. Bhat to The Times of India has already written about it, so I didn’t see why you’d come here to know more.

But then there was light. Or as numerous advertising cliches and cartoon shows have taught us, a light bulb moment. And I’m thinking, if you can’t say something yourself, say something in response to what someone else has said. The classic, ‘Those who can’t do, teach’ kinda scenario.

So after various ‘Learning on the Job’ posts, I’m now starting a new set – ‘In Response’. And the first lucky person to be chosen for the series is (drum roll please) someone who’s name I don’t know, but writes this very funny blog called ‘The Local Tea Party‘. Go. Read it. You know you want to.

Now some days back this Local Tea Party guy wrote something about something that’s very close to my heart – advertising. Or to be more specific, bad advertising. This post is in response to that.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

Dear Local Tea Party Fellow,

Few days back, I’m reading your letter in your blog post. I’m reading this when I’m eating lunch in front of my computer and thinking, “Aiyo! This Local Tea Party Fellow (LTPF) is writing about me and my brothers from other mother only!” So much red faceness happened, my colleagues are thinking, “What this girl is watching in internet in lunchtime, man?!”

Then lunchtime is over mins, I’m putting one cheap pen to white paper to write some nonsense ads and all. But then, this little voice is going on nagging like one housewife and saying, “But this LTPF is correct only. So much bad ads we’re making, we should give you our peanuts (salary it sims) just for watching it.”

But then, other little voice is saying, “Papa! Not all our fault also, no. What this LTPF know?” So I’m thinking, I should also write you one letter in blog post and say you why we’re putting so much kaka in your break time. I know all of you is saying, “Aye! This copywriter girl is making all sorts of excuses, ra!” But not like that. I’m only going to tell you how this madhouse called advertising agency is working and what the method to this madness is.

See, now you’re saying, be like Doordarshan fellow. Say something and go. But this client no, he’s thinking, “If I’m giving ‘Ek ke saath ek mufth’, toh I also should get 1+1 deal.” So in every brief ‘Sole Objective of Communication Column’ is being filled two-two times. (1) To increase brand awareness/loyalty/sales, etc. (2) To get PR value. And as if bad is not already worst, sometimes he’ll say make viral video. Meaning, for free you and your friends act in one garage and put in YouTube, automatically it’ll become viral. How much to say, only if cat is playing piano or baby is farting ABCD people want to watch, client is not understanding only. So all this we must do.

Now you only say, if I’m selling some deodorant mins how to do everything? But client wants mins client wants. So some controversy fellows will put. In India, controversy mins sex, followed by religion, followed by politics, followed by really important things. In other countries also same only, only order goes off here and there. So every time boy is putting perfumes in underarm, womens are removing clothes – either boy’s or their owns. In my full humble opinion, angels falling is not worst ad in TV. Want to hate mins, hate this eediot kid fellows talking about mosquito repellent instead of studying life cycle of pupa. But your opinion is yours only, so you hate what you wish.

Anyway, if you’re saying be like Doordarshan mins client is saying, “So much crore rupees I’m spending to be like Doordarshan ah?” So like those desperate housewives, we’ll do anything to make client happy. Otherwise client will say tata bye-bye and go to more younger, more sexier agency. Sometimes client says, “You fellows are all waste! I’ll only write the script!” mins, we’re saying, “Yes, master” and giving him the pen. And you’re only saying pen is mightier than sword, so with that only client is cutting our nose in public. Full shame-shame happens.

But client alone is not always being wrong. These creative fellows are thinking if they make simple ad mins it is not going look lovely in portfolio. Yes, simple ad will not irritate fellows, will get job done and all that, but what about when creative person quits, also for more younger, more sexier agency? Then new CD will ask no, in interview time, “Why you’re showing such ads and all man? Where is all the jhatang?” Full mind games. So these creative fellows will think of some complexticated execution and all. And if ad not come out nice, they’ll say execution bad and blame producer, director, mother, evil forces of nature and their neighbour. But never they are thinking idea only is phuss.

But creative fellow alone also not always being wrong. Sometimes their bosses are wanting big ads. Then from CD they’ll become ECD, from ECD they’ll become NCD… like those B-schools with initials in name, they want more-more initials in designation. So sometimes they’ll make Akshay Kumar fly like ye eagle, sometimes they’ll make cars go zoom in some Poland and say in Bombay roads also same performance it’ll give. All lies. In reality, they’re just wanting to go to exotic location on holiday in name of work. If execution is simple mins in Goregaon Film City they’ll have to shoot no, so why.

But all hope and brains is not lost, man. Every cloud is having one silver lining it sims, so you should also look for that some-some times. Like if bad ad is not there, how we’ll make good ad making fun of bad ad like these Bajaj fellows? How you’ll write letter in blog post and how I will respond?

I can write one full thesis on our jobs and the foolishness, but you are already knowing everything. Plus, every day art director is saying, “No one reads long copy, men!” and already I’ve written extra-long copy. If you’re reading mins you’ll be cursing in your breath, I know. So I will not say more now.

Only one last thing I will say. On behalf of all the other fellows doing this evil job, I am apologise for the mediocrity that is doing to your brain what dentist uncle’s injection is doing to the mouth. If you send me one picture, I’ll put one pin and stick it in my board, to remind myself that LTPF, like Big Brother and other billion fellows with TV in the house, is watching you. That way, maybe I write little less bad ad, and wash blood of good idea off my hands.

Until then.

Much love*,

Some Copywriter

*Terms & conditions apply

Filed under: In Response Tagged: 2011, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Local Tea Party, Response, The Truth about Advertising

Learning on the Job: 11-09-2011

Shikha — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:42:05 +0000

As a Marwari girl, choosing to become a copywriter often brought along a deluge of reactions, most of which weren’t exactly encouraging. Generally, they could be categorised under the following categories:

Kay hove woh? – roughly translates to ‘The fuck is that?’
Kay zaroori hain nyu kaam karne ki? – roughly translates to ‘What’s the need to work the long and unearthly hours like a common whore?
Kitni salary mile hain? – roughly translates to ‘I lack the tack and class to decipher how much you earn by looking at how you live, so I’m just going to be crass and come and ask you outright’

But to be fair, there were some rare occasions when I did receive a positive response. In this case, however, there was only one category and it goes as follows:

Copywriter? Very good. Toh kin-kin cheezo ka copyright karto ho aap? – roughly translates to ‘Copywriter? Very good. So which-which things you copyright?’

And therein, dear reader, lies the greatest irony of all time.

As a copywriter, I’ve always found it extremely difficult to protect my own ideas – let alone someone else’s. This, as we know, is a very common problem in advertising that everyone has faced at least once in the span of their careers, and is often the reason why you’ll find disgruntled writers sitting at their desks, mumbling under their breaths, “That’s it. Starting today, I update my portfolio and resume. And then, I’ll quit!”

Having spent a little over three years on the lower rungs of organisations, I have come to discover there are various types of people who are responsible for creating this inner (and sometimes, outer) turmoil. Here, I endeavour to enlighten you on who exactly they are and what to watch out for.

The Naysayers – These are the tricky types. You can’t call them idea stealers (yes, ‘stealers’ is a word in advertising) because they don’t let your ideas take shape in the first place. They’re almost often immediate seniors, although sometimes they may be super seniors and peers as well. Classic symptoms of the Naysayers are the use of such phrases as:

No, I don’t think it’s working. We need a “big idea”!
No, I don’t think it’s working. The client will never buy this.
No, I don’t think it’s working. It’s not on brief.
No, I don’t think it’s working. I’m not feeling it.
No.

The Two Cents-ers - These people are always encouraging. You’ll love them because they’ll love you. If they’re you’re seniors, they’ll give you all the film briefs. They’ll massage your egos. If they’re your peers, they’ll always want to work with you and are the archetypal team players. But they always want a piece of the pie and will therefore add their two cents here and their two cents there, so someone will add their name to the credits list, so they can add the film to their portfolios. See, it all adds up! (Pliss excuse). Phrases that give away the identity of members of this species are:

I love it , but maybe we should tweak the ending a bit.
I love it, but maybe instead of saying “Waah!” he says “Wow!”
I love it, but maybe instead of wearing a teeny-weeny itsy-bitsy polka dot bikini she wears a teeny-weeny itsy-bitsy floral print bikini.
I love it, but I think – and this is just me – I think the comma should appear here and not there.

The Sneaks - The Sneaks are similar to the Two cents-ers in their personality as far as the encouragement is concerned. They’ll go so far as to ask you to flesh out the idea completely and show you storyboards et al. But (and there’s always a but), you’ll never see the person they’re presenting to, whether it’s the boss or the client. As a result, either they let people assume the idea is theirs or present it so horribly, it never sees the light of day. Watch-out for:

I think I should present it. The client/boss gets perturbed when he sees new faces.
I think I should present it. The client/boss trusts me.
I think I should present it. It’s my account.
I think I should present it. I’m pretty.

The High-jackers - These come into picture only once the actual execution begins. You’re as excited a writer as can possibly be. Your idea has survived all the muck and filth and you’re on a high. Enter the High-jackers. They’ll offer to help. They’ve been here longer. They know better. And you believe them. Silly you. You’ve dug your grave the moment you’ve succumbed to:

You’re sure you want to do that?
Hmmm…
That’s… uh… interesting.
I guess.
Why don’t you try doing it like this?
Oh, you poor thing. Let me help you.

If you know of any other type of idea killer/stealer, feel free to add to the list. And if you want advice on how to protect your ideas, do what all the wise ones have. Become a suit. Or quit.

Featured image from here.

Filed under: Learning on the Job Tagged: 2011, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Lessons, The Truth about Advertising

Learning on the Job: 01-09-2011

Shikha — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 07:13:07 +0000

It’s that time of the year again. Emails from global heads you’ve never seen clutter your mailboxes. They tell you, “It’s that time of the year again.” When we must bring together the best of our talent, form a creative army and gun for the Cannes Lions. NCDs send emails to ECDs. ECDs usher in the ACDs. The ACDs round up all the minions. Because it’s time we start focussing on “proactive”.

For the uninitiated and unfamiliar, let us begin today’s lesson by demystifying the aura that envelops the word ‘proactive’. Because, while it may sound misleadingly enterprising and… well… proactive, what it is is a convenient euphemism for the word ‘scam’. And scams, as we all know, are the bane of advertising. Or so they say.

And so everyone scans the agency for people they could pair up with. Hush-hush tones are employed lest actual art-copy teams are broken. Dreams of glory are dreamt. Real work is put on the back-burner. An air of self-importance masks the general smell of smoke and perspiration. Clients are categorised as ‘Good Clients’ (allow scams) and ‘Bad Clients’ (don’t allow scams). If we don’t find what we’re looking for, then the work is first created and then the client hunted down, tucked away somewhere in the Yellow Pages. Rest assured, most, if not all work done in this manner falls under the ‘Public Service’ category. And the said client, therefore, is likely to be an unheard of organisation working for the empowerment of women or the education of street children or something like that. A little voice nags at you, saying, “This is just wrong.” But like most little voices in advertising, it will be ignored… nay, smothered. You begin to rationalise. “They could use the help. I’m being charitable. I will do their leaflets (gasp!) for free (gasp!) if they let me create this one award-winning, portfolio-worthy campaign.” Of course, none of it is true. No one save the award juries and advertising guys will really see the masterpiece that is your ad, so it won’t really help the organisation. They didn’t ask you to help them, so you’re not really being charitable. As for their leaflets, it’d be an absolute wonder if you did that work for high-paying clients without the unnecessary attitude and snide remarks, so writing one on domestic violence for no money is as likely to happen as the Maharashtra CM’s promising Mumbai’s roads will be free of potholes starting today.

And then there are those who suffer from the most common dilemma there is in such time. It’s what I like to call the ‘Scammed-If-You-Do-Scammed-If-You-Don’t’ catch-22 situation. It’s when you decide for yourself to not participate in this self-indulgent extravaganza but have your bosses come and tell you, “You must gun for metal this year. Even if it kills your soul, crushes your spirit and questions your morals, you must try and win something. It’s extremely important for raises and promotions, and especially so if when you’re looking for a change.” Followed by the ultimate sign-off, “If you have ethics, you shouldn’t be in advertising.” (I’ve actually been told that.)

With that the final dregs of hope are scattered to the wind and you put pen to paper, succumbing to what the industry asks of you. You manage to pull off a scam or two. Before you know it, the idea even begins to grow on you. And if you do manage to win an award, then it’s safe to say you’ve arrived at a point of no return. You begin to bask in the sheen of those shiny things that line the walls of your agency. You look for your reflection in the trophy that belongs to your campaign – never your client’s campaign, mind you. You begin to think you’re too good for this work. And the agency. You wait for when you’ll be called in to the President’s cabin, hoping he’ll personally tell you what an asset you are to the agency and give you a stupendous raise. But it doesn’t happen. You get bitter. You begin to mutter, “Four awards and still being paid peanuts! What blasphemy!” You quit. You thrust your book under the noses of new ECDs. They’ll tell you one of two things. “This is scam work. We don’t do scams.” Or, “There isn’t enough award-winning work in your portfolio. You’re not right for the job.” You begin to wonder what just happened. You understand what it means to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. You think of quitting advertising for good. Until some agency very desperate to hire hires you. And the same cycle repeats… like on loop.

You get used to it. You make your peace with it. You get on with it. You stop writing blog posts about it.

Featured image from here

Filed under: Learning on the Job Tagged: 2011, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Lessons, The Truth about Advertising

Learning on the Job: 22-04-2011

Shikha — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:06:33 +0000

It’s been six months at the new job now. New job is not so new anymore. Probation period has been successfully completed. ‘Success’ continues being a relative term.

Much has transpired in these six months. Politics. Mudslinging. Group reshuffles. Insipid speeches of motivation. The works.

But for me, the most notable thing to have happened in the first six months was to have my first TVC approved, produced, edited and aired. This may not seem like a big deal (because it really isn’t), but my heart still skips a beat or two when I see an ad I worked on in the papers or on a billboard, so the TVC was a big deal. Some say the lack of a love life is to blame for this. I sort of agree. But I digress.

The point is, it was my first TVC and it was a pretty awesome feeling to think I could point at it someday and say, “I worked on it!” I was, however, gravely mistaken.

The final edit was nothing like I thought it was supposed to be. This, despite my being involved in the film from start to finish.

But I’m still pretty glad it happened. Because there are some Priceless Things I Learnt from My First TVC (A.k.a. Things Don Draper Won’t Tell You), which I hope to put to use with the next (whenever that is).

Everyone Has a Vision: The truth is, TVCs are a big deal with agencies, primarily because they’re so few and far between (compared to all the brochures and emailers and menu cards and whatnot you churn out on a daily basis). And so when one gets approved, everyone who’s involved with the brand will have something to say. This is a universal truth. Commit it to memory. Because when you work on your TVC, you will notice how EVERYONE has a vision for the film. The NCD has a vision. The ECD has a vision. The CD has a vision. The AE has a vision. The film’s guy has a vision. The client has a vision. The director sure as hell has a vision. You, however, are the only one with a script. Hold on to it. Tight.

Waving the Script Works: Now when everyone is sharing their vision for the film, it’s easy to get swayed. Everything. Sounds. Awesome. Especially when you don’t know better, because it is your first film. If you’re like me, you’ll probably look at everyone large-eyed and soak it all up and nod along and trust everyone will do what’s best. If you’re like me, you’ll also end up kicking yourself in the ass later. To avoid this, it may be a good idea to pin the script up in front of everyone and cough phlegmatically or emit other unseemly noises. When you have everyone’s attention, wave the script around frantically and say, “It’s not in the script”. At this time, the client is most likely to be your best bet. They’re often scared of taking on anything that wasn’t agreed upon in front of their entire board of directors and their wives. This is not to say the director shouldn’t be given any freedom and won’t add anything to the film. Just that, it’s a nice idea to say “No” when you’re not comfortable with something and you can’t expect someone else to do it for you.

Luke Sullivan Was Right: There’s a chapter on TVCs in Luke Sullivan’s ‘Hey Whipple, Squeeze This.’ where Sullivan talks about how you always write a film thrice. The first, when you actually write it. The second, when you shoot it. And the third, when you edit it. I would say the estimated number is much higher, considering the number of times you actually write the script, but you get the picture. The point is, he was right. Which means, it’s nice to have a tight spot with no room for ambiguity, it’s nice to have enough good takes because they won’t all be good on the editing table, and it’s nice to have your edit come out exactly as you’d imagined because no one likes surprises.

30 Seconds is VERY LITTLE TIME: 30-second spots can be great fun. But they can also be a great pain in the ass. And while you may be expected to say everything in 30 seconds, the fact of the matter is, you can’t. No two ways about it. This may piss the client off in the beginning, but better that than when they’ve spent lakhs on the film and then have to make do with a shoddy 30-second edit. The “tight spot”, as they say, comes into play here. Yes, there will be the director’s cut, which can be 60 seconds long and have no product window. But your 30-second spot will actually be a 20-second spot, with a 10-second product window. Which means you need to write for a 15-second spot. 15 seconds to tell you story. That’s very little time to waste being irrelevant. Or stupid.

It’s Better To Have Tried and Failed Than To Have Won and Failed: Everyone wants a TVC in their book. This first TVC was also my first assignment at the new job, so in addition to the lure of ‘My First TVC’ there was also the additional ‘Need to Please the New CD’ for motivation. The selected script was about my 17th scripted attempt (not counting all the narratives I’d narrated verbally). There were scripts I much rather preferred but didn’t tick all the boxes. And then there was this, the one that did and the one we knew the client would buy, but just wasn’t great. And as tempting as it will be to just get something, anything out at that moment, the fact is, there is no undoing it once it’s on air and a million people have watched it. Yes, it sucks to not have a winning script. Yes, it sucks to think, “What am I doing with my life? Why am I in this field?” on a regular basis. But it sucks so much worse to have a sucky spot, not having one may actually be better. Hard to believe, but true.

There’s a lot more I could say about the making of the TVC, but I’ll save that for my next. And like a true ad person I say, watch this space for more.

Featured image from here.

Learning on the Job: 22-04-2011 (betweenthebriefs.wordpress.com)
Luke Sullivan soon chair of ad dept at Savannah College of Art & Design. (adland.tv)
Luke Sullivan, Now Savannah-bound (adpulp.com)
Screenwriter Zak Penn Talks (Sort of) About ‘The Avengers’ (slashfilm.com)
Script is ‘getting there’. (theoraclemachine.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Learning on the Job Tagged: 2011, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Don Draper, Learning, Lessons, Luke Sullivan, TVC

BestAds Rankings for 2010: The Top Agencies, Production Companies and Clients

Shikha — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 08:57:48 +0000

BestAds sent me a mail about their agency rankings for 2010, but won’t let me share a link to the story unless I’m a pro-subscriber. Which is rather strange. So here it is, quote-unquote.

“Colenso BBDO and DDB New Zealand, the two world-class kiwi shops, once again blitzed the rest of the world’s best to head the 2010 BestAds Top Agency Rankings, both with 29 points.

AMV/BBDO, London came in third (22 points), followed by Wieden + Kennedy, Portland in fourth (21 points) and Clemenger BBDO, Melbourne in fifth spot (18 points).

Prolam Y&R, Santiago came in sixth (16), followed by Shamor Avnon Amichay/Y&R Interactive, Tel Aviv (15), Mother, London (14), DDB London (13) and DDB Sydney (13).

The top country in 2010 was the United States (236 points), followed by the United Kingdom (188), Australia (185), New Zealand (124), France (79), Canada (66), Brazil (60), South Africa (47), India (44) and the Netherlands (35).

The top production company in the world was Smuggler, with 25 points, ahead of Stink (17), with Prodigy Films and The Sweet Shop sharing third spot (16). MJZ and Revolver shared fifth spot (14), followed by @radical.media (12) and Hungry Man (11). Gorgeous and Partizan shared the #10 spot with 10
point each.

Volkswagen was the #1 client in the world, with 22 points, followed by Cadbury (18) and McDonald’s (17). Amnesty International and Coca-Cola shared fourth spot (15) followed by Carlton & United Breweries, Nike and Sony, all in sixth spot (12).

The Top Agencies in the Top 10 Countries:

UNITED STATES
1. Wieden + Kennedy, Portland (21 points)
2. Crispin Porter + Bogusky, Boulder (12)
3. Young & Rubicam, New York (10)
4. BBDO New York (9)
5. Droga5, New York (8)
6. DDB Chicago (7)
6. Goodby Silverstein & Partners, San Francisco (7)
6. Leo Burnett, Chicago (7)
6. TBWAChiatDay, New York (7)
10. JWT New York (6)

UNITED KINGDOM
1. AMV BBDO, London (22 points)
2. Mother, London (14)
3. DDB London (13)
4. BBH London (12)
5. Fallon, London (11)
6. RKCR/Y&R London (10)
7. Wieden + Kennedy, London (7)
8. CHI and Partners (6)
8. Saatchi & Saatchi, London (6)
10. Anomaly, London (5)
10. M&C Saatchi, London (5)
10. TBWA London (5)

AUSTRALIA
1. Clemenger BBDO, Melbourne (18)
2. DDB Sydney (13)
3. Grey, Melbourne (12)
4. BMF, Sydney (8)
4. JayGrey, Sydney (8)
6. Leo Burnett, Sydney (7)
6. The Campaign Palace, Sydney (7)
8. The Brand Agency, Perth (6)
9. DDB Melbourne (5)
9. Three Drunk Monkeys, Sydney (5)

NEW ZEALAND
1. Colenso BBDO, Auckland (29 points)
1. DDB New Zealand (29)
3. DraftFCB, Auckland (10)
4. Saatchi & Saatchi, Auckland (9)
5. Clemenger BBDO, Wellington (6)
5. Ogilvy, Auckland (6)
5. Publicis Mojo, Auckland (6)
8. Barnes Catmur & Friends, Auckland (4)
9. Droga5 New Zealand (3)
9. M&C Saatchi, Auckland (3)
9. TBWATequila, Auckland (3)

FRANCE
1. BETC Euro RSCG, Paris (12 points)
2. TBWA Paris (10)
3. CLM BBDO, Boulogne Billancourt (7)
4. Grey, Paris (6)
5. Young & Rubicam, Paris (5)
6. Fred & Farid, Paris (4)
6. Saatchi & Saatchi, Paris (4)
8. Leo Burnett, Paris (3)
8. Ogilvy & Mather, Paris (3)

CANADA
1. Rethink, Vancouver (7 points)
2. DDB Canada, Montreal (4)
2. Saatchi & Saatchi, Toronto (4)
2. Sid Lee, Montreal (4)
5. BBDO Toronto (3)
5. Cossette West, Vancouver (3)
5. Grey Canada, Toronto (3)

BRAZIL
1. Almap BBDO, Sao Paulo (7 points)
2. Neogama BBH, Sao Paulo (6)
3. BorghiErh/Lowe, Sao Paulo (5)
4. age. Comunicacoes, Sao Paulo (4)
5. DDB Sao Paulo (3)
5. Filadelfia, Belo Horizonte (3)
5. Y&R, Sao Paulo (3)

SOUTH AFRICA
1. Lowe Bull, Cape Town (6 points)
1. Y&R Johannesburg (6)
3. Ogilvy, Cape Town (5)
4. FoxP2, Cape Town (4)
4. Lowe Bull, Johannesburg (4)
4. Volcano, Johannesburg (4)

INDIA
1. DDB Mudra Group, Mumbai (8 points)
2. Ogilvy & Mather, New Delhi (5)
3. JWT India (4)
4. McCann Worldgroup, Mumbai (3)
4. Ogilvy & Mather, Mumbai

NETHERLANDS
1. DDB Amsterdam (5 points)
2. Wieden + Kennedy, Amsterdam (4)
3. 180 Amsterdam (3)”

Filed under: Cross Media Tagged: 2010, 2011, Advertising, BBDO, Cape Town, New Zealand, Oceania, Ogilvy & Mather, postaweek2011, Saatchi & Saatchi, São Paulo, Wieden+Kennedy

The Year That Was

Shikha — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:01:26 +0000

The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.

Crunchy numbers

A Boeing 747-400 passenger jet can hold 416 passengers. This blog was viewed about 4,300 times in 2010. That’s about 10 full 747s.

In 2010, there were 38 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 73 posts. There were 63 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 26mb. That’s about 1 picture per week.

The busiest day of the year was April 29th with 69 views. The most popular post that day was How Desperate is Too Desperate….

Where did they come from?

The top referring sites in 2010 were stumbleupon.com, twitter.com, indiblogger.in, addledads.blogspot.com, and facebook.com.

Some visitors came searching, mostly for tata docomo, dove print ads, dove print ad, tata docomo ads, and dove soap advertisement.

Attractions in 2010

These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.

How Desperate is Too Desperate… April 2010
2 comments

Reality Advertising October 2009
2 comments

In the Week’s Gone By… July 2009
14 comments

Stop the Adness! February 2010
6 comments

“The Insanity of Sane…” January 2010
4 comments

Filed under: Unclassified Tagged: 2010, WordPress, WordPress.com

Learning on the Job: 01-01-2011

Shikha — Sat, 01 Jan 2011 07:48:34 +0000

When I’d quit my last job, a junior of mine (who was also looking for a job), had asked me what’s better… starting off with a large agency or starting off with a small agency. Having spent two and half years in said “small agency” and two and a half months in said “large agency”, here’s a list of differences I’ve been able to discern so far, thanks to my diligent dedication to the ‘Hocus Focus’ section of the dailies.

Big Fish, Little Fish: Perhaps the first thing you’re most likely to experience in transitioning from small to big, is transitioning from big to small. Meaning in a small agency everyone knows your name, is aware of your existence, notices when you’re missing from work, thinks you’re significantly contributing (or at least trying) and generally gives you the illusion of being indispensable. This, however, is not the case with a large agency that’s always swarming with people, where people quit before you can learn their names and where the only guy who’s truly indispensable is the guy who brings you your coffee.

Fewer “Who”s and “Wha”s: My first couple of weeks at the large agency brought on a deluge of questions. Who are you? What do you do? Who’s team are you on? Where were you before this? This last of the four questions, upon being answered, elicited one reaction in general. It goes like this. Pro: So, where you before this? Me: I was with a small agency in Bangalore. Pro: Which agency was this? Me: Bushtail. Pro: Who? Me: Bushtail. Pro: Wha? Me: Bushtail. Pro: Wishtale? Me: Yes. On the other other hand, my first day at the small agency went like this. “Oh, you’re here. Here’s your desk. Here’s your brief. Start writing.”

You Were What You Hate: At my old job, I often complained about how I spent so much time being the client servicing guy that I was left with little time to be a creative. At the large agency, though, roles are very clearly defined. The copywriter writes. The art director art directs. Planners conspire. The studio does the most work with the least credit. And the client servicing guys… well… the client servicing guys do what they’re best at. Being hated.

Office Lunch is Better: People who’ve been around at the large agency will tend to disagree but when you come where you come from and you’re living away for the first time ever, you’re just thankful for office lunch that’s edible, if not gourmet.

You Have Lesser of a Life than You Used To: Case in point… it’s the first day of the year and, while everyone is nursing a hangover after a night of partying-for-the-sake-of-it, you’re writing-a-blog-post-for-the-sake-of-it, thinking it would’ve been nice to have some Nutella now, instead of finishing the entire jar alone last night.

Featured image via Skull Monkey

Filed under: Learning on the Job Tagged: 2011, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Lessons, postaweek2011, The Truth about Advertising

Learning on the Job: 21-11-2010

Shikha — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 08:02:11 +0000

If the brief fits, wear it.

That’s precisely the lesson for the day, one that’s been arrived at after five weeks at the new job.

Over these five weeks, I have also realised there are broadly three categories of briefs in advertising, each with their own pros and cons. (But mostly cons.)

The Tighty Whities – These are briefs with little or not breathing room, generally designed by the suits, while conspiring with the client. You’ll know you’ve got one of these on when you start to feel constrained. Mostly by a list of criteria that needs to be met, sometimes bundled into one neat term called “Strategy”. While these are the client’s dream-come-true, they’re often nightmarish for creatives, primarily because they draw inflexible boundaries beyond which you’re not allowed to venture or explore. When you do try to push the envelope, you may sometimes be met with an enthusiastic, “I like that. I really like that.” But don’t be fooled. They’ve just mastered the art of faking it. Because before you get to execute it for real, your piece will go through a few hundred rounds of edits that will leave only one of you fulfilled and satisfied. And that “one” is not going to be you.
The Boxers – Offering a nice foil to the former, the boxers are what creatives look forward to. While the band around the waist offers a defining line of sorts, you’re generally free to wander about and find your inspiration. Sometimes it’s because you’ve got what’s known as the “Nice Client”, sometimes it’s because the brief really is just genuinely nice and you got lucky and sometimes it’s because the product/service being advertised doesn’t have a real “USP” and you’re free to make one up as you go along. While you may want to rejoice at being presented with one of these, there is one tiny drawback. With little to complain about, there are also fewer excuses for not being able to perform. So you need to make the most of it while it lasts.
Going Commando – At some point in time, you’ll have a client and no brief. Just a simple, “Show me your best move.” And you want to prove it to them that you can do this… that in this new-found creative freedom, you’ll come alive in all your glory. Until you realise that without someone giving you some direction, you don’t know what to do and start fumbling around like a imbecile. But that’s really alright. Because if you are asked to go commando, it’s probably for some scam that you could never dream of doing otherwise… and so you go sans briefs, sans budgets, sometimes sans clients and always sans ethics.

Image via Flickr.

Filed under: Learning on the Job Tagged: 2010, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Lessons, The Truth about Advertising

Just for Laughs

Shikha — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:30:43 +0000

Now on air in India with only the pay-off being replaced with “Dimag ki batti jalate raho”.

Filed under: TVC Tagged: 2010, Advertising, Food & Beverages, Ha-Ha Types, Mentos

Learning Off the Job: 12-10-2010

Shikha — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 12:36:35 +0000

The last time ’round, I’d said I should titling these posts “Learning Off the Job” but didn’t since there wasn’t any learning taking place. I’ve changed my mind now. Four interviews and many, many phone calls down, I’ve come to learn a lot, though they’re not all related to advertising or copywriting. So between my last job and this, I’ve learnt:

To Suck It Up: When you don’t have a choice, you just have to do what you have to do. This is not a reference to some life-changing, pivotal moment of my life but simply things I’ve had to do, even though I hate them. For instance, I hate talking to people. I hate talking to people I don’t know even more. And people I just about sort of know I hate talking to the most. But in the past month, I’ve spoken to all of the above. Some of these people I spoke to with rehearsed speeches. Didn’t know what to say to the rest. But mostly, I’m glad I spoke to most of them. Because…
People Always Surprise You: Like how people you expected to help will suddenly fall off the planet, while people you went up to with no expectations will help out for no apparent reason. Like, just like that. Not to mention yourself and how much you surprise yourself in an unfamiliar, uncomfortable situation. Like those strange animals with built-in defense mechanisms that pop up to ward off the disconcerting. Only, you’ll never feature in the National Geographic.
Advertising is Always Full of Fancy Titles: I spent the first two years of my career as “Creative Thinker”. The next half year I tried to come to terms with a title I shouldn’t have had. In less than a week, I will take on a third. I will, of course, be just another copywriter. But the fancy titles continue to confuse, amuse and generally placate our kind. I’m not complaining, though. Secretly, the titles are the second best thing in the industry. This is something no one will tell you, but you should know.
“Right Place at the Right Time” is a Real Thing: So you probably didn’t get the job because you’re the best thing out there but because it was just time for things to work out and because you spoke to the right person at just the right moment and got there just in time and you’re just lucky that you did, because you didn’t know any of this when you quit or left home or sent out your resume or spoke to your sister’s ex-boss’ contact’s contact.
Things Somehow Always Work Out: As terrified as you are about what you’ve done and what’s going to happen, things somehow somewhat work out. Of course, I’m saying this now ’cause things have sort of worked out for me recently and that makes it easier to put the cynic out to dry for a while, short-lived as its life in the sun may be. But it’s true. And you know it.

Filed under: Learning on the Job Tagged: 2010, Advertising, Confessions, Copywriting, Lessons, The Truth about Advertising, Unemployment