Comment for content: Naked fired by Labor after offering media Rudd interview in exchange for ads

Pure genius… Looks like the ALP is as smart in picking agencies as they are running the country. This comes on the back of that horribly awkward TVC that attempts to make Rudd Muppet look like Mr Positive… So awful I threw up a little in my mouth.

Well, he is British. Not like they’re reknown for standards and ethics…just saying…

Kavanagh every time an Australian agency hires yet another Brit we don’t need we prove that we are the biggest risk takers in world advertising!!

Fantastic! If Labor can’t handle the heat then get out of the kitchen. Obviously it should of been in the brief but this is what Naked is about, maybe these big risk taking ideas is what it will take to win over the young generation.

To many poms in our industry.

He offered 10 minutes face to face with PM Kevin Rudd for VICE magazine. Oh my good lord. 10 minutes face time with a crappy little tits ‘n’ drugs rag.

If a staffer did this it’d be regarded as a massively shoddy hacky move. But this guy has done it, totally ineptly (VICE!?!?), and he’s probably still congratulating himself for his boundary-pushing thinking.

As appalling as this is, it could also be indicative of how low the calibre of politics, debate and information has sunk in this country too. And that’s a very sad and a dangerous thing.

Nice to see your offensive and tasteless comments again Tom.

Paul – Did you fall asleep in your English class?

@bob loblaw Think it is pretty unfair to call Vice a ‘little Tits & Drugs rag. Yes they’re content can be crass. But their global audience probably dwarves Fairfax and News. 2 Million YT subs, 30 million UVs p/m etc

Goes on all the time.
Naked are unlucky in that they got caught out.
Tactically, ALP ‘selectively’ taking the moral high ground with an election coming up should not be discounted.

@pom, it seems that Paul and Tom were both absent from the English class. And it seems that nobody at Naked was educated ever.

A few of you who have commented above need to take a very hard look at yourselves. It is one thing to offer a POV on a campaign (its this introspection/feedback that often spurs us on to great things) but to take this opportunity to:

a) Advance your own political views
b) Do a bit of Pom bashing
c) Talk shit about a guy you’ve probably never met

That’s just plain offensive.

Those of you in the Mumbrella team ought to be looking very closely at this thread too. You invited Sean Cummins to speak at Mumbrella 360 a couple of years ago and he spoke about passionately about how trolling affected him and it was agreed you wouldn’t stand for it. I can’t believe some of these comments have been allowed to be published.

Whatever you may think about the proposal itself it is no different to the kind of discussions that happen up and down the country all day, every day…and in both directions. OK, Rudd is the PM and that’s why Naked have come under scrutiny this time, but if you boil this down to brass tacks what is the difference between what Naked asked for a publisher who says, “OK, we’ll do a story but only if you sign off this advertising IO for $X”? Rightly or wrongly, many would simply consider it the quid pro quo of today’s media industry and that’s why it isn’t on Mumbrella’s front page every day.

By the same token, as quick as people are to point out Naked’s troubled campaigns they are also an agency who regularly produce amazing work, often without the luxury of multimillion dollar budgets – Speed Kills and Steal Banksy immediately spring to mind as recent examples. SO before we hang everyone out to dry let’s just take a breath…

This story is not about Nick, or Naked, or Poms. This story is about politics plain and simple. Not just Labour vs Liberals but the interplay between editorial and commercial requirements and the balance of power between publishers and clients.

Very politically naive move from Naked. Of course this sort of thing happens all the time…for packaged goods or sneakers or whatever….but not the freakin’ Prime Minister!

But the bit that offends me most is the brief to media owners to generate ‘entertaining content’. Call me old fashioned but its the agency’s job to generate the best ideas and execute the communications strategy, and this is way too nebulous for comfort.

If Naked wants positive editorial coverage for their clients they should avoid the internet and take out a quarter-page ad in the street press.

Id be digging a little further for a directive that Naked Communications would have received from the Prime Ministers office. You dont organise time with a Prime Minister unless the Prime Minister is up for it or has raised it. So clearly they had instruction, as there not that stupid to destroy there business and credibility overnight.

And as we all know, this is exactly the sort of self promotion Kevin Rudd feeds on. All egomaniacs do.

Politics has to at least give the impression that it retains some sort of ethics – (edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons). The same holds for so much of web and social media supposed news and current affairs content where editorial and transparency get lost in a mire of advertorial and spin doctoring. Once those who worked in the media were expected to have a basic grounding in how material should be presented, be it print or electronically, but now in the digital age any smarty, who doesn’t know right from wrong and doesn’t care, can be a content provider and will be applauded by a certain percentage who are equally ignorant. Anything goes and it’s only going to get worse.

I’m not a pom, but the pommy bashing here is just juvenile and misplaced. @Anonymous, well said. Though I’m shocked and appalled if briefs like this are truly common place. At this level, anyway.

Its hard to criticise Naked’s approach (sans the unethical bits) without really understanding the brief, but it does seem bloody weird to be approaching Pedestrian, Vice etc for this product. Hardly where Big Rev Kev needs to be looking for votes in what little time remains before an election.

Reading a piece like this makes it obvious why Krudd’s people wanted to see positive artciles in Vice. If you can’t influennce them, buy them? Geniuses:

http://www.vice.com/en_au/read.....kevin-rudd

I’m with “Unlucky”

I’m sure this goes on all the time, we just don’t hear about it from Fairfax medias mates the LNP.

Forget the fact the client was a political party, the issue here is that this type of activity sets the media and PR industry relationship back 50 years.

I honestly believed the days of buying PR were gone and that people working in both industries finally understood the ethical implications of doing so.

For what it’s worth I worked in large agencies in the UK for 2 years and learnt a great deal about media relations while there, so anyone having a shot at Nick for being from the UK is really missing the point.

Lions. Lions. Lions

Blown well out of proportion. True to form, the ALP have now stabbed their agencies in the back, and this poor fella is going to be stressed to pieces. I’d be very surprised to hear any media (including mumbrella) say that value add was not part of the make up of advertising. Please right me If I’m wrong.

#ashes

Sanctimonious claptrap from ALP HQ, whose prime candidate leverages publicity by posting shaving cut shots on social media.

Roger Stirling suggested to me once that we do this for the Nixon campaign. He said Nixon would deny all knowledge if we were caught, but it might win an award so let’s do it!

And this, people, is why ad agencies (or so called brand agencies) should not do PR or GR/PA (or even social media, actually). They simply do not understand the editorial/advertising divide as they showed with this ALP situation and earlier on with that crass Witchery hoax.

Clearly we have a lot of sensitive foks from the British Isles here…

Note to all marketers: remember that Naked’s world view aligns with the ALP:
anti business, anti individual effort, anti-free speech, high taxing, and pro-maximising government control of every aspect of our lives.

If that sits with your brand, good luck.
If not – delete Naked from every future pitch opportunity.
They’ve made their bed, now they can lie in it.

Have you ever experienced an agency going out offering client services without client approval, give me a break, the agency is the fall-guy and slimy Rudd sneaks out of another one!

Maybe Naked were actually working for the coalition…
(conspiracy theorist)

I didn’t think Fairfax would need any encouragement to suck up to the Labor Party.

those of you claiming this goes on every day are either lying, or don’t understand media relations

i suspect that you are from the advertising industry and the latter applies

it’s this ignorance of ‘earned’ media workings that got Naked into trouble in the first place, so i suppose I shouldn’t be surprised

it beggars belief that anyone working wth media, in any capacity, would think it’s ok to charge for access to the Prime Minister

yet again, advertising industry folk show that they have no PR sensibility whatsoever, beyond obvious strategies like diverting a big chunk of budget to a novel prize which will of course, garner global tabloid headlines (Best job in the world, anyone?)

this is why advertising is starting to report into corporate affairs/media in a growing number of companies….’paid’ media just don’t get ‘earned’ media…

Reading this thread makes me feel very disappointed with our industry.
Most of us haven’t met this guy – let up will you! Was it wrong, perhaps but don’t ask, don’t get!

And the need to POM bash is just plain stupid and offensive.
ENOUGH

When all is said & done ,we have yet to examine the role that Abbott played in this benefits for comments, & we should know ..

Cav’s a good operator and a good man. Keep your head up buddy … don’t let these cynical people get you down (not that I think they would).

This shows First Time Voters how the media game really works!

What will they think now?

Nice to see the trolling racists are out in force, bringing entirely irrelevant personal views into this.

I’m with Rob Moore on this one. Its all very nice and cosy for you to jump on your high horses and talk about this as if you have never had a similar conversation in campaign negotiations (editorial for advertising $ perhaps?!) but I’d say you are all either living in a bubble, conveniently forgetting those conversations (ie lying), or simply do not work in the industry (in which case I wonder why you’re here in the first place). I mean holy bejeezus, the amount of conversations I’ve had with PR agencies asking for me to direct money towards publications so they can leverage some editorial would fill a book (for the record, I always say no….)

The simple fact is, if this was not a political campaign no one would bat an eyelid.

There is not reason to bring in personal opinions on someone you probably don’t even know (ie Nick). I expect the poor guy is currently hiding in his flat with curtains drawn and his phone turned to silent. Bottom line, if you have something constructive to say, then awesome, if you are simply going to use this space to bash the English then maybe take it elsewhere. And realistically, Mumbrella, you guys need to moderate that – do you really want racist remarks filling the page?

Surely an experienced communications professional would know that this is flawed on so many levels? Not only is it wrong to be dictating political editorial to a media owner. It also shows lack of judgement in potentially damaging a brand at a critical time.

Interview/content/ad deals are part of the industry, but in my experience they are largely restricted to consumer/regional/trade press. But trying it on with a political client around election issues (NBN etc.) smacks of poor judgement. The rules of editorial engagement are not uniform across the media industry. In principle, a pure-play PR agency (as opposed to an ad agency) would have handled this one better (one hopes).

Naked Comms just don’t get how to run a political campaign in Australia as an ad agency are my inital thoughts – where are you Obi Wan (aka Neil Lawrence)?

The Vine is owned by Fairfax. Surely anyone with half a clue would know that news organisations do not offer editorial quid pro quo.

I would possibly be less gobsmacked if the Labor party was running an ad campaign and wanted some sympathetic editorial to run with it (not that that’s ethical either).

But to think that an interview with KRudd is worth so much that a site would offer up free advertising as well is quite bizarre.

1. Tim from Mumbrella – you appear to have missed the point Rob Moore was making about allowing trolling and personal attacks to instead made a smarmy comment.

2. Absolutely no way that this idea gets briefed to publishers without the client’s approval. Whether or not it was directly agreed by the PM himself is one thing but no agency would put this in a brief without some sort of say so from the client.

2. All this talk about it being because of there being too many ‘poms’ is at best stupid and at worst plain racist. What has his nationality got to do with this? Is every brit making mistakes like this? No. Does that mean any mistake made by an Australian is because they’re Aussie? No. So how about we keep to the subject….

Don’t think for a minute that Naked are dumb enough to go off & do something like this without a clear directive from someone at the ALP.

They’re just the poor scapegoat.

Imagine if captains of industry got special access to the leader of the opposition

in exchange for positive coverage…like at dinners for the IPA…

What a scandal that would be.

Spot on @nell schofield – anyone with any kind of PR sensibility would NEVER do that. Firstly because you are blatantly suggesting a ‘paid for interview’ scenario, and secondly, because you pose a major PR blunder like what has occurred. Of course the journalists are going to pick up on this and run it as a negative story. I suggest Naked take the word ‘communications’ out of their title, so they wont be mistaken for an agency that has any idea about PR or corporate comms.

No didnt come from us, even though its a letter and directive from our office…..sorry gotta zip, got a country to screw over – kruddless of the no ruddy way super uncool party.

How come all the comments are numbered 1?
Anyhoo, doesn’t matter if they’re the scapegoat or not – point is, a comms agency shouldn’t be recommending that course of action to a client in the first place.

Couldn’t think of anything more inane than 10 minutes of Rudd talking in his folksy, bureaucratic public service drivel style. Q&A twitterers, GetUp victims and young Labor party hacks are all part of a self-enclosed unvirtuous circle of moronic and simplistic group think that is so far out of touch with Australia they might as well be living in Greenland.

For the record – as someone has just called me assuming “Tom” on this thread is me (Tom Donald) and that I’m slagging Naked and Brits – it’s not me, and I’m not slagging anyone.

Will use “Tom Donald” from now one.

Naked and Rudd deserve each other.

Naked – poor idea, poorly executed.

Rudd – egomaniac, naricssist, and worst of all – hanging his angecy out to dry when it all backfired. His first attempt at being the Prime Minister had similar debacles – and a history of being a very poor manager.

The key point is this – since when would an agency EVER send out anything EVER without having the express, clear and obsessive approval of the client? NEVER. Rudd was all over this.

He can’t even organise his own re-election, Australia is in deep shit.

People actually think that agencies wouldn’t promise something without first ensuring they can deliver it?

So cute.

ALP has been left standing naked on this one…!

As for Naked Communication…
Bad form, Bad judgement, Bad handeling!

Are people even reading the article.. It’s The Vine, not Vice magazine.. Completely different things. Not that it makes it any better, still an idiotic move by the agency.. just correcting the facts

I agree 1337 – stinks of Rudd hanging yet another flacky out to dry when things didn’t turn out the cunning way he wanted. Veteran public servant sneakiness. And if he refers to people as ‘folks’ again, I’m going to scream even though he does seem to have sucked in the uneducated, who according to the numerous vox pops on tv at the moment, still think ‘he’s a good bloke’. These people have obviously never worked in an office dominated by a narcissistic egomaniac before. It’s laughable that anyone who’d worked with him before left his front-bench as they were replaced with a lacklustre, inexperienced MP’s waiting their turn to get hung out to dry. Just ask Peter Garrett what Rudd is capable of.

Trolling, claims of racism, critique, offence… Is there any value in mUmBRELLA requiring people to have a real identity in order to be afforded the privilege to comment? I know it may remove sensationalism, but might it improve the quality of the commentary?

Ah, my bad. I just read the previous article that also said it was on Vice.

Thanks for clearing that up Tom…. For the record it’s the Donald Tom that can’t spell

well put Nell Schofield. This is the result of a culture that celebrates the biggest bellyflop

Missing the obvious, Why would a federal party like Labor need free advertising? This isn’t tactical or the Brits or cutting edge risk-taking creativity, it’s someone needing to plug a budget gap after an election got moved.
Don’t sweat it media peoples, they’ll find some more money, we’re safe.

It is a real shame that a great guy like Nick is in the firing line and not getting supported by his team, Naked or the Client, all of whom clearly knew and were on board with this campaign. Everyone has made mistakes.

I also don’t understand the need to Pom bash. LAFHA is gone, it is a level playing field and there are not enough Australians to fill all of the positions available. The industry is crying out for more bums on seats, why does it matter where they are from.

I have absolutely no doubt there would have been an exchange (of sorts) of plan. Something like “why don’t we organise some interviews and see what advertorial we can get”.

And a response of “yeah, good.”

THEN the idea probably got bigger as it rolled along and the Interns put the deck together.

AND THEN “oh my god, THAT’S what you had in mind???”

Kind of like “Mum, can I have some people over when you and Dad are away?”
“Sure Corey, just a few”

John Hollands,

That sounds like an excuse? We cant be that naive can we?

As marketing and Advertising people do you ever take action without approval from your client?

Do you really believe anyone in there right mind would offer an interview with the Prime Minister of Australia without having discussed this with the Prime Minister himself? especially being the Prime Ministers appointed agency!

There were all caught with their pants down on this one… Excuses and falls guys should not cut it in this forum.

it is what is it… simple

Fairfax is reporting the person responsible has “left the business”

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.a.....2q4oo.html

Do you really think a Prime Minister’s office would give a flying f.. about organising 10 minute video shoots and the rest of the junk Naked put together?

The fact that Naked couldn’t even specify where or when the “interviews” would be shows this had zero importance to the PM’s office, and was not initiated or managed from that office.

I look forward to heading back to London and complaining about how many Aussies work in England…every time they serve me a pint.

its obvious Rudd gave “a flying f..” about his 10 minute video Tony…

The fact no one else did is why we are in this discussion now…

This English bashing is a poor attempt to divert from the story itself.. A typical political tactic of diversion. I am so surprised it is not clear to you advertising people?

BOTTOM LINE:

“Bought” PR is misleading and deceptive. If Kevin Rudd was a public company he would be fined by ASIC as their actions would be considered illegal and misleading.

Kevin made a very bad decision by authorising this campaign, now he needs a fall guy to separate himself from these actions.

Everything else is an unrelated side note.

And the English Bashing is pathetic..

go Spurs

Yes, there are too many Poms in this industry here in Australia- no its not racist- its a fact and its annoying because the only reason all those Poms came here is because they lost their jobs in the UK due to the GFC.

Secondly, thank you Naked Comms– you have finally shown the world what Ad agencies really represent- lies and garbage.

As a journo, I am finally happy to admit that the era of Ad Agencies is over– Content is not just King- its will also prove the Killer of Ad Agencies- and no matter how many agencies in Sydney especially try to bring in some SEO guy or some freelance writers, you are still going to go the same way as the guy that used to deliver ice to people in a horse-drawn cart. Thank God for that!

“I’ve had with PR agencies asking for me to direct money towards publications so they can leverage some editorial would fill a book (for the record, I always say no….) ”

err….there’s a chasm between
– a PR requesting this in relation to a trade title so that unspoken reciprocity would do its work AND
– blatantly pimping out the Prime Minister to Fairfax

if you dont understand this you’re not fit to work in the advertising industry

Since I always use my name, I regret that Mumbrella chose to “moderate” my reply days ago, clarifying my position as NOT writing here representing ANYONE except myself.
These threads frequently fall way below the desirable – people hiding behind nicknames shouldn’t get a free kick.

The truth is that Rudd is in the act of polishing his very tarnished halo, this means that he will lop heads left and right in order to keep the already heavily soiled carpet beneath his feet clear of any obvious additions to its nasty stains.

Besides, as a man who loves (is even addicted to) interviews which give him the opportunity to play the hero and further his deep desire to seize the dais of potential first presidential candidate, he prefers to grant audiences, meetings and photo ops himself.