Will 2016 be the year Australian creativity died?
Over the weekend Meat & Livestock Australia launched a contender for best ad of the year. Simon Canning fears it may be as good as it gets.
If 2016 is anything like 2015, then just two weeks in we have already seen the best ad of the year. Creativity in Australia it would seem, is ready for the last rites.
On Australia Day last year The Monkeys created a wonderful, whimsical piece of work for Meat & Livestock Australia. Richie Benaud inviting a few mates around for a chop or two. It should have been the harbinger of a creative renaissance in Australia, but instead it stood as a forlorn high point in a year that failed to deliver water cooler work.
If the lamb ad is anything to go by, then yes it is the year creativity died.
From 2 years ago: https://vimeo.com/84736058
A little too soon to be putting out press releases saying this is the greatest ad ever?
Seems it hasn’t been received too well:
http://www.theguardian.com/aus.....ay-critics
And that link above looks like the same ad, just better.
I think most people would agree that for any commercial to be considered for Ad of the Year status, one of the key criteria would be originality, either in the core idea or in the execution. Preferably both.
This has neither. The idea has been done before, and the execution feels very familiar – both in terms of the production, and also the jokes within (is that the thousandth ‘unmanly hipster vegan’ gag we’ve seen?)
Props for casting LLC, even if her acting is so-so, she makes for a good talking point and gives the spot some social currency. so if this is turns out to be the best that Oz is going to produce in the next 50 weeks, we are indeed in trouble.
Your broader point stands though. Australian advertising creativity is in trouble, due largely to a collective gutlessness amongst Australian marketers.
Any clients reading… THIS is the kind of attitude you need if you ever want to be responsible for a great piece of creative marketing:
http://www.theguardian.com/med.....gorilla-ad
The common denominator amongst great advertising is a great client, willing to champion work that seeks to engage the emotions, rather than check a bunch of boxes.
You need to be intelligent and perceptive enough to know a good idea when you see one, and you need to be brave enough to stand up for those ideas when those who don’t understand how advertising works seek to kill them.
And you need to partner with an agency that will honour your faith and commitment to creativity… an agency that will never take the piss, and always seek to create work that’s on brand, and will win hearts and sell product. As the very best creative ideas almost always do.
(time and time again it’s been proven that great creative work has a higher ROI than wallpaper)
None of this is easy. But it’s definitely worthwhile.
Still pushing this campaign for some reason Simon, why?
Why is this ad in your opinion a contender for ad of the year? Is it because Mumbrella was happy to hype the ad before it was released, which seems somewhat odd? Is it because Mumbrella were happy to be cheerleaders for the launch of the ad with an unveiling at midnight? Why is it that this ad in particular appears to have been ordained by Mumbrella sight unseen, with now numerous articles devoted to it? This is not a water cooler campaign, though for some reason you think it is. And then to top it off, you decide to basically shit on everyone else and write off all other creative. Are you prepared to devote as much PR space to everyone’s campaigns?
Thanks for your thoughts The Accountant,
I am not declaring the Lamb campaign the best ad off the year and it is certainly not something being asserted by the agency, but I’m simply asking the question based on what happened in Australia last year whether we may have seen the best ad of 2016 already? As I conclude, I hope it isn’t.
As to why I have focused on the Lamb campaign, it is the first major ad of the year to launch and it has traditionally created broad discussion, so it is a good opportunity to begin the debate. Few, if any, other major brands are launching major work in January. It also has a 10 year history that is worthy of attention.
As I say, if last year is any guide, it was hard to find work that genuinely captured the attention of the public, and that is a view that has been expressed to me by many people in the industry.
As for the midnight posting of the original story, that was simply the embargo time placed on everyone by the agency and Mumbrella will always aim to give our readers the news first.
Finally, if work is worthy of the attention, we will write about it. I do not aim to “shit” on other creative, and indeed, am a massive supporter of the creative industry and have been throughout my career. I wouldn’t have returned to the industry and joined Mumbrella if I wasn’t.
Like I said, who will sieze the mantle and create something that makes us laugh, makes us cry, makes us buy?
Let 2016 not be the year creativity died.
Thanks again for taking the time to post your thoughts,
Simon
If your definition of “creativity” is defined by “must be 30 to 60 second linear video content capable of being displayed on a TV”, then you may well be right, 2016 may be a bit of a lean year. However, if your concept of marketing creativity includes innovative and interesting ways that brands can engage with audiences to increase the sale of their products, I suspect 2016 will be a year of amazing ingenuity and creativity, as marketers leverage emerging technologies and data in ever more creative ways to drive business.
To define the creative capability of the marketing industry purely by the standards of a “good TV commercial” would excite Don Draper, but even Mad Men has now drawn to a close, and maybe it’s time to update your perspective.
We don’t like adverts. We see thousands every day and most of them are just blowing smoke up our asses and get in the way of life. Lots of mediocre productions, bland, uncreative and pushing claims that simply do not stack up. The reason why the Old Spice ad and Ricky Gervais Optus are popular is because they are anti advertising, advertising. The reason the Deng Adut ad was so brilliant is because when you watch it you feel as if the advert has been hijacked to promote a higher purpose and not, as is usually the case, the other way round.
I think the future is to either go big or go home. Either go for the “Super Bowl” blockbuster or just don’t bother. Instead of lots of insipid ads that are completely bland that we immediately switch off to. Like Lamb, pick a big annual event you want to own and give it your best shot. The rest of the budget/year switch to grassroots marketing and focus on loyalty, advocacy, brand stories and functional benefits.
@Lee – There’s no such thing as loyalty pal and “brand stories” are the sorts of ads that tend to blow smoke up consumers arses.
I think what we need are different ad creatives. Most of what we see here is the same old same old (MLA’s effort this year a case in point).
….Ad of the Year Ha! That entire concept is now laughable. Sorry to say but the guy from the MLA is a dinosaur’s dinosaur. Otherwise he’d know that spending all your cash on one big moment in the year – at the cost of many constant ‘uncreative’ cheap touch points – makes no sense. And I know you agree with me Simon, because Mumbrella sends me an email every day. Yet, I don’t think I’ve seen a big production TVC yet. How did mumbrella ever survive????
@MAT/B I believe a shift in focus to loyalty and brand stories will happen away from above the line advertising. We will see more brands switch from passive advertising to interactive activities like Umood from Uniqlo. In 2016 i think creativity will flourish at the intersection of technology and social trends where consumers can still be surprised and can contribute directly to the brand story.
@ Lee
While you are right, you are also wrong. Big brands like coke, old spice, maccas and nike get that they need to talk to people in every touchpoint of the splintered media landscape. But they also get that to reach a mass market they need to spend big in ATL ,big buget video content. Pepsi tried putting all their money into digital with the refresh project 5 years ago and they went from number 2 to number 3 and are still recovering.
99% of ‘Small interacative activities’ and promotions simply do not engage enough people to make them worthwhile exercises. For the most part they are brand managers thinking ‘we hav eto do something in digital or social. But even the rockstar brands stryggle to enage their followers, let alone toilet paper, peanuts or cereals. Smart marketers are putting their budgets into TV and video content, because most people will watch something cool on their phone. Maybe share it, and that’s as engaged as they’ll get.
How many digital interactive activities have your non advertising friends bothered to share with you?
@heh heh I’ll take being right and wrong! and agree there will continue to be a mix of ATL & BTL I look at brands like Red Bull and how they are connecting with consumers and think THAT is the future, not “Demand a Commander”
Contributors like The Accountant give me the shits actually.
Clothed in anonymity The Accountant’s rudeness is matched only by breathtaking presumption. Simon, you were very polite. I don’t have to be. Hooroo.
The self appointed Creative Director of Australia is back and already beating the same old drum.You are stuck in groove Simon.Move on.Or better still move off.
Very few ads really cut through now. Every now and then in conversation some older person will say “did you see that ad where…” and everyone I know shakes their heads. They’re not watching free to air and if they are they are head down in second screens during the breaks. Content is largely irrelevant if it can’t cut through in some way. Some people shared the lamb ad. Some people are talking about it.That’s victory enough.