TO B OR NOT TO B? ARE YOU PRO OR CON THE CB BLOG? THE COMMENTS ARE COMING THINK AND FAST - JOIN IN THE DEBATE
Dear bloggers,
Below is an article written by Saatchi & Saatchi Australia executive creative director David Nobay about the CB Blog.
If you have an opinion about the blog you can either email me a brief paragraph or two, or if you have more to say, either for or against, feel free to elaborate at length.
I know there will be quite a few against, but if you have an opinion PRO the blog that is especially welcome to counter the argument put forward by Nobby.
Opinions will be published in Campaign Brief magazine first, then later on the blog (unless you specifically request otherwise) to encourage more attributed, and less anonymous, comments.
If you want to contribute to this (no negative anonymous comments will be used), I need your spiel to michael@campaignbrief.com by the end of this week, Friday 27th October.
Regards,
Lynchy
PS: There are many things for which the CB Blog, with about 1100 hits a day, has played a central role: increasing AWARD and The One Club membership to record levels, getting OZ/NZ jurors on international award shows, promoting events with spectacular results, getting NZ into the Caxtons, informing the industry of news and people movements, showing and discussing good and average work, links to most TVC production companies, discussing issues (like AWARD judging recently) and keeping expats informed of what's going down back in OZ. To a lesser extent, some of the above may apply to the nz creative circle blog.
***
Anon-imosity
I’m not a big fan of the CB Blog. There, I’ve said it. Actually, a lot of
people in the business say it. But, like the Blog, it doesn’t matter. Because they’re essentially anonymous. I guess they’re not keen on drawing the Blog’s invariable fire: rather like outing a bully in class, only to get your head kicked in once the bell goes.
I suspect some in the industry at this point may suspect my motives are wholly Saatchi-centric. Sure, it’s true that our name does feature heavily on the Blog, but I accept that. We make more news than most, and with that news rightly comes opinion; good and bad. No, the reasons behind my point-of-view are (at least I’d like to think) more objective.
Firstly, in my opinion anyway, the CB Blog celebrates cowardice and, worse still, positively encourages bitchiness.
Rather than the veil of anonymity protecting the innocent, it allows anyone with an axe to grind – but no experience to back it up – full rein to vent their spleen. While I concede this may be mildly cathartic for those sorry souls who carry their chip on the shoulder (“I never got the good briefs/good job/right salary/fully formed penis/trip to Cannes”) like a heavily laden rucsac, I question how this ultimately makes our industry a smarter place to work. Worse still, it opens the door to targeted, professional sabotage. Don’t like the look of the competition at a particular agency? Forget the boring, old-fashioned method of trying to out-write and out-think them by penning a better ad. No, these days all you have to do is seed the notion on the Blog that the competition’s latest ad is a scam, and leave the rest to the good online townspeople of Salem. By the time the accused has rebuffed with sworn affidavits from their client, it’s too late, and the bonfire’s familiar crackle can already be heard (trust me, I’m still trying to get the smell of smoke out of my clothes!).
Before anyone suspects that the gallons of mint tea I consumed on my recent, annual detox has made me all mushy and holier-than-thou, hang on: I like a good stoush as much as anyone in this business and haven’t yet completely lost my sense of humour, (especially now I’m off the wagon at last). Actually, I admit about 1% of the Blog is a fucking hoot. But it’s also a very expensive, little joke: at a time when our industry is finding it harder than ever to be taken seriously by clients, the Blog is fuelling just the kind of catty, superficial crap that got us marginalised by big business as “adwankers” in the first place.
What do I mean by catty?
Well, look for yourself. How much of any issue on the Blog is debated with objectivity, wit or constructiveness? An easier calculation would be how much of it is puerile, misinformed, inarticulate ping-pong, played out by a lucky few juniors, unencumbered by the necessity to work more than 2hours a day? And it goes far beyond inane, but essentially harmless banter. Six months ago, the tone and content of the Blog dipped so frequently into homophobic, racist and legally slanderous territory that Lynchy decided to step in and pre-edit every day’s offerings before publishing them, in fear of being marched off to court. (Which begs the question, is a pre-screened, pre-edited blog even a real blog?)
Ironically, I’ve always held that one of the best things about working in Australia is the lack of anonymity in the business. At the expense of sounding a bit Californian, we genuinely boast an “Advertising Community” here, and that’s not to be taken for granted. When I worked in the States, for instance, you never had a clue who was doing what, let alone enjoyed the chance to meet up regularly over a beer, play fooseball and catch up with guys from rival shops at shows like Caxtons. Working in a relatively small pond should be a good thing. Admittedly, the proximity should make us more competitive; but surely not at the expense of our basic social skills. Sadly, these days when we do converge as an industry, you can tangibly sense the room eyeing each other up; deciding whether the guy grinning at you over his beer is also the bastard that called your campaign unmitigated shit, your dress sense laughable and your mother a she-goat on the morning’s Blog. Mass Paranoia! Cool, eh? Like it wasn’t enough when we just suspected it was the clients and research companies that hated us. (Speaking of folksy, little communities, I’m told the issue is even worse in NZ, where their Blog makes ours look like an online puff-pastry discussion group.)
My second and more pressing reason for discounting the Blog is arguably more selfish: it doesn’t add any value to my day – a day, which like most of you I’m sure, is sufficiently busy to expect that a ten minute online distraction would at least reward me with some nugget of useable knowledge beyond “I hear so and so is a twat and works for a crap agency, so there!”.
On the other hand, would I profit from a daily, online update on what the broad industry thinks about my work and that of others I respect? Absolutely. As creative people, perspective is our lifeblood. Without it we’re rudderless, (hence, the importance of international awards – but that’s another subject for another day!). Problem is, that’s my whole issue with the CB Blog: what value are all those hundreds of perspectives to me without any evidence of where they come from?
As the late, great John Webster skilfully illustrated in his legendary TV spot for the Guardian newspaper back in the eighties; a story told from different angles has very different meanings. Think I’m talking bollocks? Indulge me in this simple exercise: I’ll take a classic entry from today’s Blog, but credit it with four different authors. Is the insight the same? Is the impact consistent. If the subject was your work, would you care?
“I’ve seen this idea a hundred times before and the execution is crap”
David Droga
“I’ve seen this idea a hundred times before and the execution is crap”
John Singleton
“I’ve seen this idea a hundred times before and the execution is crap”
Trish Jones, AWARD SCHOOL student
“I’ve seen this idea a hundred times before and the execution is crap”
Howard Draft, DM Guru
The issue for me isn’t that one opinion is more worthy than another. All these hypothetical cases have a valid perspective to comment on a piece of creative work. The point is; the significance of each perspective changes with its author. And, as such, if I was a Blogger, my rebuff would change accordingly. Without knowing the source of the opinion, the CB Blog really is “the blind leading the blind” and as such pretty worthless as a source of information. Does that stop it being titillating? No, of course not. I have no doubt that, regardless of content, the site appeals on some level to the voyeur in all of us. But then so does roadkill and Chinese bear-baiting, so is that really a reason to exist?
Before I come off overly righteous here, yes, I admit it: I have cruised the Blog myself from time to time. I am a user; if infrequent. However, like President Clinton, I never inhale. As for the Saatchi creative department; I’ve instructed them to stay off the Blog unless they have something sufficiently mind-blowing to say that warrants including their name. To my knowledge, only Luke Chess has since regularly contributed (which suggests he’s either very profound, or that I need to talk to Traffic about giving him more work).
So, for the record, that’s my opinion: my perspective on the CB Blog. Granted, you may not agree. But at least you know it’s mine.
Nobby
posted by CB @ 4:53 AM
109 Comments:
Agree with damn near every word. Don't know about y'all but I tend to sign positive comments with my name and negative ones without. I'm so ashamed. This will be my final anonymous posting.
Spot on, Nobby.
Why not create a site along the same lines as the www.ihaveanidea.org ?
They've got a fairly good site going that does everything that this blog does. But they've also got a forum so everyone has to sign in to post. Sure there will always bitchiness and anonymity but at least this way you can come to respect someone's opinion even if you only know them by the name 'adwanker69'. It's also a great way for juniors to get in touch with CDs and to post their work online. But hey, I'm a junior. I must know shit all.
Good one Nobster. Although the Blog makes interesting reading after a long lunch on Thursday or Friday... or on Tuesday morning if you've got a hangover.
I agree with Nobby, however
I read alot of blogs - adrants, adland, bannerblog, even adfreak - and none of these blogs suffer from anything like the behavior going on in here. And I'm at a loss to understand why.
Maybe its something to do with the content of the blog, which seems to be more about promoting the individual egos of those involved, rather than highlighting the work for its merits etc. Take a look at Adrants, there is some genuine discussion about the work.
As for a blog being moderated, of course it's still a blog, this practice is commonplace and widely accepted way of combating slander, or spam.
To me it would seem the quality of the content posted and the editorial around it, drives the quality of the discussion.
Hey Lynchy,
Nobby makes some very good points, but (assuming the industry does wnat some kind of blog/repository) the solution is very simple.
No anonymous posting.
If you don't have the guts to say something under your own name, then you shouldn't be allowed to post.
Cheers
Doddsy
Baudrillard was right; we live in a society which only wants to be happy with itself.
This blog, in its current form, reminds us of our place in the world. We are not as a rule contributing anything to the greater scheme of things. What we do isn't important.
It begs serious discussion on what cannot, and should not, be taken seriously. Unfortunately, this means that without effective moderation debate inevitably falls into the flippant and stupid.
So, as evidence of why the wider populous doesn't give a shit about what we do, it is a huge success.
But as a forum for debate, the pub will always be much more informed and effective.
Signed
Melbourne mid.
Wouldn't it be nice if everyone who contributed to this Blog was someone Nobby could respect; his peers, his equals.
Unfortunately, the majority of contributors aren't the people Lynchy lunches regularly; they're the footsoldiers of the industry. The thousands of nameless agency folk who aren't in AdNews every week, who aren't in the top 100 creatives list, who aren't likely to appear in the social pages of the Telegraph.
And this is the place they've adopted in order to express their views from the trenches. Long may the anonymity continue. The only worry concerning this Blog is that Nobby's worried ...
A creative director
I like the CB Blog.
I like the fact that people who don’t normally get a chance to express their opinions, for whatever reason, are able to say what they like.
I think a lot of senior people don’t like the blog because they have no control over it.
The only part I don’t like are the people who correct spelling. What the fuck is that all about?
Geriatric man anuses the lot of them.
So, that’s the bit I like and don’t like and here is a suggestion to make it better for everybody.
Turn the blog into a forum, just like any other website.
Everyone has to sign up before they are allowed to make a comment, this doesn’t have to be your real name, you can choose your own Avatar.
Then members of that forum can post to comments at will. Over a short time you will be able to build up the character of each poster.
You can see all the previous posts of each poster if you want and their opinion will be valid not because of who they are but rather the opinions they hold.
And better still each poster can ad a picture to their avatar, so Nobby for example could have a picture of a, well, you get the picture.
(Double pun + visual pun, thankyou very much, triple word score.)
It really is simple. It’s how every other forum works. And it’s how this one should too.
Signed,
Adwanker_2006
David Nobay’s Comments – IMPORTANT EDIT
I think David Nobay’s comments about not knowing the source of comment makes absolute sense and I have only become a recent contributor to your Blog, but never anonymously. Infact my very first entry questioned why all your bloggers wish to remain anonymous? If they are amongst the creative ranks, then surely they should have ‘the guts’ to be all different things in their output? Distinctive in character, pragmatic or otherwise in response….Subversive, revolutionary, and also corporate, approachable, eloquent and inspirational….BUT ALWAYS IN THEIR OWN NAME. Anonymity is not an opinion! But David Nobay “INSTRUCTING” his department cannot post entries seems a tad old school! I don’t know about David, but a majority of my “blogging” is done between answering to clients and colleagues in Europe, US, here and China and often when I can’t sleep, or quickly between assignments. REAL blogging is part of what keeps the real social and peer-2-peer currency of the internet and other digital media alive. Surely that’s part of the reason David Nobay and Simone Bartley took on Paul Worboys recently? I think your BLOG has all the right reasons for being there as identified by you already, but never to house just anonymous comment. It should be offering mass inspiration and debate! And as for David Droga’s comment. I was a little surprised. He’s one of my heroes….I’m not quite sure what he’s referring to here (?) A debating BLOG is about OPEN debate-with the authors sourced. John Singleton and others echoing Droga’s remark is probably more for effect! And these are people who regularly address summits and conferences where a majority of the audiences, or their companies, pay thousands of dollars to hear their opinions. So surely they have some valid or ‘value added’ opinions that could be added to the BLOG? If I’m also allowed to mention B&T’s BLOG? Their journalists often raise incredibly thought provoking stuff. Particularly-a recent piece that asked whether “staid agencies stall digital growth”? Surely this should have opened floodgates of integral debating response from the Nobby’s and all other ECD’s, Creative Teams, Heads of Interactive/CEOs/Clients of all other important agencies? Plus another review of the exquisite Sony Bravia TVC got barely a response. It’s a known fact that trend spotters from agencies and big corporates worldwide are combing through blogs in search of the ‘frontline of cool’ and often finding it! Other times-they just come across thoughts for collaboration, as was the case when a top NYC Agency contacted me recently! At least when B&T and other local BLOGS “discussed” the Google You Tube buy-I was able to invite a US based colleague, (very close to the deal) into the debate! So I hope you don’t drop a BLOG based on local agency politics! BUT I RECKON bloggers should not be anonymous. It’s about being REAL and it’s definitely NOW! Chris Simon. Social Technologist and Creative Director-Bracket Boys. October 24.
Tip for AWARD School Students:
If you're ever tempted to take Nobby's advice and put your name to a critical analysis of a piece of work done by an agency you just MAY one day want to work for...
For fuck's sake - don't... OK. Cos the CD of that agency or the senior team who did the work and who have the job of vetting books for the CD aren't going to commend you on your bravery and forthright opinions.
No. They're going to open your book and piss all over it. Not figuratively, but literally. They'll probably shit all over your book too. Again, not in the figurative sense.
Then you'll be so traumatised by your experience you'll wind up working for a research company, so you can spend your days killing ideas.
So for your sake, and ours - STFU.
There's two dilemnas I can see here. Well three if you include the spelling bee state champion from 1986 (get a life).
The first dilemna is that with anonymous posts, people are more inclined to say whatever they want, because they're hiding behind a wall so to speak.
The second dilemna is without anonymous posts, with the industry as Nobby pointed out being so small, anyone with an 'objective' opinion about an ad is likely to be shot out of a career quite quickly.
Lets take Flash Beer for example.
Those that ridiculed it, quite rightly could have been put out of a job.
And those that praised it, quite rightly could have also.
Possibly the best idea is that if we're critical about anything, we're constructive about it.
But hey, what would I know, I'm just a mid-wieght in a top ten agency.
Here's a thought...
It's Lynchy's blog. He can do what he wants. The fact that over 1000 people view it each day means that he's doing something right. So until Nobby can "INSTRUCT" all of us to stay off the blog, who gives a shit what he thinks? It's not his place to tell the whole industry what we can and can't do. If people want to put their names to a post, let them, then all of us can judge their oppinion for what it's worth. If not, take from it what you will, no one is forcing you to take it as Gospel.
Cheers
-Anon
Yeah the anonymity has serious drawbacks - some people just get on here to savage work.
But you can't take the anonymity away. The point about losing one's job is a good one. Plus I always like the rumour mill factor - who's going where etc.
But to be honest I think the worst thing Nobby could have done is dignify this blog with this missive. You're the CD of Saatchis, don't let it get to you.
It doesn't matter who wrote each comment. If a comment is apt or on the money, pay attention to it. If it's not, don't.
Having said that I've never had any work put on here (and i'm sure I won't for a very long time!!). I'm sure it feels rotten to have anon folks go to town on your stuff. But I still think I would only get upset if I felt the criticism was accurate, regardless of the stature of the poster.
Anyway what do I know?
-- Scumbag Junior
Dear 1.31,
I think Droga's comment was hypothetical.
who posted catapult on the site?
The people that go out of their way to be anonymous in advertising usually get their wish.
nobby +1. i vote for continuing the website that champions work and news and losing the comment posting option. if anyone feels strongly enough to write something let them publish it on the site along with their name and their agency.
cheers,
andy mckeon
jwt
I hate to be picky but i'll use this quote to illustrate the point.
“I’ve seen this idea a hundred times before and the execution is crap”
David Droga
The fact is, if it comes from David or a David wannabe, that type of writing is rubbish. I actually like the anonominittyity (being an art director, it hides my terrible ability to spell). I think that the people who are going to bad mouth things are going to do so anyway. I personally don't like it, but the fact is there are grudges, differences of opinion (like mine) and like you say axes to grind.
I, like you, would rather the, "I personally don't like the ...... but think ...... because of ........ reason" approach.
Perhaps I'm being too optimistic.
Long story short. I like anon. You can be an anon respectable guy or an anon wanker. I hope for more option 1 but anon should be an option.
For example will it make any difference if i put my name here?
.........
dude from across the ditch
Leave the blog alone.
If you don't like it, don't read it. Simple.
"Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author."
Sure it is. Sometimes.
Unacceptable personal attacks slip through too often but that could be easily fixed if parameters were established and CONSISTENTLY maintained by the blog host.
Over to you Lynchy. Save the blog by setting the standards and enforcing them. Don't let a few vicious vendettas spoil the generally amusing (anon) banter.
Dear 5.09: Ur right! Droga's (&
Singleton's) comments were hypothetical! I sent an edited comment amending this, but still left part of it, because my point about the Droga's and Singleton's wide public opinion value on the conference platform being transferred to a BLOG platform still holds! You can now add stupid to my name, huh? Best-C.Simon.
Sent to Lynchy via email....
Trouble is I reckon you're both right. (There's a first...)
Yes, the blog is a cowardly, snide way of making underhand comments and yes it is a useful forum for spreading information and gauging opinions from the far corners of the community. As I've said before it's the equivalent of a bunch of pissed blokes talking shit in a pub. The ill-informed bitterness used to piss me off so I stopped reading the blog entirely, which I've found helps. The boys tell me I've been getting some stick recently for my pink shirt so if they don't shut up, the green suit is coming back. You have been warned.
Sent to Lynchy via email...
nobby +1. i vote for continuing the website that champions work and news and losing the comment posting option. if anyone feels strongly enough to write something let them publish it on the site along with their name and their agency.
cheers,
andy mckeon
jwt
Sent to Lynchy via email...
Campaign Brief is inordinately powerful in the creative community. "Power corrupts, absolute power..." you know the quote.
This business is based on subjectivity. Opinion. Not fact.
A person's opinion can affect an outcome. An award, a perception. A career.
Through the Blog those people who are mobilized enough can influence the industry in a disproportionate way. Like political branch stacking, it doesn't reflect the mind and mood of the constituents.
The Campaign Brief Blog has been one of the worst things I have ever seen in the industry. It is bilious, it is slanderous and it is designed to protect the wrong people.
I have had disgusting things written about me. The words have stung. The assertions have been wild and varied...and more importantly they were designed to hurt. And they have. They have hurt me deeply and have made me less trusting and more guarded than ever.
Some epithets come to mind. "Play the ball, not the man"
And "two sides to every story". But the Blog celebrates the venal, the axe grinders and the jealous.
I don't have a victim mentality, but the Blog victimizes people. Like a cowardly king hit from behind. It's sexist, ageist and elitist.
Personally I like a good debate. I love wit, intelligence and above all humour.
Very few times have I seen anything written in the Blog with any thought, panache or flair.
It's like watching drunks in a fist fight. A lot of flailing arms but little connects.
An opinion is only an opinion if you put your name to it.
This anonymous ranting is just, as David Nobay beautifully put it, cowardice.
I shudder to think clients may see the Blog. I really do.
That’s my opinion. And here’s my name.
Sean Cummins
this is so funny, all these people saying profound things about honesty and creativity. come on!! this blog and the australian advertising community is all about bitchiness! it is the only reason I would ever look at this blog. I mean does anyone really take the stuff people say seriously?
I've sent one piece of work on the site and it had the absolute shit slagged out of it. But I didn't give a shit. I thought it was funny! It went on to get a finalist at cannes and still has a few shows to come, so there's my reward.
It's like that spit roast thing the comedians do in the states. it's an act of love. tough love but love none the less.
David
Amsterdam [and sometimes Berlin]
ps. someone please find a spelling mistake.
I think David and Sean raise some really valid points, but I'd like to see people separate Lynchy's blog and the commenters when discussing it... what do David and Sean think about what Lynchy writes, that being the actual blog??
This blog is a good thing.
Not as a forum for objective criticsm of work because it seems that quickly breaks down into a slag fest with people from rival shops calling good work shite in the hope that someone across town doesn't get another rung up the award ladder and their snout further into the well guarded trough.
The real purpose served by this blog is that cuts through the veil of bullshit and press releases about people "leaving to write a children's book and work on their memoirs".
It also allows the truth to come out about the way certain CDs run their departments,which agencies fist juniors with promises of full-time work and $20 a month, who is a prick to work for and why etc. Let's face it, this is a pretty nasty business we work in and a lot of power is wielded by a small number of people who generally act in their own best interests. Occasionally the comments get vitriolic and personal, and the fact that Lynchy now edits them is a good thing.
However it seems that when someone gets slagged (ie Simon Collins) it's not by just one blogger and there's a chorus of agreement from people who have had an unpleasant experience at the hands of said individual. You never see the good bastards being slagged so if you treat people well then you have nothing to fear.
In my opinion this blog serves a purpose and it's clearly one that the big boys aren't happy about.Tough.
yours anonymously
LONG LIVE FREE SPEECH. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY WHATEVER THE FUCK WE WANT TO AND OWN IT OR NOT! You don't have to wear your name badge when you shout opinions out in the street.
7:30am Brilliantly put.
I've seen many good people slagged on this site, 7:30AM. Enough that I agree the anonymous comments should stop ...
- Tony Ellershaw.
Nothing gives more pleasure than seeing your work butchered in the Blog. And then seeing it get an award. I'm with David from Amsterdam. It feels great....
Another David.
Guys, could we please stop taking this so freakin' seriously.
I mean really, there is only one opinion that really counts and that is the one found out on the street. You know, those people buying the crap that keeps us in our jobs?The one's who would laugh if they saw how much we debate that 30 second blip in their day?
Remember them?
Nobby's exercise in attributing different authors to a base critique is great, but he missed one:
“I’ve seen this idea a hundred times before and the execution is crap”
Joe Average.
Although I'm sure Joe would in reality drop the word 'execution' , you get my point right?
Perhaps the way around this is to invite comment from the informed layman.
People outside of the industry (but with half a brain) are invited to critique our work. A targeted 'Vox Pop' of sorts. Even if it ends up being a load of bullshit, I'm sure it would make much more interesting reading than what is usually posted, and I'm sure it would help shed a sobering light on our industry every now and again.
Melbourne Mid.
10.22, So you want to turn the blog into a research group?
When we enter our work in awards, how many of us put “anonymous” in the credits?
Cheers
Connan James
Senior Writer
M&C Saatchi
Auckland
When you're shouting your opinions in the street, 8:41, you're not putting your name to them, you're putting your face to them.
Anonymous blogging is more like prank telephone calling. Possibly funny, but certainly cowardly.
John Stanton
Adelaide
how petty.
If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Big boys, big boys, big boys!!!!!
I'm sorry for all of the people who have shed a tear from reading the CB blog. I shed a tear for you, because it's so fucking sad.
You aren't rock stars, and this blog has shown you that your shit does sometime stink. Let your work and your personality shine. If it doesn't, like 7.30am has said, then you have something to worry about.
signed,
an anonymous coward with an opinion who hasn't had work submitted to to the blog, but isn't a junior, who works in a big time agency and who wants to continue working in the industry.
cheerio.
Well said 7.30 AM.
A dictatorship is a funny thing. It's designed to create social harmony. All citizens living under one set of well-defined rules, created by those with power, to protect those with power. But people are still free to talk. However if they say something the power holders don't like, well everyone knows where they live.
SFX: (.44 Magnum) BANG!
Sure, democracy has drawbacks. People with nothing much, or nothing good to say still want to be heard. But those who have something VALID to say CAN be heard.
Sent to Lynchy via email....
Dear Michael,
I love pretty much everything you do at CB and the support and dynamism you add to the industry is very much appreciated.
My mother taught me that if I hadn't got anything constructive to say, not to say anything at all.
But here goes.
You probably already know that I am wholly against the blog in its current form.
I hear nothing but bad things about it which reflect badly on our industry.
It's embarrassing, childish, and at worst slanderous.
No one in my three years here has given me a good reason to go to the blog other than to read deeply upsetting anonymous postings.
My advice to my department was to ignore it and get on with producing great work.
Would the above opinion change if the author's web signature was attached and validated by CB?
Probably.
Whether I'd become a blogger would remain to be seen, generally I'd rather share my opinions with people I know and respect over a few beers.
Nick W
Sent to Lynchy via email...
Hi Lynchy,
I think Nobby is right, all blog entries should have the author's name attached.
Anonymity encourages the lightweight losers of our industry to bitch about their superiors without due thought, care or respect.
It gives the bottom rungs of the industry too much say.
I am happy to hear anyone's opinion, if they have the courage to stand by it with their name.
I must say that when i occasionally look at the CB Blog, i am always amazed at the vitriol.
These people may work in a Creative Department, but they are not creators, they are destroyers.
siimon
Not at all 10.53. Sorry, I may not have made myself clear. (Said without the least bit of sarcasm i assure you.)
I'm talking about the 'informed layperson' every now and again being asked to comment.
(i'm scared to give examples of 'who' for fear of being castigated as in previous blogs. Lets just say intellegent, respected, creative, but not in advertising.)
I'm not advocating the blog become an open slather forum. Just invite people who understand communication to write an article on a campaign, then we comment on the issues raised. This will, a) Bring a fresh perspective and b) eliminate the bitchiness as they are not directly related to the industry.
In essence, I think it would be great for the blog to function as a conduit for fresh perspectives rather than a dog chasing its own tail. That's all.
Mid.
Are we trying to get rid of all anon posts or just the slanderous personal comments?
It's not the anon opinions of posted work which bothers me about the blog - on average, it's a pretty accurate rating.
Didn't Lynchy himself say in a newspaper article this year that bloggers can smell a dud ad a mile off?
It's the unchecked cowards with axes to grind against a former boss or colleague that need reining in.
ermm.
funny how so many NAMES are appearing for the first time ...obviously they never ever wrote anything themselves before and signed their name if they did....oh come on!!!!!!!
everyone has a slag and a dig...i bet there is not an innocent amongst you.
p.s. i love the fact that some people are so 'sniff sniff' about the verbal attacks done on them when one of the above has regularly vilified people openly as well as unnecessarily and is very lucky not to have been sued himself by several of my friends.
KARMA IS AS KARMA DOES...
Sent to Lynchy via email...
I don't sodding care really. But I do agree with Nobby. I have personally been bludgeoned by the Blog. And whilst stick and stones etc - even the most inane insults from idle Mac rats have a certain ugly stickiness to them.
I think that if people want to have a say, a pop, a spit or a spat, then they should do the bloke thing, and look people in the eye when they point their typing fingers. No-one likes a coward.
It's not the Aussie way.
Hey Michael, love the blog. Love the short and relevant information that is getting sent directly to my laptop. Love the up-to-date news. Love reading peoples comments.
The people who write negative stuff are obviously bored with their job/agency and are looking to take out their frustrations somewhere. I suggest they call Today Tonight?
We see the blog as an extension to what is a brilliant and highly credible magazine to the creative industry.
Cheers
Simon Hakim
Head Surgeon
The Surgery
Melbourne
We all agree 99% of ads on TV are crap, correct?
So, here’s an idea, lets slag off the people who are doing the 1% of good ads (which tend to end up on the blog) That will be a sure way to encourage better standards in the industry. That’s why the anonymous blogging is a downer.
Abuse of free speach is when you are too whimpish to put your name to it. Speech in some parts of the world is not entirely free, more discounted.
Enjoy it and treat it right.
It would be sad to see the CB brief die, but there is so much rubbish flowing down the river I cant see the water.
Hey Siimon.
If you're gonna rip off peoples ads (TRUMP) and have them blog'd then you're gonna get stick beatch. By 'lightweights' and 'heavyweights' and everyone else.
Where are all the anonymous comments asking what Nick, Andy, Siimon, Simon, etc. have ever done? Or do we reserve venting that particular spleen for when we see a piece of work we wish we'd done ourselves?
John Anderson
Fresh!
Brisbane
Siimon says:
It gives the bottom rungs of the industry too much say.
How elitist and offensive.
Sent to Lynchy via email...
I feel the blog is entirely healthy and necessary, but unfortunately anything of this nature will always be open to abuse by anonymous.
(Anonymous means 'something that isn't worth reading'.)
Keep up the good work,
Regards
Philip Putnam.
Sent to Lynchy via email...
Lynchy, much though I admire all the good things the blog does for the Australian and New Zealand advertising community, in the last six months the good deeds have been completely overshadowed by the hordes of bitter and twisted individuals who've used it to savage anyone they please. I'm sure they think they're funny, but the reality is there is little wit or cleverness in what they write. If their ads were like their blogs, I certainly wouldn't hire them. Sure, I understand it gives everyone a voice, but do they really deserve avoice if this is what they have to say? Like Paul Catmur, I now try and avoid the New Zealand blog (we Poms are sensitive creatures you know). But when you asked me to respond to Nobby's piece, I did revisit it to see what everyone had to say. To my genuine surprise, there were some eminently quotable comments. But very few, I should add, from the anonymous contributors.
The best blogs were from people like Sean Cummins who attributed their names to their comments. It added so much more meaning when you know who they are. Nobby's right. Context is everything.
Let's give the anonymous blogger complete anonymity and ban the fucker for good.
Toby Talbot
Creative Director
Saatchi & Saatchi New Zealand
Dear,
John Anderson
Fresh!
Brisbane
If you don't know what these guys have created over the years you should just move on. You're exactly the type of il informed person that makes the anonymous blog opinions so utterly frustrating. To think that an industry leader has to suffer a second of negative reflection over an idea because an ill informed character like you busts out an idiotic comment like this.
O Prime
Why did Nobby write this letter or article?
PR.
like most successful ad guys, he understands PR. A moment like this was an opportunity to shine in the creative world. To look good amongst his peers and the press in general.
To be the creative good guy.
If he was really concerned about the problem, he would go to the heart of it. He would put a blanket ban on all saatchi work appearing on the blog, in the magazine and stop going to Lynchy's lunches.
Nobby, if you are going to use the machine, use it, flaws and all.
David
I'm honestly shocked.
The powers that be in this industry - an industry one would hope comprises an enlightened bunch of folk - are basically demanding the end to an avenue for freedom of speech.
Shall we all congregate in the town square at 9pm and throw our laptops on the bon fire?
It seems we all agree on the problems associated with annonymity. It allows people with axes to grind to grind at will. Well I have a suggestion: when you sense someone is grinding away - ignore them. That's what we do if we're in a cab and some freak is mouthing off on talk back radio, that's what we do when we disagree with a commentators views in the SMH. I know, it's a little harder to ignore when it's about your work. But if you can't handle the heat... It really is your choice whether to post your work on the blog and whether you read and write any comments.
We also don't like that the blog gives the ill informed, the idiot, the junior, as much of a voice as the heavyweights who have worked hard for their staus within the industry. Again, a suggestion: If you're a senior and you disagree with a posted opinion, elequently argue your case. Personally, I love getting on the blog and defending good ads (probably more than i enjoy stating my opinion on why i don't like a bad one.) This could be a constructive forum where healthy debate exists.
Lastly, the flaws we find with this blog are basically flaws endemic to the Internet itself.
I think we all love the Internet (worts and all) and I think if we deny this blog the right to existence, or the blogger's right to annonimity, we basically reject what it is that makes the internet so great.
Long live the blog.
Right, I'm getting off the soap box now. Thanks for your time.
Senior Writer
Top Sydney Agency.
I partly agree with nobby. when I was starting out there wasn't a forum to vent frustrations, so you just shut the fuck up, worked hard and tried to absorb as much as you can from those you respect. (For me it was particularly easy as I started at Saatchi Sydney and respected all the seniors opinions) We all survived OK back then.
I agree that 99% of anonymous bloggers add no value at all. I've seen personal vendetta's waged against many people. Some have been particularly poisonous. Any prospective employer of these people who have to make a difficult decision about who to hire could easily be swayed by some of these comments, even if it's from some punk ass award school student with a chip on their shoulder because so and so was critical of their work.
On the other hand this has partly arizen because there is a certain group that consistently feature heavily in the pages of campaign brief and the industry is much bigger than those 10 or so people.
Therefore, I still think there is a place for the anonymous comment at Lynchy's discretion. It's the best way to truly express yourself as freely as possible. For example, if I voiced my opinion on the Muslim religion and the Birka on the SMH letters page, I'd hardly want to reveal my identity. Sure the consequences aren't as severe in advertising, but you still risk a public crucifixion.
I just think the comments need to be scrutinised much more closely before they get published. If it's not fit for the printed version of CB I don't think it should be fit for the electronic version.
I agree that it is important for our industry to be taken seriously by the business community. However, to the extent that our industry isn't taken seriously by business, I doubt the CB blog is to blame. I find it very unlikely there are that many CEOs surfing the comments section of the blog. Also, I doubt that advertising is really any more bitchy than other ego-driven professions. I reckon those esteemed investment bankers would put us to shame in the back-stabbing and sniping stakes.
Dear O Prime,
You miss my point. I was trying to point out exactly what you're saying. That all those "what has blah blah ever done?" comments are ill-informed rubbish.
And it's interesting that on this comment board, where we're not talking about an actual piece of work, all those worms have decided to stay in their holes.
Settle down, O. I'm with you not against you.
John Anderson
Fresh!
Brisbane
That's bullshit.
So Nobby posts that horrid piece of crud Catapult and opens the gate for discussion on it.
So then the junior dude at an agency somewhere who really wants a job at S&S, but thinks the ad is a steaming turd has to stick his name on his comments???
Tell me Nobby is going to think "good on you young whipper-snapper, come in and show me your book".
Not likely. Say goodnight to ever working for the dude. It's just the way it goes.
People in this industry, senior or junior, have very thin skins. And very long memories.
I'm not signing my name, and you can all lick my cold hard stones.
Hey 3.33, I think you're confused. The Economist "Trump" ad ran later than the Fin Review version.
If you're going to crack the shits over the Fin Review, do it over the fact that the entire tone and strategy of the whole campaign is a rip-off of the Economist. Not over the fact that one execution is a doppelganger.
12.00AM
You are spot on, well informed and completely anonymous.
And they said it wasn't possible.
i for one don't care, just put some good work up and lets get on with it
I'm sure most of us have worked in big creative departments where there's usually one or two arrogant cocksuckers.
You know the type. They sneer down their nose at you and see everyone else as ants, to bow down and kiss their toes.
They slag off everyones work except their own. Nothing could be as good as the prima donna's latest scam ad that he pinched off the work experience guys.
And down at the pub, the only people that talk to them are people lower on the food chain.
And on the blog, they get the p*ss taken out of them for being pigs during the day or they take the p*ss out of everyone else.
Unfortunately, because the small number of prima donna hacks are far more opinionated than the rest of us, both in the big creative department and on the blog, their comments seem to be more frequent than everyone elses.
So I say, keep anonymity and encourage more creatives that actually have jobs in the industry (AWARD students working in bottle shops not included) to get on here and say what they think – objectively. And that way, we drown out the opinionated dickhead minority that frequent both agency and blog culture.
There's an article in The Australian about this.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20644657-7582,00.html
As predicted by many of the saner people on this blog we come off looking like idiots.
i think that nobby's open letter to the industry signals a turning point in CB's blog history. it sprung up as a small blog not long ago, yet now the poor little thing cannot handle it.
it should be now that the momentum the CB blog has gathered be turned into something that works. i don't think anyone would like to see it go, but everyone would like to see it flourish.
- advertising student
(i thought about not saying that cause now i'm guarenteed no one will listen.)
What a great way to create news on the blog when there's so little going around :o)
Time for a new story please.
My take on it is that if Lynchy is going to continue editing comments, why can't Lynchy just avoid publishing comments that are either:
- Personal attacks on the creators of work or the subject/s of the article.
- Obvious slander and vitriol (love that word)
If Lynchy does this, then soon it will catch-on to those responsible that they're wasting their time even attempting to post such comments; and I guarantee it will stop.
It might mean Lynchy has a bit more work to do upfront in rejecting comments, but down the track, the blog will be fuelled by constructive commentary.
Nobby and everyone else will then be happy.
Look, Nobby's being a Knob, Siimon's one-eyed, and Cummins is spurting again. The only true senior that puts the worthy truth is Putnam... I say keep the anonymity if only to keep the bastards honest; and keep the spelling mistakes (witness dilemna and annonimity). I say this to defend the write (sic) to keep any blogging democracy alive. Besides, you should have heard these guys when they were whipper snappers - talk about a lynch mob. And anyway, it's great copy that obviously feeds your voyeuristic needs. Go Lunchy!
Ok,
Having been asked for my opinion i think i shall give it.
Especially considering i have been at the barbed end of several blogsters...or perhaps those blogsters might just be one person.
And therein lies the nub of the matter.
Unfortunately the blog does and will always allow the nasty amongst us to write vicious and quite frankly insulting tripe about whoever takes their disfavour on a particular morning.
And that is a matter for them to take up with their own consciences.
However i am an avid supporter of freedom of speech.
And whilst speech comes from a mouth , which belongs to a head which has an identity, i don't believe that in all instances everyone is able to post their name.
I believe that anonimity ,if it relates to criticism of work ,is important,if the person wants to have it.
Without it some will never comment at all [juniors,suits ,whoever],feeling threatened by the reaction a negative comment might create and maybe a tad insecure.
However when it is a mere mask for personal vitriole,as Nobby and so many others have said and experienced,i believe it is demeaning .Not only for the victim but also for the attacker.
So i only have this answer.
Advertising is a wonderful business.There are some wonderful characters in it.But there are also some shameless tossers and wicked individuals.
It seems to me that if you really are the type of person that gets their kicks writing snide jibes or even worse poisonous insults on the blog then question yourself.
If what you write is witty and informed and concerns the work,then as long as it only concerns the work ,be as anonymous as you like.
Anything else is up to the moderator of the blog to determine what is merely a ludicrous crass insult and what is in effect intelligent comment.
P.s.Jay Furby is a complete wanker.
I thought i'd get that in before the floodgates open.
Yours in absentia.
Jay Furby.
The first time an intelligent thread is posted on this puerile blog and the debate.... should it be ditched. How ironic.
Imagine you work at Saatchi & Saatchi Sydney and you disagree with Nobby. What would you honestly do if you had to log in as yourself to publish your opinion? You would just remain silent - that's what. (I don't see a comment posted by Luke C. on this issue and I don't expect to. He can't win with an opinion that sits on either side of the fence.) Let us keep the space where we can freely debate without politics, fear and sycophancy coming into play.
Cheers.
It was a faint suspicion - now very much confirmed - that juniors are revered with utter disdain in this industry.
Interesting to note that the words "Award School Student" and "idiot" are considered interchangeable.
Way to go encouraging and nurturing your future. And believe me you are in desperate need of fresh blood as this industry seems to be growing ever more elitist, sexist and narrow minded with each posting.
Adwankers give yourselves a pat on the back. You are alive and well.
I find it odd that at the crux of the postings bemoaning the cowardice of anon-imosity, the real issue appears to be that of 'bottom rung feeders' getting too much of a say.
Thank you Lynchy for posting these comments. I too ask the same question of Nobbys motives - whatever they are I'm sure he's getting the results he required. I respect his right to an opinion even if he does not value mine. I on the other hand have a comprehensive list of people that I would never want to work for.
Keep up the good work.. and to all the nay-sayers, hands of Lynchy's blog.
Signed
An anonymous "idiot"
This site is very handy to keep up-to-date with industry news, instead of waiting for CB to arrive in the mail with its stale newsbites once a month. But don't confuse it for a blog.
This is not a blog, as such. Lynchy, like many others, simply uses the convenient blogging tools as a glorified newsfeed/PR outlet (even though a simple RSS feed would suffice, saving us the hassle of opening a browser and waiting for the photo-laden toilet-roll of a layout to unfurl.)
As a relative newcomer to the whole business, I have been surprised by the vitriol directed at individuals here. I wouldn't be surprised if much of the slanderous garbage I have read would be considered defamation, legally speaking.
Let's be clear. Except for the little bitches who write the shit, no-one wants to read slander, bile and hurtful criticism here. But it's like a car crash. You can't help but stop, read and shake your head in disbelief at the juvenile and petty nature of it all, even when some of the shit is sprayed in your direction. Nothing that I have read in the comments section here has been genuinely constructive. Nothing. That's the problem, IMO.
The Anonymous button is the problem. It makes it too easy for people to post offensive garbage. Get rid of it.
Keep the comments, but make commenters sign in. People can still shit-can an ad if they want, they'll just have to jump through an extra hoop. That way, if they have something constructive or useful to add, others won't miss out. (You also then have the option of barring certain commenters, who will then have to sign up for another junk email address to continue to post their excreta.)
Sure, it's idealistic to think it will stop the guttersnipes, but if you're willing to continue to monitor the comments Lynchy, I think it will make things more pleasant around here.
It's not that difficult, really, kids. Now go outside and play nicely while I wash my hands to get some of the stink off.
Signed,
Junior Brown
Hey guys.
I thinkthe blog is a waste of time.
I have always been taught if you have nothing good t say then dont. Simple.
Why slag people off when you are annonymous. But at the smae time people only do it to get a rise out of people.
Why do people get so touchy when people say the word scam. Who cares if it is.
Nobby is a great CD, and has an opinion that you muct respect to be honest.
But could he put his hand on his heart and say he has never done a scam ad? That I dont know.
I couldn't. Mine won at cannes and got me a nice pay rise. Sweet. Job is a goodun.
Higs, DDB Europe.
i like blogs where yous can slag everyone off, the fikking kiwis did have ablog like that..then it got lobotomised and kinda poncey, adland, wanker biscuit
don't let it happen here..oh it already has
A few points
1. All those people signing their names now. Do you think anyone believes that's your first post?
2.People like Andy Lish are critical of the bitching but then he calls people 'idle mac rats'
3.Was Siimon's last paragraph satirical?
4. Is it a standard template for CD's to start by talking about not going on the blog much, but then giving it away like Nobby did by seeming to have noticed all Luke Chess' posts?
5. Doesn't everyone just read the comments and not the PR crap from CD's talking about 'fresh thinking'?
Dave you got it spot on.
Cheers
Amon Emsley
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Bunny says, "Chill out, have fun, play nice."
IF THERE WAS NO CB BLOG, HOW WOULD FURBY FILL THE HOURS OF HIS DAY?
Sent to Lynchy via email....
This is an issue on which I have been extremely vocal on many occasions, albeit only to Lynchy himself.
In my opinion, the Blog or, more specifically, the comments section, is single-handedly turning Australian advertising into the malicious and divisive industry it now all but resembles.
It has allowed people to make libellous statements, without fear of retribution.
It has allowed people to play out private vendettas in full public view.
Hell, on many occasions, it has even allowed people to make stuff up just for fun
Whilst it has affected me personally, it has also had a huge impact on many people around me.
And, to be honest, I would be thrilled if the industry decided to no longer stand for it.
Lynchy, you claim that The Blog attracts thousands of people every day.
Whilst that may be true, I suspect that the great majority of them are there simply to make sure their name isn't being ruthlessly slandered.
And surely that's the real point.
To allow people to be attacked by Campaign Brief's "anonymous" readers is not only gutless, it's against the law.
Yes, slander and libel laws apply to blogs.
Free speech is one thing, but it was decided long ago by people smarter than us to put laws in place to protect individuals from exactly the kind of "free speech" that takes place on The Blog.
When I excitedly returned to Australia earlier this year, this bitching, backstabbing industry is certainly not what I thought I was heading home to.
Overseas I would tell people what a great "community" we had back home - but, by the time I returned, the Campaign Brief Blog had all but destroyed that.
So, let's disagree.
Let's argue.
Let's debate the work.
But let's do it openly and honestly, without the veil of anonymity.
Matt Eastwood
National Creative Director/Vice Chairman, DDB Australia
I agree with everything Nobby has written.
I was a big fan of the blog initially, but when it went sour I really didn’t need reminding that I was part of an industry that behaved like a bunch of dysfunctional teenagers. (At this point I would normally make an apology to all dysfunctional teenagers, but they’re all far too busy securing high paying jobs in online companies to notice).
I like the email updates with industry news and I could be persuaded to return to reading the comments if they weren’t anonymous.
I love that it keeps us all up to date with industry news.
Great work.
Regards
Paul Carpenter
Creative Direector - Dell
DDB Sydney
Sento to Lynchy via email...
Hi Lynchy
I was standing at the check-out last night and overheard a lady saying to her friend, "Nobby is CD at Saatchi, surely he's above all that?". At which point I chimed in and said "No, because Nobby is CD at Saatchi he is probably one of the few people who CAN say it".
Well done Nobby, you have faced the pack head on and said what most people have been too afraid to. And I understand why you did it.
Along with the embarrassingly huge amount of positive comments my peers, friends, relatives and girlfriend have posted about me, I've had my share of slagging on the blog. But like you Nobby, the sour stuff is water off a duck's back for me - seriously, I could care less. 90% of the people who frequent the blog know good from bad and make up their own mind about the work and the people responsible for it. The other 10% are anonymice who don't matter. Sure, some of the work on the blog is rubbish and that is promptly pointed out, but remember 90% of us don't really believe the slagging of good work and people. Some of it is amusing at best.
Back to Nobby's letter though. Great CDs create an environment where their people will flourish. I'd say Nobby wrote this for his people as much as anyone. Saatchi's have received some very unwarranted negative posts in the past and as good as his people are it's possible that, like a lot of writers and art directors, when they were handed their talent they were also given a fair helping of sensitivity (I've had to cuddle grown men in the past and it aint pretty). Nobby's people have busted their arses to get into a shop at the top of it's game and lots of people who don't work there are jealous and they frequent the blog.
So am I pro or con?
I think the thing should exist. But, let's be proud of our ability to
recognise good from bad and make up our own minds about the work and the
people who created it (and I love you all). Let's continue to laugh at the slaggers who denigrate what is clearly good, and a message to judges - don't EVER let your personal opinions be swayed by the pack.
Roddy
Sent to Lynchy via email...
Hi Lynchy,
You won't believe it, but I agree with Nobby.
I love Campaign Brief, but the blog's evil. When I moved to Saatchis a few months ago and my appointment was reported on the blog, I braced myself for an onslaught of criticism about my work. I was petrified that my book would be publicly slagged-off by strangers or, worse, acquaintances anonymously taking their opportunity to knock me down a peg. As it turned out, hardly a word was mentioned about my work, but I would have preferred this to what actually was posted.
Over the following week I was repeatedly humiliated by bloggers critiquing my appearance and stating their eagerness to 'have a go' or 'give me one'. A debate then flared up as to whether I, or any attractive female creatives, even deserve our jobs due to the fact that, clearly, our only use is to stroke the egos of our stupid 'Viagra munching' CDs. I was horrified by the whole experience, and extremely distressed as to what my new bosses and colleagues would think. At the 8 Commercials party that week, you assured me that I needn't worry because you'd filtered out 'all the really filthy stuff'. Since that episode I've watched in horror as every female featured on the blog (Bec Carrasco, Ros Sinclair, Simone Brandse, the list goes on) has been evaluated by the quality of her PR photo. As a result of my experience I'd now be very hesitant in submitting work for the blog, let alone any news to do with my career. In fact, I know several female creatives who've had fantastic recent successes, and who've concealed their news from the blog for fear of being ridiculed and objectified. In its current form, the blog is going to perpetuate the advertising boys' club and really alienate the girls, and I think you'll find fewer and fewer women who'll want to be featured on it.
Lynchy, I don't know whether you care about what the girls think. But if you do, you should reject the anonymous postings and only publish signed comments. To the people who say you're restricting their freedom of speech; this has nothing to do with anonymity. No one's trying to gag them, the opportunity to have their say would still be present. It's just a matter of encouraging some good old-fashioned respect, and manners.
Cheers, Lynchy. As an AWARD committee member, I love that you've supported AWARD this year; we couldn't have done it without you. But as a girl, I really hate the blog.
Justine Armour
Senior Copywriter
Saatchi & Saatchi Sydney
Sent to Lynchy via email....
I moved back to Japan in July & was very happy to leave the CB blog
behind.
Recently, I came back to Sydeny & was pleased to hear that most of my
friends had seemd to leave it behind as well.
Now back in Tokyo, the CB notification email compels me to have
another look; refelct & comment.
I am surprised to see the sustained anonymity here. I think it is
cowardly to be invisible. I also think that an opinion devoid of
context is irrelevant to debate.
Yet, anonymity encourges discussion & is sometimes entertaining...
So to be, or not to be again seems to be the question.
The choice to be known or unknown lies within the percieved weight of
the words spoken. Those thoughts projected without identity carry
less weight than those with.
Therefore, if your ideas are worthwhile reading, you will want to
own them. If you are flippently commenting on another's thoughts, the
purpose of your sgnature is negated by your lack or original content.
Similary, if you produce a good ad, you want the credit..... If your
work is without merit, you will choose anonymity.
So,if you must say something, the hope would be that you endeavor to
say something worthwhile. Strive for the courage to be accountable.
Stand up for your beliefs. That said, I apologize for the long
windedness of my posting. Americans tend to talk too much, in general
(and in particular w/ regards to me).
Good night Australia! You are a fantasitc county w/ a fantasitic
people.I'm looking forward to knowing you all better! And, perhaps,
getting back to reading the blog....Hell no! How much time did I
spend on this? Fuck me! What a time waster.
Actually, I reckon the best thing said here is that you Aussies are
better off havign this disccussion at the bar.... After work!
Go well! And give it to me if I am wrong...
Peter Grasse
Curious Film
I'm not really sure what exactly David wants out of this discussion but here's my thoughts. It's long but here goes.
I had lunch with John Anderson (ex Deputy PM) last weekend and we were
talking politics. I asked him why people have such low regard for them. He went on to outline 3 major reasons why.
1. People think politicians are infallible.
We now have this mindset that politicians aren't people. People make mistakes, groups of people make mistakes. People have to make decisions one way or the other and stand by them. Sometimes (depending on your point of view) they aren't the right ones. With that mindset, if you have an opposed view to politicians, words like 'Howard's a wanker' spring to mind. Truth
is, I bet 99.9% of people that say such things have never met the guy. They base all personal opinions on what they see or read. Which is pretty much point 2.
2. The media.
The public loves a scandal. We all know it. It's better selling news to
attack the PM than constructively discuss the pros and cons of any decision. Subtly, the media actually helps de-personalize the politicians. Headlines lies 'BEASLEY CONDEMS HOWARD ON ....'
And 3. Question-time.
John Anderson said he opposed the decision a few years back to allow
question-time to be televised on the grounds that instead of rugged debate, we'd end up with showroom antics. Seems he was right. Nowadays it becomes personal attacks in front of camera for the media to sell. Who mocks the most.
Hopefully by now you've all made the connection to this situation. At the
moment, this blog has the opportunity to be solid constructive debate. As soon as it degrades in silly school-boy bitchiness, we should all hang our heads in shame.
Regarding the media aspect, Campaign Brief is still the best read in the
region. (my opinion) AUSTRALASIAN ADVERTISING CREATIVITY. It says it on the front, and it delivers. It should be about promoting the work not a crazy bitch mag. Go read NW if you want that. The role of the press in our industry (if you want to win awards) is very important. The challenge is to keep that integrity and keep putting good work in front of international jurors.
Finally, regarding people being infallible, of course we aren't. Nobody's perfect, (well maybe John Eales) and with that in mind there's no excuse to slander people publicly. And even if you have a beef with a particular guy, this isn't the place to take it out.
Keep anon, I think it's important to be able to say what you think without putting your name to it. Heck last time I put my name to something, I was abused cause I wasn't known. (Not sure if that's irony or not?). If you think a person's credibility is measured by the amount of awards they have
won, I feel sorry for you, but to make you happy I won first place in
Queensland for high jump clearing 2.02m in year 12.
Happily.
ANON
Lynchy,
See you at AWARD night at the Opera House on Nov 8. That same AWARD that the Blog re-built from 160 to 500+ members in a few months. If that's not building rather than destroying I don't know what is.
Do people really take the bitchy, mindless slagging anonymous comments seriously? I don't think so.
We're surely all intelligent enough to know the difference.
As for hiding behind anonymity, why not? It might save your job.
Round the world, radio stations have 'rumour' spots, where anonymous listeners ring in to dish up a few hidden 'truths'.
It's so popular that it's taken off around the world. People like this sort of thing. Also, those spots are edited and nothing is sworn as the truth, but interesting stories are corroborated and perhaps later reported as news.
Isn't this okay.
I sometimes think that people complaining of folk hiding behind the anonymous veil may have something to hide themselves.
Also it's fun. Golda Meir once said, don't be humble, you're not that important.
We could replace the word humble with precious.
Blog on and on anon.
Sent to Lynnchy via email...
So Nobby doesn't like the CB Blog. Welcome to the new, slightly f#%^@& up world of the internet. This reaction to the CB Blog, especially the issue of anonymity, is exactly why blogs are so brilliant in their function. I am not saying the content is great - if fact, most of it is worthless, just like most of the content on Youtube and Myspace; but for some reason, people dismiss the written word much more readily than your kid brother contribution to modern film.
People with power, or a reputation, tend to be threatened by blogs, because it levels the playing field, giving everyone an equal voice. No more perches from which to cast judgement protected by reputation or the number of times someone has sat on an awards panel. Your interns opinion os now on a par with the opinion of your superiors. And with the industry expanding and
including us "new media" folk, it's time to shake it up a bit.
Blogs, and any social networking tool, reconstruct existing communities, while also creating them and making them more inclusive. Nobby mentions that we boast an advertising community. From whose perspective? Do elite awards
shows and dinner really represent a community? What percentage of agencies actually enter awards or go to networking functions? The advertising community, as it has been traditionally represented, has been a microcosm of the larger nameless, faceless, under represented media community. How many people went to Cannes? And were they the same people as large year? The status quo had not been representing the community.
I know of the quality CDs out there, but have never met a number of them;
yet in the online industry, which I have been in for around a decade, I am fairly well known, in both good and probably bad ways. That's life. So how is it, if there is really this advertising community, that I have never met,
emailed or been dissed by Nobby; indeed, most of you reading this would never have heard of me. It isn't an advertising community, its more like a circle, and it was a bloody closed one.
The example that Nobby gives of the same quote being attributed to different authors is flawed in one major way - what if the reader has never heard of any of the people that the quote is attributed to? The beauty of blogs that allow anonymity is that there is no preconceived notion of contextual value.
Imagine if award shows were blind, in that the judges were not aware of the submitting agency. The results would be very different, and perhaps the cream would rise to the top, who knows.
The CB Blog is an opportunity for people to express their opinions, and the value of their opinion is based solely on the content of their post. I won't go into the whole writerly versus authorly debate, but Nobby, perhaps it is time to not preform opinion based on reputation as much? I am not saying that I don't do this as well, we all buy in to the hype to some degree.
Without the blog, I would never have been exposed to the rants of juniors, been able to see what agency creates the most spin, and the direction that some brands are taking. This is because I have never actually read the printed magazine, and I am not alone. Rather than read the beautifully constructed case studies, or see PR agencies finest work in getting their client a feature, I am simply exposed to the blood and guts, an unedited free for all. I see no problem with the level playing field, but of course today's juniors are tomorrows CD's, so maybe some people are worried about getting old?
Nobby talks about the bitching that goes in at networking functions, yet
nobody would then say that networking functions should be stopped. So why is the blog any different? The same things are being said, just in a more public forum. Would you prefer to know that people think some of your work is poor, even if it only for political reasons, or would you rather live in
magical Adland surrounded by lions and sycophants? To know that your enemy exists, even in anonymity, is surely better than not knowing they exist at all.
And Nobby, surely you don't actually believe that people assign an equal
weighting to anonymous posts as they do to posts that have a credited
author? Your concern about false rumours spreading via the blog are akin to believing that the general public actually believes everything that is printed in NW magazine. People know the difference between entertainment and news, just like they know the difference between a TVC and actual programming (though of course some people try to blur this line). We know that most of what is written on the CB Blog is bullshit, and that's a big reason why we like it - it's a break for many of us that is slightly tied
into what we actually do, validating some wasted time in an otherwise hectic day.
As part of a creative industry, we put our work out there for the public to see, and we aren't doing this for the good of humanity, we are doing it generally to sell something. We are doing it for commercial reasons. We take advantage of the media machine, which means we give the green light to critique. We can hardly then turn around and criticise the media, lest we do a Bjork or Jessica routine.
Discounting the any blog because it doesn't add value to your day is an
interesting one, and yes that is primarily selfish reasoning, but valid at the same time. The answer of course is simple - don't read it.
So now the fences that separated those in the loop and those on the outer have been torn down, exposing some of the inner machinations for all to see.
No longer can we leverage our reputations to stroke our egos to the same extent, and we can't demand to be heard simply because of who we are.
Regardless of who you are, you can now be cut down by an anonymous
contribution, but this is hardly cowardice. This is a great thing. Think of it like a swingers club for opinions. You can do and day what you want, and interact with whomever you want, but in the end you may still end up in the dark as to whom was the subject of your attentions.
And Nobby, for instructing your creative department to stay off the blog ... you just displayed a red rag.
Peter Bray
Managing Director
Clear Blue Day
www.clearblueday.com.au
The age old saying:"if you haven't got something nice to say, don't say anything at all" should also apply to those who choose to hide behind the smoke screen of anonymous blogs. So on that point, I agree with Nobby.
However, that is not the nature of this industry and surely no one is shocked by people bitching, either behind closed doors or on a public website. So screw it, if you don't like the blog don't read it. If you do, feel free to continue the tradition.
Personally, I'd rather have a Corona, give you all a big industry hug and get on with more important things in life...... weekends and family.
Love to you all
Pete
I’m not an online/digital/new media expert, but I doubt that ‘signing in’ is going to stop the tidle wave of carry on.
Take for example other blogs. And yes, there are few of them. Rarely do people sign in using there ‘real’ or full name. Very rarely. Given this, how seriously would you TrixyBbear287’s or Fluffychub13’s comments about your latest campaign? (A small thank you to Captain Obvious for illustrating this point.) Unfortunately on the web there seems to be a way to fake or, worse still, even assume someone elses identity at every turn.
I think the answer is that if you are to moderate (or choose) any comments at all, why don’t you moderate all the trashy drivel (vitriolé) ones as well?
Tom.
dear 9.54 AM you are the classic example of the worst sort of blogger ,put your name to your comment,go on dare you.
dear 6.56 PM who is being attacked by 9.54 AM in a typically horrid way...don't worry about idiots like this.
they are as everyone says the lowest of the low...i.e. dillbrains and probably crap at ads....as well as the fact that they seem to have missed the point that you took the piss out of yourself already in your message....nice touch.
Some people like this idiot will never ever get it i think.How VERY sad for them.
Melbourne heavy.
NO NEED TO WRITE KILOMETRIC ANGST TO ANSWER IF THE CB BLOG IS POSITIVE OR NOT: THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE AND CLEAR: OF COURSE IT'S MORE THAN POSITIVE!
JUST GET RID OF OF BLOGGERS WHO HIDE UNDER THE CLOAK OF COWARDICE, THOSE WHO HAVE GLISTENING AXES TO GRIND. I AGREE WITH DAVID NOBAY THOUGH THAT ONLINE FORA ENCOURAGE BITCHINESS. IF TAIWAN CONGRESSMEN CAN SMACK EACH OTHER'S FACES DURING HEATED DEBATES HOW MUCH MORE VENDETTA-WIELDING HACKS ONLINE?
Had my photo printed on Campaign Brief a couple of months ago. Proudly showed it off to my mates at the footy and they hadn't heard of Campaign Brief.
Fine.
But my mum liked the shirt I was wearing in the photo. She hadn't heard of Campaign Brief either but she really likes to sing along to the Flashbeer ad.
So there you go. To rip off what a witty old adguy once told me, while all you blokes are kicking each other in the kinardleys in the comments of Campaign Brief, my mum's at home singing along with the Flashbeer ad.
When the blog first started I used to post a few comments on it. Then I won a few awards, managed to get respect in my agency and got the better briefs. Now, in general, I'm too busy for the blog. From this I can deduce the following points. 1/. Those that are good at what they do don't have much time to post on the blog. 2/. I'm turning into an ad wanker. X X o (little hug).
You know that 'defend to the death' stuff I said?
Well I fucking well take it all back.
Francois-Marie Arouet
aka Voltaire
If you don't like the state of the blog, why not vote with your wallets. Cancel your subscriptions to CB stop entering your agency’s work in the Work, and wait until something is done. I'm sure when agency’s like Saatchi, Mojo, DDB, Lowe, etc. start dropping subscriptions, your pleas will not fall on def ears. Lets not forget Lynchy is running a business. I think we have all given enough to this business to demand that a leave respect for one another is maintained.
What i find annoying is the amount of people now posting comments with their names. You can't tell me that all these people have never posted as anonymous and have never had something negative to say. I know for a fact that you have. How? Because I've seen some of you people do it and some of you have told me you have.
So please stop the bullshit! To me its more gutless to chose when to post anonymously and when to use your name to sound like you have something positive to say. Its so fuckin fake. I don't buy it. You bunch of liars.
Even though i agree with most of the things Nobby has to say, I'll always remain anonymous. And as long as i never personally insult anyone or talk down on work for the sake of it, I'll continue to do so. I really can't see anything wrong with that.
Whilst I agree with what Nobby said, it is a bit of a worry that Lynchy only bought this up when Nobby in effect asked him too.
As the posts show, numerous other people have condemned anonymous posting to Lynchy both on the blog and in private and he hasn't done a thing.
This is exactly why so many people think there is a secret cabal.
I know for a fact that Lynchy is a member of the Illuminati, Opus Dei and the Kiwanis so nothing he does surprises me.
9:52
I think you're right that everyone is guilty of posting the occasional harsh comment anonymously, myself included.
Some of us have just decided since this article came out that maybe that's not such a great thing. There's too much negativity on here, so from here on out, I am signing my name.
If it's so bad that you don't want to sign your name, maybe it shouldn't be written in a public forum.
I saw Nobby last week in Sydney and when he mentioned he was doing this, I thought, it's about freakin time.
My original thoughts were that the blog just needs to go. But it is a great place to see new work and to see what people think about it, good or bad. My work has been applauded and slagged and I don't really care either way because I've always known this was a part of advertising and it wasn't an attack on me. My school actually prepared me for it. Only, they prepared me for my creative director to slag my work, not some anonymous angry fuckwit. But still, it's never bothered me that much. At least I can get the work out there and have a chance to listen in on a conversation I would never normally get the chance to hear.
And I don't agree with people saying you can't put your name to a negative comment. If you show respect it's fine. When I worked for Nobby, trust me, if he didn't like an ad you presented he'd let you know. He'd let you know if he liked it as well. That's what this should be about, extending that conversation to other people in the industry.
Then I just read Justine's comment on her blog experience. For me, that's where the debate ends. People need to man up and put their names to their comments. I find it extremely embarrassing that the men in our industry are that childish and that sexist. Grow up or get out, for fuck sake. And be a little more creative. I've seen women picked apart and looked up and down on this blog time and time again. It's weak.
So, sign your name, and say what you want...about the work. No offence Lynchy, but I'd hate to have to rely on you judging every single comment before it goes on the blog.
And it ain't free speech if it's anonymous. It's just cowardice.
Don't graffiti our industry in the middle of the night. Come out, be proud and man up.
-Jay Benjamin
Creative Group Head
Saatchi & Saatchi New Zealand
What's there not to like.
You'd have to be living in the stone age not to. It's immediate, interactive and for those of us not living in the Emerald city it enables us to keep a finger on the national pulse and health of Australian creativity.
Soon people will start to meet and get married through it????
Patrick Baron
2a Somerset Street Elsternwick
Melbourne Vic Aus 3185
m 0413 307 053
p 03 9523 0510
Justine's post was right on the money.
Sent to Lynchy via emai...
From the comments I’ve read, the case for the defence of the CB Blog seems to rest on its existence as a forum for exercising free speech.
At first glance, that sounds reasonable. As does the theory that putting your name to criticism of high profile work is not exactly a brilliant career move.
Unfortunately, both arguments ignore the reality that even in the most liberal societies, free speech is a qualified privilege, not an absolute right.
In exchange for the freedom to express your opinion, you have a responsibility to claim ownership of it. Otherwise, it’s not an opinion. It’s simply the written equivalent of a king hit from behind on a dark street behind a pub.
The laws that protect people from libel and slander exist as much to force people to pause and think before making their thoughts public as they do to preserve an individual’s reputation.
Remove the cloak of anonymity and I think we’d see a lot more considered opinion and a whole lot less pointless and offensive dribble.
And the CB Blog would become exactly what it should be; a handy source of information and a forum for civilised debate.
Brendon Guthrie
Grey Worldwide, Melbourne.
Sent to Lynchy via email...
We agree with that sexy man muffin, Luke Chess. Remove the anonymous button.
We stopped blogging after a couple of ex-colleagues were absolutely slammed. Then we were accused of writing them.
They should never have been put through that experience, especially when their brand new National Creative Director/Vice President had to read it. Very uncool indeed.
Unfortunately we’ve also decided to stop sharing interesting work that we’ve seen around the vast region we work on – mainly Central Eastern Europe, Middle East & Africa. Why? Because we were personally hammered for showing a great Johnnie Walker ad from Beirut.
Sharing innovative work that you probably won’t see in Australasia is not about self-PR, especially when we didn’t produce the ad. It’s about keeping you all informed on what else is happening in the world. What’s wrong with that?
Saying that, the CB blog is not all bad. Far from it. Lynchy has set up a great forum for us to celebrate our work. And when used properly, will only help our industry as a whole.
Keep up the great work everyone. The Australian & New Zealand advertising industry should be very proud of the work it’s producing at the moment.
Have a great AWARD night. And in true blog spirit...may Saatchi & Saatchi flog the rest of you mother fuckers!
Matt & Derek AKA The Hairy Banana
CEEMEA Regional CDs
Saatchi & Saatchi
I'll keep this short.
Keep anonymous, it encourages young people to post.
We can judge the comments then by WHAT they say rather that WHO said them.
We should be clever enough to do that.
Hey Benjamin, like i said i'll never personally insult someone nor will i ever talk trash about someones work for the sake of it.
Infact most of the time i try be positive about the work. But who i am is not important.
Take it to the extreme, If you had to donate say $10,000 to charity would you want everyone to know about it? Or, when you next vote in the election would you like everyone to know your vote?
Extreme i know. But i think it gets my point across.
Gee I'm glad I wrote that article.
It seems I'm right as usual.
And I'm glad I understand this whole internet thing.
It sure feels good putting my name to something.
Or is it my name?
Oh shit, this is some other short fat guy.
Damn it.
Why won't my idea work...
I'm a bit late on this I know, but I think this quote from Shelly Lazarus, Chief Executive of Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide sums up this entire squabble perfectly:
“Control is so 20th Century.”
I love the blog by the way. Apart from the endless over written press releases that is.
Stan
Post a Comment
<< Home