Friday, August 17, 2007

WERE THE KIWIS FIRST?





A New Zealand blogger points out the similarity between the recent AWARD School Melbourne posters created by George Patts Y&R Melbourne (below), with last year's NZ Herald campaign (left) created by M&C Saatchi, Auckland that got metal at Axis and was shortlisted at Cannes.



21 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wasn't that "been in your job too long" line used in the Leos Singapore Cannes winning campaign for Aquent or another headhunter?

11:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the Fresh stuff was 'similar' to 18-30 then these two are nearly identical to each other.

12:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That is just wrong...cringe!
And yip Leos in Singapore picked up an Award or 3 for the work they did for Aquent last year.

4:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At least the font's different.

4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh quick, someone call the united nations!!! Two ad campaigns have similar visuals.

Must not be much real news to publish this friday Lynchy?

5:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's their similarity that makes me suspect it's nothing more than coincidence. If you're dumb enough to pinch an idea, surely you'd at least have the sense to change the scenarios? GPY&R are neither stupid nor hard up for ideas. And no, I don't work for them, though I have previously worked with some of the guys involved.
And propped up many a CD's italian leather-clad shoe.

6:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now all we need to find out is who the Kiwis copied!

[ But just between you and me, I'm sure I first saw these 'visuals' in an episode of The 3 Stooges ]

7:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who cares? That's not the issue. The Kiwi campaign works because it's about crappy jobs. Basically, if you feel like this, get the fuck out of that job. The AWARD school Melbourne campaign sends the message out there that if you want a job in advertising as a junior, expect to be treated like shit. The SALE bit makes it even worst. It's wrong and it's not funny. Maybe a lot of people on this blog may think it's funny because they have become arrogant assholes themselves, who see this kind of behaviour as acceptable. Well, shame on you. Yes, I know it's an exaggeration but the message still wrong. And unoriginal too. At least the Sydney campaign elevated the new crop of students to something that's worth fighting for. Not reduced to some stocktake sale of office furniture. I suppose it says a lot about its creators.
And, no, I'm not a junior and when I was, I didn't propped any fucking CD Italian shoe.

10:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've heard the students weren't even told or asked about it. They were sent an email and then voila! You're it. Some of them actually really resent the fact they weren't asked properly. It's a disgrace and an oversight on AWARD's School behalf.

3:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The oversight comes from Catmur, that even thought he was a CD in New Zealand for years, allowed such an unoriginal concept up. He should have been familiar with the kiwi campaign don't you think?

3:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A trick for young players, if you set out make a slightly scamy ad campaign with no budget & limited media, expect Saatchi NZ to have already done it!

9:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This type of idea has been around long before either of these examples, still, I do prefer the second one. A fresher version atleast.

9:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These ads demonstrate everything that is fucked about this industry. People running Award school in the late 90's and early 00's would be horified at this dribble. Some of those tutors are now at working at places like Mother in London. They're doing real work for real clients, not scammy arrogant shit like this. You wankers are hilarious.

11:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They should have been naked. Like in Salo. Pasolini has a lot to teach us.

12:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reason the "fight for them" idea feels better (apart from questions of originality) is that it's more reflective of the truth.

Ok, so CD's are not literally fighting over newbie juniors but the reality is the days of advertising employers being in a buyer's market have changed. Unemployment is way down and the current generation are more informed about their choices. Consequently they are harder to attract and keep (the good ones that is).

The old axiom that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys applies just as easily to adland.

The running joke is that you can treat juniors like shit and pay them bugger all. This might feed a 80's stereotype but it fails the truth test.

3:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, it's just a joke. Lighten up!

I'm get it, I'm pretty sure most of the industry gets it, so would any student that is good enough to get a job.

9:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aspiring to become a junior (with a job - this is the crucial part) is an absolute bitch. Working for free, doubting yourself, being made to feel like your ideas are only fit for wiping one's arse. So you push through, and when you finally make it, you get to scrape by on 30k for a good six months.

That said, maybe this is the determination test. If you make it this far then you're made of the right material.

So to the would be juniors reading this, be prepared to take a little, create a little and be fed a little shit in the beginning. If this is what you really want then you'll soon get used to the taste.

1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

man i took it up the bum for a long time before i got 'anywhere' (ie can eat) and i'm still no-where near where i want to be...

its hard. fucking deal with it or work elsewhere.

Junior junior.

5:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you think anything in advertising is original, then you haven't been in the industry very long. Even if you're sure you've just invented a better mousetrap, there's always some bugger who will tell you that, hey, they saw one just like it in a movie once, or in an old D&AD annual, or he had the same idea rejected a couple of weeks ago.

The other point is, clients don't care. They don't give a stuff whether you've adapted a radio ad from the 70s into a TV ad today - they just want it to sell. (Jeez, remember Foster's doing the rip off of the Canadian beer ad back during the Sydney Olympics? Who do you think wanted to do that? The agency? Of course not. Blew up in their faces, of course, but that was because it was far to obvious.)

1:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lets face it, it was done for awards. Copied or not It has been done before and been awarded. Burn it!

5:29 PM  
Anonymous Screamer said...

Re: Passolini - I doubt his actors had to eat as much shit as award school students.

2:52 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home