Useful Lunacy

MCAD Fall 2009 Copywriting - Recap 10, October 29

The primary purpose of being a Copywriter is to create ideas (in any medium) which cause the reaction: "I hadn't thought of it that way before." Your role, then, is to create transformation of some kind. That change, that effect, might be emotional or logical, it might be factual or empathetic. Regardless of style or process, your work creates a shift in perception. 

I hope we made that clear tonight.

10 sessions into this course, I'm grateful for the opportunity to work and rework this discussion around what it means to be a Copywriter circa 2009. I really do appreciate your opinions and insights into the process and result of creating advertising ideas, or being a copywriter. 

I sense you're enjoying it, too. (And there's a comments field below where you might register some thoughts on this issue.)

Now we've entered the "reality" phase of the course. Now we're going to focus on doing, and quickly—assuming everyone is possessing the growing skills, aptitude and desire to create influential advertising. 

Your first assignment is to create print ads for the iPhone 3GS. I'm stipulating "non-interactive" and "non-broadcast" because it forces us to focus on what's in front of us—in other words, if it's not visible on the page, it's not happening—e.g. make your ideas legible. 

The presentation below has a few links to click on, and outlines tonight's presentation and the Apple assignment. Definitely check out all the technical specifications around the iPhone 3GS. But don't hesitate to ask Mr. Google what he thinks. Review the competition. Review the punditry. In other words, dig. 

As I said in class (not sure if I had the wig and helmet on at that point), our goal is a fruitful discussion of vibrant ideas. We're looking for ideas, as I said above, which cause us to think, "I hadn't thought of it that way before." 

Each of you is charged with bringing at least six pungent ideas. Six pieces of paper with one idea on each. If you're smart, you'll bring more than six. Hopefully they fall into one or two distinct campaigns. And from a presentation standpoint, all I care about is legibility—e.g. whatever you've got on the page is clear to anyone who looks at it. Black and White is fine. Drawings and stock photography are fine—but please recognize the trap you can fall into with someone else's images. So use all the tricks at your disposal, you clever art school students. I know you're individually capable and have the resources to deliver coherent ideas. 

Next week will be treated as an internal review. Then we'll work together to refine our work. 

Happy Halloween.

Compare and Contrast

Interesting juxtaposition here, with a shared premise of empathy. Microsoft (via Crispin) asks us to see ourselves in their new operating system—even gives billions of us credit. While Apple (via TBWA Chiat Day) suggests Microsoft is just shilling more of the same.

Art vs. Commerce

We've entered a Vonnegut reality. One where creativity and human invention of one kind consumes creativity and humanity of another kind. Maybe this cycle has always been there, but it seems to be blossoming now.

Take Daniel Roth's recent Wired article, "The Answer Factory: Fast, Disposable, and Profitable as Hell," as a case in point. 

Roth describes Demand Media, a company which creates all kinds of text articles and videos—4,000 individual pieces of content produced and distributed every single day. Demand's focus is in providing content which "answers" needs and questions found across the Internet. A noble task, it seems. Who wouldn't welcome content which supplies the answers you were searching for?

"Demand has learned, for instance, that [the keywords] 'best' and 'how to' bring in traffic or high clickthrough rates, while 'history of' is ad poison." 

The insights Demand uncovers are scintillating. And profitable. 

"At the end of the process, the company has a topic and a dollar amount — the term’s 'lifetime value,' or LTV — that Demand expects to generate from any resulting content."

It's a fantastic argument. Demand knows what the people want. It's algorithms actually save time, by ferreting those topics for which you and I want greater illumination. As Roth points out, 

"It turned out that gut instinct and experience were less effective at predicting what readers and viewers wanted — and worse for the company — than a formula."

"...every algorithm-generated piece of content produced 4.9 times the revenue of the human-created ideas."

Bravo. Well done, algorithm! Figuring out what people want to know—in other words, figuring out "what should we talk about?" has always been a contentious, subjective issue for marketers and publishers. To leverage brute math and uncover those stories our audiences want (but haven't yet found) might just be a godsend. 

"This, Reese says, is the ultimate promise of his algorithm: 'You can take something that is thought of as a creative process and turn it into a manufacturing process.'”

Uhh, hold on a second.

"You can take something that is thought of as a creative process and turn it into a manufacturing process."

Demand produces 4,000 articles and videos every single day, on-track to publish 1 million items every month by this time next year. Humans alone can't scale for that output. Fair enough, I get that. And as Roth describes the process, it's not 100% machine-driven. 

"That’s not to say there isn’t any room for humans in Demand’s process. They just aren’t worth very much. The average writer earns $15 per article for pieces that top out at a few hundred words, and the average filmmaker about $20 per clip."

In Demand's model, humans have a role to play, but you've got to literally become a machine to play. You'd have to write approximately 2,667 articles a year at $15 a pop to earn $40,000 through Demand's process. That's seven "few hundred word" articles a day, every day. 

As Daniel Pink asks in A Whole New Mind, "Can someone do it cheaper? Can a computer do it faster?" Demand's approach says "yes." The Wired article begins with an interesting observation from a filmmaker producing content for Demand:

"He points out that the focus is off: The rippling water is sharp while the kayaking instructor is slightly blurred. But the company he’s working for won’t care, he says, so why should he — especially for $20 a clip?"

Heck, I can hire Niche Writers of India, "starting at $4."  

Silly humans. 

Posted via email from Tim's posterous

MCAD Fall 2009 Copywriting - Recap 09, October 22

What is the future of copywriting?

If anyone knows, it must be Elizabeth Sakola and Meghan Casey from Brain Traffic. 

We were very fortunate to have these two smart people visit MCAD tonight to share their perspectives and expertise on the art of writing copy in the age of SEO, PPC, UX and a whole host of other acronyms. 

Elizabeth shared her thoughts on "Web Writing for Dummies, Smarties, Oldies, and Newbies." Interesting to consider the dualities of copywriting online—is the task to excite, to compel to dramatize (e.g. messaging) or is the task to inform, direct and facilitate (e.g. functionality)? 

Then Meghan discussed her background in writing, editing and content strategy. We walked through a diagram from Kristina Halvorson's presentation on content strategy to better understand the various roles and interplay required of writers in the digital age. 

 

Then we had a brief discussion around the increasing rift generated by technology and offshore capability to automate and supplant the traditions of copywriting.

Daniel Roth's piece in Wired, "The Answer Factory: Fast, Disposable, and Profitable as Hell" dissects the success of Demand Media's approach to content creation. As copywriters, how do we feel when our work can be valued at $15 per article? Heck, there's some fellas in India who will write your brand's site copy starting at $4. 

Next week we're going to begin a sequence of five assignments, back to back; one per week. 

MCAD Fall 2009 Copywriting - Recap 08, October 15

Students!

I really appreciated your willingness to step up today and present your brand manifestos for Harley-Davidson. Reading them out loud is good practice for future client and agency presentations. 

The work you did will continue to evolve. I encourage you to revisit what you've written and consider what the other students wrote and what we discussed in class—then evolve what you've put down. Work like this is evolutionary. Your first draft is likely one of a dozen, at least, that you'll pursue.

Our brief discussion around the transition from print to broadcast likely didn't do the subject justice. But I know you have access to Writing for Broadcast and Radio classes. The main point is this:  Context matters. Who reads your words, what words are spoken versus text, what music you employ. So many components can seriously affect how your words are ultimately understood. It's wise to be aware of the tools, resources and situations at your disposal. After all, you all have Macs.

Next week we'll dig into "writing for interactive," with guest speaker Kristina Halvorson from Brain Traffic. 

Perfection vs. Improvisation

This is not a debate.

Not in music circles, anyway. 

In the marketing marketplace, however, the stage is still set—though the lights are dimming. Marketing and Advertising are finally emerging from the Classical era and into the birth of Jazz.  

My good friend Andew Eklund, CEO of Ciceron, laid out his stump speech on this topic over at Minnesota Business the other day. Well said, Andrew! 

I figured, since I picked up a degree in Jazz (University of Cincinnati College Conservatory of Music, B.A. '92), I ought to riff a little, too.

As Andrew puts it:

"Today's marketing executives got to where they are by executing marketing when it was in its 'classical music' stage. Classical music is a genre that does not take to making mistakes lightly. In fact, there is no room for error in classical music.'"

Dig that.

The pursuit of perfection as a cause unto itself was then. Or as the retired management consultant and Netflix Prize Challenger Gavin Potter described it in Wired, "The 20th century was about sorting out supply. The 21st is going to be about sorting out demand." 

Figuring out supply is a quest for perfection. Figuring out demand requires a different set of equally exacting skills. 

Jazz is about the now. Jazz is created on the spot, in response to circumstances—just like so much of modern socially mediated-marketing. 

If you listen to Thelonious Monk or Charles Mingus, you soon realize improvisation can be perfection. Jazz at its best creates beauty on the fly, the result of listening (being "in the moment") and preparation (e.g. "muscle memory"). Jazz is not, however, an accident. Nor is without rules or theory. I recall an interview with the saxophonist Branford Marsalis describing free jazz as an art form best appreciated and articulated by musicians with tremendous skill and preparation. 

In other words, the more you practice, the more you prepare for any outcome—by being aware of your surroundings, your brand story (e.g. the tune you're playing), your team mates, audience and culture—the better your response will be in the moment. 

That's the discipline we need in marketing now. 

The Classical era dictated a rigid hierarchy: A score composed by very few, conducted by even fewer, performed in lock-step by a clearly structured team for an audience corralled for the occasion. And while this kind of command and control approach to music and marketing created incredible results, it stumbled in the face of outside ideas and changing culture. The team couldn't react swiftly if the music blew away, or if the conductor failed to show up. And the audience knew one rule above all others: Shut Up While The Orchestra Is Performing.

The Jazz era begs no less professionalism or skill. 

The story (the tune) still sits at the center. Without a brand story, the music of marketing goes nowhere. In the Jazz era, however, that story is open to interpretation, evolution and mutation based on a set of rules and understanding and group collaboration. 

Success is still measured in applause and repeat attendance. Classical or Jazz, you still need to make the outcome remarkable. 

But the new scene does demand a different understanding. 

The audience is involved now. Just compare any live classical recording to a jazz recording—the biggest difference is audience participation. We need to encourage them to call the tunes and hoop and holler and maybe even sit in with the band. 

The band is smaller. No disrespect to orchestras—but that model just doesn't jive these days, unless you've got really big global budgets. The Jazz era of Marketing requires teams of soloists working together towards a common tune. We've still got to make music, with fewer players. That means the kind of marketing we make has to change; the pacing, execution and performance practice has to evolve. 

Lambert, Hendricks and Ross captured the spirit thusly in "Twisted":

My analyst told me (what?)
That I was right out of my head
The way he described it (how?)
He said I'd be better dead than live
I didn't listen to his jive
I knew all along
he was all wrong
And I knew that he thought (what?)
I was crazy but I'm not 
0h no (on no?) (oh no?)

Posted via email from Tim's posterous

Thought Problem, by Vijay Seshadri

I love this poem from the recent New Yorker. Fantastic imagery, intriguing turn of events. 

October 12, 2009

THOUGHT PROBLEM

by Vijay Seshadri

How strange would it be if you met yourself on the street?

How strange if you liked yourself,

took yourself in your arms, married your own self,

propagated by techniques known only to you,

and then populated the world? Replicas of you are everywhere.

Some are Arabs. Some are Jews. Some live in yurts. It is

an abomination, but better that your

sweet and scrupulously neat self

emerges at many points on the earth to watch the horned moon rise

than all those dolts out there,

turning into pillars of salt wherever we look.

If we have to have people, let them be you,

spritzing your geraniums, driving yourself to the haberdashery,

killing your supper with a blowgun.

Yes, only in the forest do you feel at peace,

up in the branches and down in the terrific gorges,

but you’ve seen through everything else.

You’ve fled in terror across the frozen lake,

you’ve found yourself in the sand, the palace,

the prison, the dockside stews;

and long ago, on this same planet, you came home

to an empty house, poured a Scotch-and-soda,

and sat in a recliner in the unlit rumpus room,

puzzled at what became of you.

Posted via email from Tim's posterous

But wait...

Limited.
Special.
Platinum.
Diamond.
Wolfsburg.
Collector's.
Master's.

Which "Edition" are you selling?

Truth is, it's not the original.

We have several copies of various Disney/Pixar films, each its own "Edition." I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between any of them. But we did buy them, so something must be working with these labels.

Posted via email from Tim's posterous

MCAD Fall 2009 Copywriting - Recap 05, Sept 25

Students!

I talked too much today. 

I hope all that blather brought you at least a few useful insights for confronting the blank page, and developing more and more great ideas. We'll be jumping into doing more and more work now. 

Many of the words and images in this presentation are linked to further information.

Is it really you?

Free is tricky.

Easy is often too easy.

I'm seeing more and more examples of corporate leaders attempting to harness social media for their personal/corporate brands, but leaving the actual work to someone else. 

Is your brand "In Name Only?"

A retired CEO tweets about meeting another retired CEO backstage at an event—while both of them are on stage. 

Someone I know personally, an owner of a regional chain, responds to my question via Twitter with a product recommendation I know this person would never recommend—because I asked this same question face-to-face years before. 

The actor Hugh Jackman admits he doesn't write his own tweets.

Hello, is it really you?

Or is it really someone you hired who doesn't know your personal tastes, or isn't paying attention to where you really are or can't spell?

I guess this is one of the consequences of free media. You get what you pay for.

Posted via email from Tim's posterous