WHY?

Cutsie Bootsie Christmas Dog @ Yahoo! Video

Santa Cat In Boots @ Yahoo! Video

a santa strategy

Around the world, ad agencies consider a number of different cultural differences as they develop communication plans to profess the unique values of goods 'n services.  Although I wouldn't consider their tip-toing around different cultural differences a sly manipulation of differing belief systems, I would point out that the utmost consideration needs to be paid to the cultural differences that differentiate peoples around the world.

That being said, Christmas is an amazingly global holiday.  It's always cool to see just how widely this tradition casts -- every year it seems to be something different.  

This year, advertising extended into peripheral.  Well, the agencies.  Below is a look at some of the videos that were created for clients (and stalker fans, like myself) by ad agencies around the world.

Enjoy!

M&C Saatchi

AKQA

W+K London
http://www.christmascardmakingmachine.com/

thank god you're a man!

While catching up with my blogging friends, and keeping my eyes open for inspiration for my upcoming campaign to battle binge drinking (oy . . .) I found these pieces awesome.  Very insightful.  Have a look-see.  (You  may have to enlarge them to see the glorious details.)

Advertising Agency: McCann Erickson, Tel Aviv, Israel
Creative Director: Ido Ben Dor
Copywriters: Asaf Zelikovich, Elad Gabison
Art Director: Geva Gershon

appropriate to sing yet?

What is it about making it through a seemingly long performance that makes us inclined to sing (or wait for someone else to sing)?  Is it the joy involved?  Is it relief finally being realized?  Or is it something more?  Obviously, we're invigorated by the jolting lyrics of The Final Countdown where we relish the act of anticipatory (and almost cult-like) chanting when we see that the end is in sight . . . and there is definitely a release of inhibition when can finally sit down to pour ourselves a glass of wine . . . but what is it about singing that paints the finality of something?

I digress.  I'm nearly done (da-da-daaa-daaaaaah!  da-da-da-da-daaaaah!) with my last final of this semester, and let me say it here first:  it's about goddamn time.  Although I liberally advocate the concept of thinking, I must point out that I think I've abused my brain in this circumstance.  Unwilling to take in any more information, my brain has begun to kick things out of the mental apartment.  It's horrible.

Something to look at though.  Here is a snapshot of a blog for one of my classes this fall, and I thought it was absolutely indicative of what you might find happening with blog-class matchings.  For a class of about 35 people, the instructions were as follows:  "Write 5 original entries and post 10 comments on your colleagues entries by the end of the semester for full blog participation points."  Today being only 12 days into December, I found these numbers not in the least bit perplexing.  Setting aside the fact that most people in the class are not familiar with using blogs in their lives, I think this serves as a reminder of just how timidly we approach deadlines.  Especially on seemingly insignificant topics, such as media law (ooops, I blew my veil RIGHT off, there).  "When are they due?   December  11th at 2pm?  Okay.  Got it."  

Fortunately for everyone in the class, they [presumably] got everything in on time.  And luckily for all of us, we're done for a little bit.  However, unfortunately for me, my fascination with quirky things like this kept me coming back for more -- I would check every hour or so just to see the number of posts exponentially rise.  Good for my curiosity.  Bad for my writing and cramming.  

So, as I finish up my last final later this afternoon and pour myself a nice glass (bottle?) of wine to celebrate The End, I shouldn't be surprised if I find myself turning the volume up on my speakers.  I may not be a fat lady, but I sure as hell can drunkly sing any song I want.  Gimme the mic.

Cheers!

finals week in the student center

Take a look at some of the iTunes library names you'll find if you happen to find yourself studying in the general proximity of Syracuse University students:

fight hate with musical theatre

A recent and absolutely fabulous political commentary on our friends over in California.

See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die

personal insight

It bothers me when authorities in life make spelling mistakes.  Or blatant grammatical fuck-ups.   

But only for a moment or so.

I suppose it's a similarly neurotic objection to grammatically incorrect text messages for the sake of saving time.  

I suppose I'll just have to get used to witnessing "Thx" and "Your welcome!"  

Just sayin' . . .

And I think I found a culprit:

A key recommendation:  exercise homophones with caution.

quite some time

Uh, how the hell did so much time go by?

This part of the semester always boggles my mind -- it never ceases to astound me how quickly the days zip by, and how much more work I have to do by the time I go to bed.  I suppose it's just one of those instances where you have to pay homage to the clocks of the world for keeping track of precious time, and continue on with your work.

As a brief recap of the past few weeks:

Halloween very definitely ended.  

Obamarama took place, followed by the exclamations of "YAY!" and "Oh, shit."

And of course, Thanksgiving took vengeance on all of our stomachs.  Since there are only a few days left in the semester, I decided to stay in Syracuse for Turkey Day . . . and cook.  A privilege I've never before enjoyed on Thanksgiving.  Here are a few pictures of my festivities:

It was disgustingly and painfully delicious.  All of it.  

But I did very little work.  Actually, that's a blatant lie.  I did no work.  None.

Therefore, the next 2 weeks are going to be sleepless, highly caffeinated and strung out no doubt.  I'm flying home to Chicago for the first break since early May (discounting the last week, of course).  My time there is pretty much solely dedicated to working on my book, independent study, and agency research.  Most of which can be done from my bed.

I'm playing with the idea of hiring a nurse to deliver daily sponge baths so I truly never have to leave my bed, but I'm leaning towards not actually doing it -- there is a certain enjoyment derived from showering, no?  I think I can carve out 20 minutes/day in my agenda of nothingness to cleanse my slumbering body.

Best of luck on any other ends of semesters out there, and enjoy exercising your consumer right to spend money like drunken sailors on embracing the tackiness of the holidays!

Cheers!

only because i find it way cool

forthcoming intelligence

Recently, political broadcasters have been going back and forth over the number of wars in which this country is currently involved -- there's the war in Afghanistan, the one in Iraq, there's the elusive war on terror . . . all of which are decidedly complex, global predicaments that undoubtedly will need relief immediately.  

But there's another war that Obama's mere election to the presidency re-introduces to our country:  the war on brains, as discussed in a delightful op-ed in today's NYTimes. In the wake of a brutally long election where we saw low-blows and high moral stances taken on every issue (and, arguably, those stances shifting daily), there's an uncanny sense of relief in the air that our country will be in the two of the most intelligent hands.  Those hands, of course, both belong to Barack Obama.  As we progress through eduction in America, there is a universal value that is indirectly taught to us even despite differences in educational opportunities.  With any sort of learning, there is a valuing of becoming more intelligent.  More knowledgeable of how the world works.  More interested in real facts.  More interested in new ideas.  Regardless of differences seen in the valuation of education in a society, there is a personal value to intelligently understand things in our lives.  

I'm ecstatic for the forthcoming leadership of the President-Elect -- it's an exciting time for America, but it's even more exciting because of what it means to the unconscious valuation of intelligence within each person living in this country.  

A tangential thought, also, might be to consider how Brand America will ooze intelligence to other countries around the world.  The effect of this, I would claim, can already be seen  in the offering of congratulations from world leaders to the soon-to-be President.  

I'm giddy.  

reason #451

IDEO Global Chain Reaction from IDEO Labs on Vimeo.

Here is a fabulous planner manifesto.

Russell Davies posted this to his blog, and I thought instead of simply providing a link that I should post the whole thing.  It's an inspiring call to action in the business of action calling.  Here it is:

Planners tend to be over familiar with their own navels.

There’s something about the profession that has us always on the cusp of writing portentous articles called things like ‘Whither Planning?’ in which we prophesy the end of our trade, lament the irrelevance of our skills and bemoan the decline in standards since the great days of Pollitt and King.

If we’re not doing that we spend a lot of time debating whether ‘Planning’ is the best word to describe what we do.

I hate all that. It’s stupid.

I think Planning is a fabulous trade, which has never been more relevant, more necessary or more undervalued. And I think the advertising industry should care because planners are increasingly in demand as agency management, as essential personnel demanded by clients and, heaven forefend, as clients themselves.

So my purpose in this piece is to make some sweeping generalisations about the state of the business at the moment, to suggest that planning could be the salvation of a slightly parochial and tradition-bound industry and warn you all that if you’re not careful all the good planners are going to bugger off somewhere else.

My excuse for writing this is that I’ve just been involved in organising, judging and arguing about the Creative Planning Awards; which is a fabulous opportunity to peer under the hood and see how brand thinking actually happens nowadays. And that, having spent 6 months at Nike and having worked on the brand for years, I’m really starting to understand what should be obvious to everyone, but is sometimes very hard for agency folk to internalise – advertising agencies don’t have a monopoly on good ideas.

Most client organisations are full of imaginative, talented, creative people and they partner with all sorts of businesses to get even more good ideas. Agency planners are valuable to us because their skills and experiences have taught them to be good collaborators; they know how to work with people and ideas. They tend not to be precious about where the idea has come from. And, unlike many people in agency life, they’ve learned how to be good listeners. In the world we’re all moving into – client-based strategy and creativity, multiple agency partners, communications integrated across a wealth of media platforms - these will be increasingly important skills.

So here are some things to think about:

Planners are all over the stream.

Remember the good old days of consultancy envy? Agencies looked at the influence and fees that people like McKinsey got and said – hey we’ve got some speccy people who read books, we could do that. Ever since then the whole industry has tried to get as far upstream as it can. Agencies are continually trying to re-brand their planners as market analysts or something and they’re always presenting clients with intricate processes which emphasise how all the strategic problems will get solved way upstream, leaving nothing unpredictable to get in the way and giving the creatives a virtually open goal they just have to tap in. I don’t know why agencies persist in doing this. Personally, as a client, I feel I’m capable of analysing my own market. What I’d really like a planner to do is help make the ads and stuff better.

And what was refreshingly obvious from the judging process is that planners are happily ignoring the upstream myth and they’re going to where they can actually add value. Which means they’re sailing up and down the stream, like Ratty and Moley in pursuit of an insight. They’re upstream, downstream, midstream, underwater and having a drink in The Riverside. They’re doing all the traditional stuff but they’re also getting involved in art direction and casting and internal communications and every aspect of brand building. And this isn’t just wannabe creative meddling. This is planners realising that the executional is strategic. That their responsibility extends beyond the creative brief.

I loved seeing this. It makes for better communications. It means planners have more interesting lives and it’s the only way to do things these days.

Everybody’s having ideas.

When judging these things we were constantly asking – but who actually had the idea? Was it you? Because we felt like we should be rewarding the person who had ‘the idea’.

This is a prejudice we might have to abandon, and it might be something we have to change for the next awards, because it’s obvious that in the modern world ideas aren’t really had by lone genius’s. They don’t come from a clever planner in an ivory tower or a genius creative team in a black box. The modern brand world is too complex for that. Ideas are turning up through teamwork, conversation and iteration. And that team includes the client, agency people, other partners and all sorts of random people like consumers.

So it’s probably unfair to punish planners for not ‘having the idea’. We saw, in many instances, that planners were operating more like midwives of ideas. They laboured to ensure the group delivered a healthy, vigorous idea, even if they didn’t have it themselves.

This midwife role isn’t something you read about in many planning textbooks, but it’s one of the reasons planners are so employable outside advertising these days; because this is how most media/communications businesses operate. Teams have ideas. Teams do strategy. Teams do execution. And knowing how to make that happen and how to swarm all over that process makes you very valuable.

The Gonzo cometh.

There’s never been a huge canon of ‘conventional planning wisdom’.

There’s some shared language, some familiarity with TGI and focus groups, lots of Adam Morgan’s Challenger Brands and some of Dru’s Disruption. Otherwise most planners seem to base everything on the people and brands they’ve worked with, some dimly remembered training courses and lots of Malcolm Gladwell.

But every day another bit of conventional wisdom turns out to be myth or bad habit.

Neurologists and psychologists destroy our basic assumptions about how communications work. Propositions are shown to be old-fashioned and unheard. Media proliferation upsets our campaign planning habits. Markets change before the SWOTS have been SWOTted. New research tells us that ads people skip through are more effective than ads they watch.

So a lot of traditional planning discipline has gone out of the window. Which is good and bad.

The positive aspect is the liberating effect it has on some people. Unusual and unexpected solutions are more necessary then ever and many planners are finding the current strategic free-for-all just what they need to reinvent the way communications are made.

But on a bad day people are forgetting the basics.

When we throw out the bathwater of conventional wisdom its easy to lose the baby of ‘hard won experience’. Yes, it’s important not to be a slave to tools like propositions and ‘reasons to believe’ but if you’re going to dismiss them you have to know why.

The gonzo model – just dive in, busk a way through and see what happens – has its attractions; you get unexpected answers, useful tangents and a more interesting life. But, you have to be really good to make it work. Musicians have to know their scales intimately before they can become great improvisers. Many of the papers we didn’t shortlist were full of out-of-the-box imaginative thinking but lacked coherence and common sense. It was like listening to the worst free jazz - no ideas and no structure. Trad jazz might be boring but at least you know what it’s trying to do and when it might end.

Planners. Bless ‘em.

Whenever we get a non-planner involved as a judge on the awards they always remark what generous, modest people planners are. Generous with credit, with praise, with ideas. They tend to contrast the convivial atmosphere with the backbiting and ferocity of creative awards.

Which is nice.

But it’s more than just nice. It’s just one illustration of why planners are so in demand by industries other than advertising. There are many others.

We also saw some incredibly tenacious and insightful research being done. We saw planners get their hands dirty with art direction. We saw inspired media thinking and expansive total communications planning. We saw planners constructing new facts because the existing ones weren’t compelling enough. We saw planners see opportunities their clients had completely missed. We saw planners leading and inspiring teams. And, refreshingly, we saw planning knowing when to get out of the way.

Planners are almost always the third most important people in any agency, which means we have to know how to collaborate. We learn that to be effective we have to surrender our own ideas. Or at least accept that we won’t get any credit for them.

Planners have to bolt together disparate ideas and post-rationalise intuitive decisions. They have to be sensitive to consumers, to clients and to the multiple partners they work with. They stretch themselves across all sorts of brands, consumer groups and product categories. A decent planner can talk knowledgably about statistical significance, rotation effect, projective techniques, casting, neuroscience, art direction, interest rates, merchandising, onomatopoeia, transactional analysis, grime, the triple bottom line and Coronation Street. Great planners are creative generalists who can apply themselves quickly and flexibly to all sorts of problems.

That’s why good planners are so hard to find. Everybody wants them.

Countless industries have realised that specialised craft skills are quite easy to come by, but the kind of generalised skills planners have are very rare. There are thousands of colleges turning out very talented creative writers, designers, film-makers, what have you. There is a mere handful trying to create planners (and I’d argue that planning’s a thing you can only learn by doing.) So planners are moving into lucrative and fascinating jobs with in all sorts of strange and wonderful industries. Some are even becoming Clients.

This is something British advertising should be proud of. It invented this odd endeavour and now it’s giving it to the world. But you should think about what you’re giving away.

Planning for diversity.

The best thing about being a judge for these things was realising that there are a million different ways to do good planning.

Almost every presentation highlighted an approach I just wouldn’t have thought of. Some led with research, some with brand analysis, some with thinking hard about the consumer, some with the product, some with everything, some with statistical analysis, some just dived in and fixed the art direction. But every solution worked. And these answers didn’t arise because they were necessary solutions to the problem but because individual planners decided to do it that way.

In an industry plagued with earn-out enduced blandness it’s important to cherish this diversity of thinking. (Even as we lament the lack of other forms of diversity.)

I’d suggest that Planning Directors, for instance, are less self-similar than Creative Directors, less interchangeable and more revealing of the character of their agency. I suspect that clients find the personality and work-style of the planners more instructive of the character of their agency than they would the account people or the creatives.

Planners represent the accessible bit of the agency’s thought process; the conscious mind of the organisation. The creatives are very often just a black box, the unconscious mind that you can’t really get into. And this means that Planners are more emblematic than anyone else of what makes one agencies thought-style different from another.

There’s opportunity here for the industry. People like Mark Earls of Ogilvy or Jim Carrol of BBH are doing better, more rigorous, more nuanced, more surprising thinking than many in the wider communications world yet we insist on pushing the same few creative names to prominence (who then bang on predictably about big ideas and content being the new black.)

The final curtain.

Agencies should learn a lot from their planners. They should learn to listen. They should learn to share. They should learn to play nice with others. Because modern communications are built by integrated, multidisciplinary teams of creative people, some of whom work for advertising agencies. That’s the future. And planners are making themselves valuable by getting to that future first.

woh

Given no preface, this took me aback.  Have a look-see.

talk to consumers

Here's a sneak peak to what looks like a great brand book, for all of you who--like myself--have an ever-growing list of books to read.  Pile it on.  

Interestingly, their opening line discusses a bubble.  Outside the bubble, life is easier and more predictable.  Inside?  Not quite the same.  This is mirroring my life inside the bubble known as "college," and although my absorption of news is a desperate attempt to reach out of the bubble to blindly feel my way outside the bubble, I'm still here.  No changing that.  It will always be a bubble, and it will always be a hinderance of some sort. 

I digress.

As I develop thoughts on my independent research, I feel like I'm in a game of pong between the empirical findings of scholarly research studies that delve deep into the mind of the human being, and the other moving platform is the freshness of the constantly moving ad business.  Everyone has their own view, and it constantly evolves as worldly experiences shift our attitudes in real time.  

Y&R's Brand Asset Valuator is the doggie in the window, for me.  After ogling it in the window as a mere child of this business, I'm finally understanding it's niche in the world of brand research -- it's nested quite comfortably, and I think it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Good.  Cheers to that.

An understanding of consumers is the only base off of which any advertising can build.   In such horrifically ambiguously defined times, we need numbers.  We need understanding.  While looking for that solid base, it soon becomes general knowledge that we're trying to build on a pool of Jell-o.  That simply won't do, and I'm glad Y&R is so successful in this venture.  I look forward to reading the book, and the future of the Brand Asset Valuator.  

Cheers.  Here's the clip.

The Brand Bubble from Brand Bubble on Vimeo.

Gerbils from the 90s

energy

It's all about energy.

Whether it's positive or negative, there's always something there.

Follow it.

Foliage

Going to school in upstate NY is shitty quite a bit of the time; however, we do have autumn to look forward to.

I stumbled upon this website  earlier today and I found it quite intriguing.  It's a branch of the larger I heart NY campaign, but it's very focused on weekend getaways and the individual.  Bright move.

There's a certain allure to this time of year -- it's nature's annual fashion show, and the colors are always in season.  Hands down, the most beautiful colors in the world.

Here's one feature that I found particularly cool.  Well, 'warm' I suppose.   

foreign strategy

Recently, I whipped up a strategy for the American launch of the European phenomenon known as the Ford Fiesta and handed it off to some very creative folks to see what they could come up with. (Still waiting). The launch is scheduled for next year, so I suppose we still have some time.

In a country where SUVs are getting bigger, hybrids are pushed as the only answer to saving the environment, and Americans are spending more on gas than ever before, a cute 'n playful ad won't keep keep them happy -- even more, it certainly won't motivate them to go out (or stay in) and buy a Ford.

The benefit for us? The newest Fiesta is being launched right now in Europe. The drawback? Consumer perspective -- what American consumers expect to see in car advertising next year will be a completely different playing field than British consumers right now.

Regardless. Here are 2 spots that popped up today through the blogosphere:

Find more videos like this on AdGabber


The first one wasn't my cup of tea, if you will. Not sure if I didn't like the execution (which is not that far of a creative leap from the car's own name . . .) or I just didn't understand the strategy. It may very well be a combination of the two, only because . . . well, I'm not currently in the mindset of a British consumer.

The second one is a bit higher in my books. The strategy and the execution are solid. It's taking the opportunity to motivate people to feel the car personally, and feel that its a part of something larger. That redefinition of the discussion is key. Here's the spot:

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

homophone rant

A thought popped into my head the other day (go figure).  

Looking at the world and living life, I look for intriguing, interesting and profoundly inspiring ideas.  After all, these ideas not only make me more informed, but they lead ultimately to better advertising.  My noteworthy thought was not this.  No.  My noteworthy thought was this:

I look for the good, and bypass the bad.  Simply because it's not good.

Let me explain.  While catching up on my blogs this morning, I stopped to think:  With thoughts spanning from consumer insights on hybrid cars to the technologically innovative evolution of the broom, very rarely do I extend a "negative" comment into a discussion.  In other words, I typically make a face, make a mental note (occasionally tell a friend) and then write it off.  I quickly fixate on the good, thinking about it for hours/days/etc . . . but then dismiss the bad even more quickly.  Giddily inspired vs. ignorantly unsatisfied.  

In an interesting world, I look beyond that which I find simply uninteresting. 

 That's not good.  In two ways.  

My mind immediately backtracked to recover a nearly traumatic ad/brand experience and dissect it for my own sanity.  As a planner, I would hope to be able to not only think forward in advertising development, but also to look at the final product and work backwards through the same project.  After all, if there's something 'wrong' with it at the end, there could be a number of issues that happened along the way.  

Then again, it's completely subjective I suppose.  And so it goes . . .

While racking my brain earlier, I thought of something that did not bode well with me:  the Syracuse University campaign for . . . well, itself.  Here's the logo/slogan:

This irked me when I first saw it last year.  Although I had no real issue with the graphic elements of the campaign per se (and I fully admit that I bring anything but an unbiased perspective to the table), having such a brand identity as the new face of the school both to higher-ups and to . . . um, I suppose you would call perspective students 'lower-downs' . . . regardless, it was too off-course.

The objective of the campaign -- which cost the university approximately several hundred student's tuition (if we're going to measure by the unit of 'student tuition') -- was to raise the endowment and to make ourselves stand out in the American university community.

Well . . . I suppose we stand out, I but wouldn't necessarily say that it's in a good way.

As a planner, I find the wording to be a bit confusing.  In the advertising world, insights do not in fact incite change.  They are a catalyst for that change, yes.  But if someone was sitting at a table and I threw an insight in front of them, I can guarantee you that change would not happen.  Or rather, it would not 'incite' change.  There's something else involved.  Insights gained by scholarship are part of the puzzle, but I think the university needs to take a closer look at how to communicate the other puzzle pieces, too.  Having a set of homophones blown up to gargantuan proportions in various shades of orange won't necessarily do the trick.  There's something more -- something's missing from the puzzle.

The objective was clear.  The strategy was there.  But something went awry in the execution.  

Thank you, NBC.

I found the full link to the skit de jour. Enjoy.

GarageBand for 3-year-olds

This development from the UC Berkeley tech kids is intriguingly simple yet systemically complicated, no doubt.

It brings a new meaning to the phrase "sweet music."

Would this one be called "Boobie Doobie"?

When I have that unique hankering for ice cream, my first thought used to be "strawberry," but after living near a Ben & Jerry's this summer, the thought evolved into "Chunky Monkey in a waffle cup."  It's an odd transition, yet one that I'm completely comfortable with.

The word iconic is used, overused and abused while talking about brands; however, I have to bring myself to argue there are a few brands that fall into that category.  Ben & Jerry's is certainly one of them -- the product has a unique hold over people, and thus their brand is the muse of liberal clarity and entrepreneurial relief.  

PETA recently saw this unique energy around the ice cream brand as well.  A recent request that certainly falls into the organization's "oh, yes . . .  we went there" category of requests, is lingering in my head:  they submitted a proposal to have all cow's milk be replaced by human milk in all Ben & Jerry's flavors.  

Just to clarify, we're talking about breast milk, correct?  That leaves a sour taste in my mouth.  

Ben & Jerry's decided not to follow through with such action, unfortunately.  You can read all about it here.  The company did their research (or at least presented a facade of doing their research) for PETA's recommendation, and claimed that it would not functionally make sense at this point in time -- there are just too many substantial differences between how they create the magical ice cream now (with milk from a cow's utter, to clarify) and a transition to the "boobie doobie" of the future (breast milk ice cream).   

This naturally poses a few questions, I think:  

• How would the brand image change among the lighthearted audience it has captured in recent years after hypothetically switching to human milk as an ingredient?
  
• Would this raise other objections in consumers' minds, as they might weigh the difference between feeding your teenagers breast milk in ice cream and feeding your teenagers breast milk?  
  
• The breast milk production is no doubt relatively new and European, but in an American market, what would happen to the brand?
  

and most importantly

• Would consumers have the opportunity to make their "own" ice cream?  
  

This is all fun to think about, but Ben & Jerry's is much more fun to eat than to think about.  Keep it fun.  I anxiously wait for the next introduction into the flavor library.  

Breast milk -- right now -- is not fun.  It's scary.

I Am(Ex) Surprised.

Find more videos like this on AdGabber


Celebrity cameos / endorsements / etc have always irked me -- they're not bad, per se, but I feel that many brands use them to say something new to consumers. Something that simply wasn't being said through other means, whether it be through words, pictures or other communicative tool.  It creates confusion instead of consistency of message.  Even if the celebrity pick is nice personification, the celeb's success seems sometimes short-lived during the brand's lifespan.

This spot? 

Love it. Why? It throws two [well-known, mind you] celebrities into the mix. Tina and Martin actually stand for something, especially when shown during the Emmies -- they represent the pinnacle of meaning in the TV/film business. 

But what makes it genuinely fantastic is the concept of "good advice" is exhibited through a back-and-forth with these two. That's it. They bring other names, like Leo D'Cap, into the conversation but only to sprinkle humor on top.  

Genuine travel advice, as we should learn from the comedic, dramatic and amazing authorities of show biz, is based on trust.  These celebs have done work for AmEx previously, which differentiates the spot from otherwise desperate attempts to bring a famous face onboard. 

We trust these people. We trust our intuitive knowledge of humor. And now we trust AmEx. 

I stand corrected.  Make the check out to cash.

Stories

Please watch.  His appreciation for other people and their stories of hopeful or actual happiness ignites tremendous inspiration.

Cheers.

Hello, world.

Hey, everyone.  Here's the first entry -- the most cliche experience that a blogger can write about, much less experience.  

So I'll be posting a video and pointing you in the direction of my old posts for reference purposes only. Check these out (in reverse order): 

My old blog.

That's it.  Cheers, all.