The Pope’s opportunity to overcome the vested interests in Christianity

 

The Pope’s visit to the UK at the end of last week and over the week-end dominated the media to such an extent that it is impossible to avoid the subject.

As a lapsed Catholic, who is now an atheist, I believe I have a right to my own say.

And I may have a world-changing Insight, in which the marketing and media industries could have a role. I am aware my Insights are not always accepted, not when I reveal them anyway, but I think I have one, which I will come to at the end.

For now, please forgive me if I start at the beginning.

I experienced one of those strange British childhoods where, at the age of nine, I was sent to a Roman Catholic boarding school in Nottinghamshire. We had cricket pitches, football fields and woods to camp in. We had a swimming pool and bicycles to race around the grounds. Indoors, we had table-tennis and snooker tables.

But this was no English heaven – because my parents lived in Hong Kong.

So, in those days, ‘home’ was a 25-hour flight away including three sleep-denying stops such as Rome, Tel Aviv and New Delhi.

Leaving Hong Kong, at the end of the holidays, when it was time for us weeping, expatriate children to go back to school, BOAC employed extra people to tear us from our distraught parents and physically force us, kicking and screaming, onto the plane. One of the cabin crew held you down, the other fastened your seat-belt.

I don’t think my parents liked this system but, in those days, it was ‘the norm’.  Indeed, such was it the norm, that it was in my father’s contract that the company, for whom he worked all his life, paid our school fees. At the end of the war, having served throughout the Middle East, he had ended up in India and, for a host of reasons, this lead to a successful career in the Far East, ending up in Hong Kong.

I have to admit that the little boy who the world now sees as privileged, because I was privately-educated, was profoundly miserable at school. For most of my adult life, I was able to compartmentalise this misery. I hid it away. Put it to one side. Then, later, when my own kids reached the age of nine, all these negative thoughts came flooding back. Worse, I was jealous of my own kids coming home every day. That’s quite heavy.

When I was their age, we attended Mass every morning. We ‘served’ at the altar. Confession was compulsory once a week, as were The Sacraments of the Cross.

So last week, the memories, the smells, the pictures in my mind and the inner misery of my Catholic prep school all came back. The Papal robes, the cassocks of his entourage, the hymns and the language were all scarily, creepily familiar. I could smell the incense on TV.

Because I feel entitled to a personal perspective, I come now to the various celebrities and ‘opinion formers’ who jumped on the Papal bandwagon.

Is Peter Tatchell really an opinion former? God forbid.

These people live in the ‘secular’ world which the Pope opposes. This was his key message. The USP of his trip.

Thanks to this issue, and its vast media exposure, the word ‘secular’ has attained new levels of awareness and infiltrated our lives – to the extent that ‘secular’ has defined itself as the antithesis of the word ‘Pope’. Not Buddhism, not Islam, not even Protestantism.

Pope – secular. Secular – Pope. They go together. Except, of course, they don’t.

The core issues which enrage our secular opinion formers are, it seems to me, fivefold – child abuse, contraception, abortion, homosexuality and women priests.

I have listed these five issues deliberately in the order above.

First, child abuse.

At my privileged Roman Catholic prep school, I was not abused. Well, I was, in that I was beaten almost weekly. The Headmaster had two leather slippers. One had a section of sole missing, which meant the nails stuck out so, for worse offences, you were patterned with six crescents of holes in your bum. These bled. The other slipper was full of sole (sic). This did not leave bloody marks but it bloody hurt.

I was not sexually abused. But I know it happened, by the Chaplain as it happens.

If them, why not me? Perhaps I was ugly. Hopefully, I was so unloved, miserable and stroppy that no one would touch me. Lucky me.

My view on child abuse is that it is a criminal offence and that the law, however secular, overrides religious belief. So, if any Catholic priests, however senior, are found to have sexually abused children, then they should be prosecuted and punished. They can go to Hell, as far as I am concerned.

This includes anyone who may have covered up such behaviour. As I know from my own experience of litigation, covering up a criminal offence makes you an ‘accessory to the crime’. Not that you necessarily get punished, of course. But you should be.

Anyway, last week, “Pope Benedict XVI admitted that the Catholic Church was too slow to tackle paedophilia by priests….(and)… apologised for the ‘unspeakable crimes’ committed by Catholic priests who sexually abused children”. You can’t say it clearer than that. However, as a lapsed Catholic, I can accept the apology but I am afraid you’ve still lost me.

Contraception. I do not agree with the Roman Catholic stance on this issue. In secular Britain, I believe this is an area of individual choice which most of us are capable of making. In other countries, without the benefit of wonderful health and educational systems such as ours, and where different values pertain, I think the Catholic position is positively dangerous and would argue against it. As a lapsed Catholic, this alone would keep me from the flock.

Abortion. This follows contraception or, rather, it doesn’t. Ditto the above.

Homosexuality. Sorry, not my bag, but I don’t agree. Live and let live.

Women priests. Of course there should be. No brainer.

So I am sorry your Holiness, you have lost me. I am lapsed and staying lapsed.

But I have an Insight that might encourage me and many other atheists and non-Christians (not, note, non-Catholics but non-Christians) change our atheist lives in our secular society. 

Last week, you may even have taken the first couple of steps to executing the objective I am about to propose.

For the first time, you shook hands with an woman priest in Westminster Abbey.

For the first time, you visited the Archbishop of Canterbury in Lambeth Palace.

For the first time, you made an official Papal visit to Britain.

As supreme pontiff, pontifex maximus and vicar of Christ, you had a one-to-one chat with our Queen, defender of the faith and supreme governor of the Church of England.

So here’s the deal.

Why don’t you guys get together and unite all the Christian factions together to create one united Christian faith?

When I was young, I vowed I would never return to the Church until you all achieve this. If the leaders of the Catholic, Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, Lutherans and other Christian churches cannot join together, then why should I rejoin you?

I am very sad you cannot show this leadership. Frankly, if Northern Ireland can overcome their problems, why can’t you guys get back together? You are the preachers.

Up and down this country, at our happiest and our saddest moments, when we are baptised or marry or mourn, we go to Church. But then, when we walk down your aisles, out of the doors of your historic churches and into your evocative graveyards to the sound of the most beautiful, resonant, moving music, you lose us.

I am the son of a Catholic mother and an Anglican father. My wife is Lutheran. We were married in a wonderful Cathedral in provincial Sweden.

And do you know what? Behind the main altar were three smaller Chapels and one of them was dedicated to Thomas a Becket. Like my family, he came from Kent.

Years later, one Christmas, as part of a school project, one of my children and I set out to discover why this English saint had been remembered in this way in the middle of Sweden. We discovered that Becket had fled to France and spent two years in the Cistercian abbey of Pontigny. There he made such an impression on some travelling Swedish priests that, when they heard of his later fate, they dedicated a Chapel in Linkoping Cathedral to his memory. This was in the 12th Century, hundreds of years before Henry VIII wanted his divorce.

Now, in the 21st Century, wouldn’t it be great if Christianity could unite and agree one set of values and transmit a modern, relevant social and moral message that would encourage us all back to Church to meet once more as local communities?

Wouldn’t it be great if, rather than pontificating, you did this on a consensual basis?

And wouldn’t it be easy for you to get together and work out a way of communicating the Christian values you espouse? A message that, by defining the true Christian spirit and the way we live our lives, we could all buy into and follow together as one Christian Church.

Then you could use your combined wealth to raise a budget to transmit this message using all the technological tools and human skills that we currently use to market cereal and washing powder to influence the behavioural values that unite our society rather than divide us?

That, Your Holiness, would make your trip to Britain, and your cup of tea with the Queen, really worthwhile.

I believe, if he were to come back down to Earth, this is a brief Christ himself might set.

Until then, I fear that all the leaders of all the Christian churches are all too human to see the bigger picture and achieve this.

You have too many palaces, too much status, too much property, too much money, too much pride, too much baggage and too much to lose.

Ultimately, you have too many vested interests.

Pity.

Posted in Blog posts, Social media, Twitter | Leave a comment

Mourning Big Brother and the exposure of social prejudice

 

The late Big Brother exposed a good deal of media and cultural snobbery.

Last week, a BBC Radio5Live presenter was unbelievably patronising to his listeners who called to support Big Brother (and the 3.7million who watched the last show).

I am not ashamed to admit that I believe Big Brother played a vitally important social role in exposing underlying prejudice in society.

Indeed, I would go so far as to say that, through the years, Big Brother not only entertained me and my children, but it enabled us to address subjects that we may not otherwise have discussed.

I am not referring to Celebrity Big Brother here. I am talking about the show that featured ‘normal’ people.

Mind you, by winning the celebrity show as a mere ‘normal’ person in 2006, Chantelle Houghton (I admit to relying on Wikipedia here), famously exposed the celebrities as the shallow, sub-normal people most of them really are.

So why was the ‘normal’ Big Brother both entertaining and socially important?

And why do I believe that the world Big Brother exposed was important not only to my children and me, but also to all of us whose livelihoods depend on understanding and influencing human behaviour?

Well, frankly, and this is an interesting social observation in itself, each series of Big Brother inevitably included at least one person who we would not normally meet, either in the course of our day-to-day personal lives or in the focus groups on which we depend so much (or, should I say, ‘we depend too much’?).

Typically, these people do not fall into the demographic profiles of those whose behaviour we seek to influence. They are off of our radar, off the wall and, often, off their heads. They are different – from us and from each other. That’s what makes them so interesting.

Call me closseted, but until I ‘met’ Pete Bennett on Big Brother, also in 2006, I had never met anyone with Tourette’s Syndrome. But I’m glad I go to know him and was delighted he won the show.

Call me naïve, but I had never come across a Portuguese transsexual like Nadia Almada who, on the recent ‘Ultimate Big Brother’, attracted transphobic comments from another contestant for which he was removed from the show.

Call me illiterate, but I’m not sure I would have known what the word ‘transphobic’ meant until I researched this post so diligently.

Call me a snob but most of my personal friends and professional contacts know there was a bloke called William Shakespeare, they don’t think East Anglia is abroad and it probably wouldn’t cross their minds to say: “Posh and Becks named their baby Brooklyn because he was conceived there. What am I going to call my baby? Jacuzzi?”.

There are lots of other examples. Google them, Bing them, Wiki them, whatever.

My serious point is this.

Almost without exception, the Big Brother contestants, when their true nature was revealed during the course of the show, were different from the way my kids and I perceived them when they first entered the house.

This is a very important lesson for us all. When we meet people, we label them, we make instant judgements and it takes time to discover what they are really like.

It is like this in marketing and communications.

We can develop all the consumer research, test marketing, strategic thinking and creative brilliance in the world, but we never know for sure how people are going to behave.

And it is always worth bearing this in mind.

Thank you Big Brother.

Posted in Blog posts, Formspring, Social media, Twitter | Leave a comment

@StephenFry on #Twitter – a new media channel for charity marketing

 

I feel if you are going to come out, you might as well be up front about it.

So, deep breath, here goes.

I have started following @Stephen Fry on Twitter.

At the time of writing, I am just one of his 1,764,195 followers. But I also have a confession to make and I feel, if you have a confession to make, you might as well be up front about it so here goes.

I have followed Stephen Fry to try to understand why so many others do, how Twitter works, what drives people to use it, what they get out of it – both as Tweeters and Followers – and I guess this is the real confession, to gain a deeper understanding of Twitter from for professional rather than personal reasons.

I am not really interested in the minutiae of Stephen Fry’s life. Nor, I am sure, is he in mine. As he follows 53,321 people, I am a long way down the list. But I do enjoy his quaint use of language (“Oh dear, I’m developing an absolute fartweasel of a cold.”).

There are two particular reasons that make me professionally interested in Twitter:

1. I don’t think that even the people who started it knew what they were doing or where it might lead, especially not to where it is now. Twitter is a phenomenon.

2. Twitter polarises people as much as any media channel I have known. It is that ‘love it or hate it’ thing again. (Now it has come out, doesn’t that phrase come up more and more often these days?).

Anyway, I have decided the only way to understand Twitter is to get back to basics.

While I am at it, I’m just going to make myself a cup of tea. Or rather a mug, which I prefer – builders is fine, white, half a sugar. People are interested in these things.

PAUSE

Right, I’m back. Forgive me. Lovely mugga tea. Blissikins. 

An advertising friend of mine once described an industry colleague as follows:

“The trouble with Blogs is that, while most of us are born with Transmit and Receive antennae, he has two Transmit and no Receive. He just talks and doesn’t listen”.

These two words, transmit and receive, are very important in marketing and media.

In fact, they pretty much sum the whole thing up.

Let’s take TV. I remember the days before remote controls were invented and one of the family had to get up and press a button on the telly to change channels. This was a bore so, usually, no one bothered and we watched the ads.

We ‘received’ what was transmitted to us. Other than in person, and a few short-wave radio geeks, the only way to transmit to people was by the telephone, which was attached by a wire to a box in the hall, so we didn’t have many options.

We lived in a world of ‘reception’.

And, by the way, the reception was pretty poor. Remember those pictures of the man on the moon? I wish we were there now. I would love to see what the moon is really like. In space, we seem to have taken a giant leap backwards in time.

Anyway, back on Earth, since we landed on the moon, the world has changed completely. Technology has focussed on human beings rather than outer space. Apart, from those satellites, of course, which are up there to receive messages and transmit them back to us.

So now we live in a world of ‘transmission’.

And Twitter is the ultimate transmission medium. Mankind has never known anything like it. People are twittering all over the place. Hence my professional interest.

Sorry, the doorbell has just gone.

PAUSE 

Phew. That was the postman. He had a package to deliver. Lucky I was here. I have posted on this before: http://bit.ly/ccIQBm.

OMG, SO lucky I didn’t miss him! That would have really cheesed me off. Bah. 

Let’s get back to Twitter.

With a different hat on, I have been Tweeting for 18 months as @Tweeterbookclub. My idea here was to recommend a book a day and attract book readers to www.lovereading.co.uk, which I co-founded.

This was purely a ‘transmit’ strategy. But, daily, more and more people want to receive messages from @Tweeterbookclub. It now has nearly 3,000 followers which is respectable, I think.

Mind you, if I did a trawl back through all these people, I bet loads of them haven’t used Twitter for months. They must have tried Twitter and given up.

That is one insight about Twitter. These long lists aren’t as ‘active’ as they seem.

Another is that I can’t be bothered to do this trawl because you cannot re-arrange your lists. You have to plough through page after page, rather like trying to discover a new book on Amazon (I mean #Amazon). You can’t re-order lists by Name or Subject or Date or Size like you can on, say, #MicrosoftOutlook.

Anyway, I thought I should know more about Twitter than ‘transmit’ and so recently I registered as @TheSalmonAgency. My rule is that if you follow me, I’ll follow you.

I still don’t think people can really be interested in the minutiae of my day-to-day life, so my thought I would post one little insight on a social and/or media related issue that came to mind such as:

– #Fedex announce three-year tennis sponsorship deal, but why don’t they make more use of that inspirationally designed arrow in their logo?

– Why are they thinking of banning English cricketers from Twitter? Surely they should censor the message not the medium?

– If we are lobbying the Indian Government to legalise and thereby control gambling, why doesn’t the same principle apply to drugs here?

That sort of thing.

Also, as @TheSalmonAgency, I have followed Stephen Fry and I have discovered something quite interesting.

I have no idea how he manages to ‘receive’ messages from 53,321 tweeters but, in amongst all the trivia, he does ‘transmit’ messages for charitable causes that seem able to engage him. Here are some examples:

– Wonderful, moving video from @elephantfamily http://bit.ly/cXINFt – Sign the petition to help save the Asian elephant

– Laughter’s a good way to end stigma in mental health. Madpride! http://tinyurl.com/2ua9lm8 – ‘Celebrate Difference, Stop Loneliness’

– Do support Woolly Hat Day @WoollyHatDay and help raise money to end homelessness www.mungos.org/woollyhatday

– PDC’s official charity @SignHealth are creating a world record for the most people playing darts at the same time http://bit.ly/96uMN1

Now, I’ve been a Trustee of a charity and I know how difficult it is to squeeze money out of people. With over 163,000 charities registered in England and Wales, it is a vitally important and highly competitive sector.

And so I do think his ‘audience’ of 1,764,192 followers, despite knowing that many of them are inactive, makes @StephenFry really quite an important media channel.

Which is also, presumably, free.

Toodle pip.

Posted in Blog posts | Leave a comment

A progressive proposal for agency account management

There has been some debate recently about not only the role but the very survival of account management in agencies.

The issue was raised in Campaign by ‘the chair of the IPA Client Services Group’, no less: http://bit.ly/aYjNyv.

I don’t sit comfortably in today’s PC world requiring me to call her a ‘chair’ but, as she says she ‘loves being an account man’, I admire her already.

Anyway, as someone who has managed large and small agencies, both in London and overseas, I have long held a thought which I would now like to bring to the table.

Once upon a time, the CEO of a major multi-national client company told me that anyone who aspired to reach the top had to be prepared ‘to cross disciplines and cross borders’.

Yet, still, agencies still lag way behind their clients in these two areas.

Here follows a series of generalisations, for which I apologise, but I need to make them to get to my specific point.

Most agency personnel are ‘labelled’ by their area of speciality from the birth of their careers.

Yes there are exceptions. Some ‘suits’ manage to transfer to creative. Indeed, I once took some unpaid months off to give this a go myself. Others cross over to other disciplines, but this is still relatively rare, difficult to achieve and seldom encouraged by agency management.

For a suit, the career pyramid is very steep. And the top of this pyramid is not populated by the best people whose careers started as agency suits. Many move over to the client side, where their skills and intelligence are better suited and applied. Others drift away from the business altogether.

I began my career as one of five graduate trainees at Ogilvy & Mather. The other four all had Oxbridge degrees. I hadn’t been to university at all (another story). My contemporaries were all very bright, intellectual even, and certainly clever enough to recognise there are better career options out there than be suited advertising agency account management people.

None of them work for Ogilvy or any other advertising agency anymore.

This is not their ‘fault’, of course, but I do believe agencies could structure themselves better to develop more disciplined and rewarding career paths for better, cleverer people to stay in the business; for agencies to benefit from presenting better-qualified and smarter suits to their clients; and then, perhaps, charge more for their currently under-valued expertise.

So I would like to propose a new way forward.

Before this, I need you to accept one further generalisation – that the job of a suit is a combination of thinking and doing.

Quite frankly, my first two years at Ogilvy were the most enjoyable of my career. I loved being an account man. All I did was what I was told to do. Pour the coffee, write the contact reports and keep the wheels in motion – mostly, it has to be said, by persuading other people in the agency to do the things that needed doing. It was great. I didn’t really have to think at all.

Then, for most suits, come two or three difficult years where a new grad arrives to pour the coffee and you feel you can do as well as the Account Director above you. (I chose a different, perhaps more creative, path – another, another story).

This is when many of the clever people bail out. They are squeezed not only between their client views on one side and agency views on the other – but also from above and below in their account management structure (and all to promote sales of products or services that they know, because they are smart suits, really don’t matter or will change the world at all).

Now, from a management point of view, it can be good news when suits walk out at this stage. They are good people and you want to keep them, but you now have to pay them, say, £30k when you can pick up two grads for a similar bogof price. At the same time, you know they are not ready to be Account Directors where they will have to understand and argue the case for the thinking which underpins the agency’s recommendations.

So there is this career void in the life of a suit which I reckon lies between two and four years of your career development.

In managing smaller agencies, this is when I have actively encouraged and helped former grads find jobs at bigger and better agencies than mine – who may have downsized their grad recruitment policy and need people to hit the ground running, which my trainees, who glory in the privilege of learning from my own sheer brilliance, can by now do brilliantly themselves.

I said I would generalise, so please accept my theory that this career void exists, park it and stick with me while I put different hat on.

Because now we come to planners. Ah, planners! They do have to think.

As clients expect a sophisticated and experienced perspective, this makes recruiting ‘grad’ planners difficult to justify so, even these days, planners sort of emerge from inside and outside advertising.

In short, planners’ careers are not well planned.

So my proposal is as follows.

You want a career in advertising. You are clever, quick-thinking, insightful, imaginative, creative and you have an empathy with human behaviour.

As you climb the slippery slope, this is what clients will pay for.

Stage One, you spend two years in account management. What you are asked to do is not difficult for someone as bright as you.

But what you do is important because agencies need to deliver on budget and on time and the last thing an agency needs is a groundswell of anti-agency feeling to rise up from the client’s own ‘junior’ managers.

After all, agencies get paid for efficient implementation of their strategic thinking and creative ideas which, as we know, they have given away for free at the pitch process. Dumb, but true.

As a suit, up to now, you have been judged more by doing than thinking.

Stage Two, a thrusting new young grad takes your place as day-to-day gofer on your account(s). It is time for you to ‘cross disciplines’.

You become a junior planner on, ideally, the same account(s) you have been working on with the clients you love. Now you really have to study the market, you have to talk to and touch the target audience – both on the street in quantitative research and in qualitative research groups – and you have to bring new insights and fresh perspectives which you can present clearly within the agency and to your clients.

You have to think – as all good suits should do (you would be amazed at how many people who manage advertising agencies just don’t get it).

Stage Three, after two years as a planner, following two years as a suit, you have spent four years in advertising, the equivalent time accountants, lawyers, doctors and architects take to learn their professions.

And you have reached a cross-roads. Are you a suit or a planner? Or are you in the wrong business? Perhaps you are better-suited as a client or in another way of life entirely – school teacher, nurse, politician, whatever.

Or is it the time for you to ‘cross borders’ and accept an overseas posting? Be careful. In the agency world, this is a dangerous call – as I know to my own cost. Multinational clients are much better at staff transfers than agencies.

Whichever way forward you chose, you have a strong grounding behind you (ideally certified by the appropriate professional bodies).

And, in the longer term, the agency you work for will be led by people who are deeper thinking and more knowledgeable than they are now – and your clients, at last, will respect the wise counsel you provide and value your agency at the level they pay their other professional advisors.

Posted in Blog posts, Formspring, SCA 2.0, School of Communication Arts, Social media, Twitter | Leave a comment

More intelligent use of phone technology and new media in Afghanistan War

Rarely have I felt so angry.

On 5 August, nine foreign aid workers for the International Assistant Mission (IAM), including Karen Woo, a British doctor, were slaughtered in Afghanistan.

Last week, on 12 August, further details emerged – http://tinyurl.com/23o3oyy
 
Here are two of them (my underlining):

1. “An IAM spokesman said: “Our own research suggests that the murders were not a robbery as initially reported in the press”…..The attack (is) now believed to be the work of a band of insurgent fighters rather than common bandits”.

These insurgents have now been identified as ‘non-local fighters’-
Hizb-i-Islami and the Taliban.

What a surprise.

2. “Ten gunmen with covered faces ran towards their victims shooting in the air and demanding (the medical team’s) satellite phones”.

Why did these insurgents, now identified as the Taliban, want these phones?

I know satellite phones aren’t terrestrial mobile phones but can’t they be tracked?

Why are these phones, whether satellite or mobile, worth killing people for? 

Surely we can find a way to making mobile phones accessible to Afghans?

Why can’t everyone out there have a mobile phone? We’ve got plenty spare.

The size of the bill for the Iraq and Afghan wars is estimated to be $3trillion. That’s 3,000,000,000,000 US dollars (I think).

Let’s give everyone in Afghanistan a goddam phone!
 
Yes, give them to them – all of them (thus demobilising the Talibans and making their phones worthless). Second-hand will do.

This way, local people can report on ‘non-local’ terrorists in their neighbourhood.

In return, perhaps, we can explain to them what we are doing in their towns and villages. We could espouse the human values of democracy, freedom of speech, women’s rights, liberty and how wonderful are the benefits of Western civilisation. All they see of us at the moment is soldiers with machine guns.

Why can’t we make more intelligent use of new media in this military minefield?

I am sorry. I have said all this before: http://tinyurl.com/y4rca5s 
  
I even stood as a Independent candidate MP for Parliament to raise awareness of this vital, global issue and YouTubed my views for the people of the world – http://tinyurl.com/28nn8xq
 
I accept this is a mere insight. It is not a strategy. It is certainly not an execution (possibly the most inappropriate use of that word in the history of our business).

I know mobile phones need networks and networks need connectivity.

I know mobile phones have batteries to charge. But, with new technology, does the supply of electricity really need thousand of miles of cable underground or ugly pylons? Isn’t there a more local solution? That really would be innovation.

As Alexander Graham Bell, who started this whole thing off, apparently said: “This is such a good product that, one day, every town will have one”.

So, we have gone from supplying the entire population of Afghanistan with mobile phones to providing them all with electricity too. Can it be done for $3trillion?

Alexander Graham bell had a dream. Why can’t we have one too?

Surely there must be a better way than blowing each other to bits.

Otherwise, there’s only despair.

Which is how I feel.

Posted in Blog posts | Leave a comment

Open letter to Rupert Murdoch concerning The Sunday Times paywall

 

Dear Rupert Murdoch,

Last week, on 4 August, this Brand Republic website reported that you ‘gave the first hint’ that subscriber levels to The Times pay wall are ‘strong’.

Good on you.

But what you have done has really hacked me off. You may not care about this. After all, who am I?

Well, I am one of your customers.

I have been reading The Sunday Times for all my adult life and I still pay £2 a week for the privilege. My kids think this is heathen behaviour and a complete waste of paper – especially as I don’t read half of it.

The ‘Money’, ‘In Gear’ and ‘Home’ sections go straight in the orange bag. In ‘Travel’, I read that naughty little article ‘Confessions of a Tourist’ and then chuck that out too.

As I’m a cultured kind of guy, I read ‘Culture’, especially the book section, but I’ll come back to that.

By the way, I used to keep ‘Culture’ for a week to refer to the TV and Radio listings (sometimes returning to book reviews and other articles I glossed over on Sunday) but now I chuck it on the Sunday with the rest.

Ironically, this is thanks to you. Because not only do I buy The Sunday Times every week but I subscribe to Sky for TV, phone and broadband.

And on my Sky HD+ box, it is much easier to see what programmes are coming up than it is in your Sunday Times ‘Culture’ section. So I bin it.

The sections I do read are the newspaper, ‘Review’, ‘Business’ and ‘Sport’ (even there, the ‘Cowes Week’ supplement went straight overboard).

So, for years, I have paid for your products and been a loyal customer.

But last week there was an article in The Sunday Times about a medical condition in which I have a particular interest. I wanted to ‘save’ it on my computer in the special computer file I keep for this subject.

I looked the article up your website to see if I could save it electronically. No doubt, you will say this is illegal. But I feel I have paid for the article and, having paid up, the format in which I want to file it is my business.

Then I hit the pay wall.

Well, I am sorry. I have already paid for this content in your paper.

And I deeply resent the fact that you are trying to extract even more money out of me for something I have already paid for. So what did I do?

I could have scanned in the article and saved it electronically but, before bothering to do this, I found the same subject on one of your competitor’s websites. They covered it quite well, actually, and they didn’t charge me to access it (so I’m thinking of transferring to their newspaper too).

Anyway, I think I have a better idea (or rather, on this site, an insight) which, on a one-off basis only, I am prepared to share with you for free.

First, I have to declare an interest. I am a co-founder of two websites www.Lovereading.co.uk and www.Lovewriting.co.uk.

Lovereading reviews and recommends books and charges publishers to email this content to readers who have opted in to receive this service for the genres of books they have told us they are interested in.

Lovewriting doesn’t review and recommend books, but is a media channel where self-published authors pay us to promote their books on the site. To help these independent authors, we urge our 150,000+ Lovereading users to browse books on Lovewriting.

All Featured Books on both these website have free Opening Extracts.

Admittedly, compared to your empire, these are tiny businesses.

However, because of what I have learnt, I can accuse you of being lazy.

Why don’t you use your Sunday Times website to find out from me the ‘sections’ of content that I am interested in and pay for on a weekly basis?

Why don’t you unbundle your customers into their areas of interest rather than by media channel (newspaper, TV, digital etc)?

Why don’t you ask us if we would be interested in receiving digital content from your media channels in my individual areas of interest (e.g. books)?

Then you could charge advertisers to reach clearly defined audiences who you know, because they have told you, are interested in certain activities (books, cars, sport etc) and likely to buy the products that apply thereto.

This way, you can avoid hacking off previously loyal customers like me by asking us to pay twice for the same content.

Yours sincerely,

A Different Hat

PS – from Lovereading, I have learnt there are many other smart ways of monetising your newly refined and defined customers but, like you, I’m not going to give everything away for free am I?

I did enough of that in my last post.

Posted in Blog posts | Leave a comment

A more consumer-friendly insight for car insurance comparison sites

Originally posted by  Hugh Salmon, Aug 04 2010, 10:21 PM

I dislike having a car, which may seem ironic as I am occasionally accused of looking like Jeremy Clarkson.

I have been deliberate in saying ‘I dislike having a car’, not ‘I dislike cars’.

In fact, I quite like driving cars. In my youth I attended a single-seater motor racing course, which led to my being cast as ‘driver’ in the launch ad for a new Ford model, which was more fun than a day in the agency. Nowadays, I like the car I drive – as I should because I chose it.

No, it is the management – the fuss – of having the car that I dislike.

From an engineering point of view, if nothing goes wrong, then the car is doing what I paid for it to do. Fine. I don’t think about it. I just like it. Then, if something goes wrong, it is always boring and usually expensive.

I don’t like it at all. I’m sure we all feel the same way.

But what I really dislike about having a car is the bureaucracy required.

I have been deliberate about the word ‘required’ because there are three facets of car ownership with which I am required to comply by law.

These are Tax, Insurance and yes, I am afraid it is true (Jeremy Clarkson will know the seriousness of this admission), MOT.

Recently, very efficiently, I was sent a ‘renewal reminder for a tax disc’. This requires me, by law, to provide an valid insurance certificate – otherwise they won’t let me pay the tax.

So, because I am interested in recent market developments in this sector, and what is going on in the big wide world, I have just road tested the gocomparethebeatthatquoteuswitchmoneymarketsupermarketconfused car insurance journey. And it’s not as swifty or simples as they claim.

In fact, to be honest, so boring and time-consuming was the experience, I could only endure it twice including, as you would expect, the site whose advertising campaign I most admire. Of many frustrations, I will share just five insights before I get to a possible ‘upstream’ solution:

1. With all the boxes you need to fill in why, as on other sites, can’t they ‘leap’ from one box to the next when you have inserted the information?

2. From the same input data, one of the two comparison sites gave a price which was £150 cheaper than the other. This means that if you really do want to compare the market, you need to undertake a price comparison of the price comparison sites. Or get a life.

3. They ask for an interminable, and unpredictable, level of information. Because you don’t know the information you will need, it may not be to hand. For example. I remembered my wife had picked up penalty points for a minor offence, for each of which there is a long list of code numbers.

How would I know the code number for being stuck in a yellow box? As a teacher, was I going to interrupt her lesson to ask her for the details? No.

4. So then you have to leave the comparison zone and start again later (when, beware, there may be another random, unforeseen requirement). There is a feature called ‘save quote’ but, as a price comparison dinosaur, I took this to mean ‘save’ to my computer which, as I had not finished the process and so had not been given a quote to save, I did not want to do. In fact, ‘save quote’ meant the site would ‘save’ the information I had provided so far to avoid my having to start again which, as I didn’t, I did.

5. This misunderstood benefit, however, led to the scariest element of the journey which has led me to regret setting off at all.

The next day, one of the insurance companies I had not selected telephoned me – at home! So it seems all that data – my car details, my home and email addresses and all my telephone numbers – now lie in the hands of an untold number of unknown (to me) insurance companies who I am sure will pester me again at car insurance renewal time next year, quite apart from whatever else they will do with this information.

And what about my bank details? 

Because I had not been told otherwise, I honestly thought the information I had provided was done so confidentially to the price comparison site only – and not broadcast out to a long list of random insurance companies. 

Why would my home phone number affect the cost of insuring my car? 

All in all, I may have saved £100 but I do feel I have made a big mistake – and I feel this even more so because I think I’ve got a much better idea. 

Why can’t all the boring fuss of owning a car be saved on my own online ‘Auto Manager’ micro-site, hosted by an organisation I trust but which is personal to me and accessible by me only via my own password? 

This would enable me not only to ever have to input my car details once, including the DVLC code number of my wife’s minor offence, but also:

1. Pro-actively, in advance, warn me by email that my insurance is due for renewal and include price comparison options – not wait for the incumbent insurer and, for all I know, now, the rest of the insurance world to tell me.

2. Pro-actively remind me by email that my MOT, compulsory by law before I pay my tax, is due for renewal – and perhaps even suggest local garages that could supply me with this service?

3. Pro-actively, having arranged my insurance and MOT, tell me my tax is due and help me through the process online on, ideally, a one-click basis.

4. Pro-actively warn me when my car is due for a service and recommend more local garages, perhaps even with price comparisons or offers.

5. Link me to the Congestion Charge people, and warn me I have entered their zone so I can pay Boris at the click of a mouse or touch of a screen.

6. Let me know the prices, opening times and other services at my local petrol stations (especially if they have a 24-hour shop and sell Calpol).

7. Help me, if I want to sell my car, link to auto trade sites that do this. I know some of these sites offer some of these services but I don’t want to sell my car – I just want to minimise the fuss of owning the thing.

8. Help me find my new car – and finance it if I need to.

9. Retain my personal details, including private financial information, but only release them to outside organisations of which I know and approve.

10. Advise me on various miscellaneous issues such as parking availability and regulations, other regulation updates, car hire, local taxi services, driving lessons and even forthcoming local road repairs, closures etc. 

I am sure all this information is available online already but, if so, it is all in separate places which I have to go out and find when I need them.

This is confusing, as the names and advertising of the comparison sites admit. 

Why, if I provide all my personal details to one ‘My Auto Manager’ I can trust, can’t these people be automatically and digitally connected to me?

I would happily pay, say, a tenner a year to opt-in to such a car service. 

And I would happily help anyone who thinks this might be a good idea. 

After all, I would only be helping myself.

And, after the journey I’ve just endured, I need all the help I can get.

Posted in Blog posts | 2 Comments

The Post Office: a STORAGE and a DELIVERY business

Originally published by Hugh Salmon, Jul 15 2010, 11:24 PM following an earlier post on 20 Nov 2009

Today, Thursday 15 July, there is a letter from the Managing Director of eBay UK published in the Daily Telegraph:

Here is what she says:

Royal Mail’s challenge

SIR – Recent years have been difficult for Royal Mail customers. But with a new chief executive, Moya Greene, taking up her post today, the company has an opportunity to lay that past to rest.

The letters business is in decline, but with online retail set to grow from £46 billion to £62 billion over the next decade, new opportunities are opening up. The challenge is to ensure Royal Mail is able to deliver. Fewer than half of the online firms that sell
through our site are confident in Royal Mail’s ability to meet their needs. Worryingly, a third say Royal Mail’s limitations hamper their growth.

For a secure future, Royal Mail must address these concerns. More flexible delivery options, greater convenience for parcel collections and improved reliability are all essential to allay current fears. Extended opening hours for delivery centres,
announced this week, are a positive step.

Clare Gilmartin
Managing Director, eBay UK
Richmond, Surrey”

Here is what I said on Friday 20 November last year (http://tinyurl.com/yc5m5p6):

Putting things in boxes

A few years ago, in a moment of visionary genius, I realised that, over time, more and more products were going to be sold over the internet. Amazon’s business was growing at an extraordinary rate.

At the time, Amazon had made its name as the website of choice for books. Now, of course, Amazon sells virtually everything. But I remember thinking that books were a great place to start because, especially if you bought one at a time, they fitted conveniently through your average domestic letter-box.

Generally speaking, though, if you bought more than one book, or anything larger than the size of your letter-box, you had to be at home or a little card was popped through your door telling you that the Post Office had tried delivering a package but that, in order to retrieve it, and most annoyingly, you would have to pick it up yourself – back at the Post Office.

Well, I didn’t know much about the Post Office other than posting letters in nice, warm-red pillar boxes and receiving them through my letter-box. But I did know that sometime, somehow, somewhere, a box containing my online order arrived at the
Post Office, was loaded into a nice red van and driven to my house. Then, if I was out, the driver would drive my box back to the Post Office it came from – with my order still undelivered.

In this new-age world, with more and more people buying more and more products online, this all seemed a rather inefficient, and decidedly non-eco-friendly, delivery system.

Now, please put all of the above in a little box in your head because while I realised this was happening, I became aware of another market trend.

More and more, at a rate similar to the growth in online purchasing, I read that Post Offices were being closed all over the country. In fact, the deeper into the country you lived, the more likely would it be that your Post Office would be closed. This
meant that if you jumped onto the bandwagon of buying products online, but were not at home for them to be delivered, the wagon with your box in it would drive even further to find you were out and even further back to where it had come from.

Surely, if there was a system where you asked for your products to be delivered to your Post Office and that the card saying it had arrived was delivered by lunchtime with the rest of your morning mail, then you could go and collect your order at your convenience?

And surely this would save time and petrol and carbon for the Post Office as well as provide an exciting new reason for your local branch to survive?

Online retailers would offer their customers two options:

1. Would you like your order delivered to your home?

2. Would you like your order delivered to your local Post Office for you to “collect at your convenience (you will be notified when it arrives)”?

By saving all the inefficiencies outlined above, Option 2 might even be cheaper, creating a win-win-win situation. No need to close Post Offices (and perhaps the opportunity to open bigger and better branches); online retailers offering a choice of delivery options (and possibly cost savings); consumers in more control of their purchasing decisions (and supporting the survival of their local Post Office, especially in rural areas).

Perhaps, even, the Post Office could develop an expansion strategy? Maybe they have a wider product offering than they think? Maybe, because they have to store all these undelivered boxes, they Post Office has become a STORAGE, as well as a
DELIVERY, service?

Why not invest in those storage places that have sprung up all over the place (especially those revolting, ugly, intrusive, big yellow ones which you can paint in your nice, warm, royal, pillar-box red)? There’s lots of boxes in those and they make lots of money. And yes, PO, you can charge money for storage. Even if only pennies a day, there’ll be lots of them.

So come on PO – please don’t GO. We want you to GROW!

What a great idea. I dreamt of my destiny as a dotcom millionaire and, on 2 November 2005, I wrote to the Post Office. I told them what their problem was (but I didn’t tell them my solution).

What happened? Well I know my letter arrived, because a person describing himself as ‘Managing Director’ of a branch of the Post Office called me. He asked me to tell him my idea over the phone. I replied that if I did that, the Post Office could nick my idea (and my millions). He told me the Post Office had loads of new ideas and if I wouldn’t tell him mine over the phone, then he wasn’t interested. He put me back in my box.

Much more recently, Adam Crozier has been on the box. On the Andrew Marr Show (BBC Sun 27 Oct 09) he said: “Our market in the letters side is shrinking all the time whilst, at the same time, we are growing massively in terms of packets and parcels”.

There you go. Even the Post Office agrees with what I told them would happen four years ago. So now we have more and more products being sold online, more and more boxes being driven around in more and more vans to more and more empty houses and more and more Post Offices being closed – apparently, since 1997, the number of post office branches has fallen from 19,000 to 11,000.

Can this be right?

And where did I go wrong?”

So, there you go. That’s what the MD of eBay UK said today. And that’s what I said then.

Posted in Blog posts | 4 Comments

Jacob’s Cream Crackers – biscuits or bread?

Originally posted by Hugh Salmon, Jun 30 2010, 07:37 PM

I feel the time has come for me to tell my Jacob’s Cream Crackers story.
 
I have been inspired to do so by Rory Sutherland’s article a couple of weeks ago (‘Time adland started to understand its audience’: http://tinyurl.com/33oc2u2).
 
Rory reminded us that:

‘if we make decisions at the category level before we make brand decisions, simple path dependency may mean that a strong brand in a weak category may get nowhere…. Birds Eye has been a victim of (this) phenomenon. It did not matter how high the quality of individual brands of frozen food might be, middle-class housewives had stopped turning down the freezer aisle in supermarkets – rejecting a whole category.’

So it passed that I found myself on the train to Liverpool, having been told that, although we were not the agency of record, Jacob’s Biscuits had a serious factory issue with their Cream Cracker line and any solution would be gratefully received.
 
This was over ten years ago and even though the brand has now changed hands, I do not think it would be appropriate to reveal the precise nature of the problem. Having said that, if you go out and buy some Jacob’s Cream Crackers plus an own label version, it won’t take you long to work it out.

Anyway, I was dead excited for I knew the Jacob’s factory was the home of the Twiglet, of which I am a big fan. Suck ‘em and see! I dreamt of carting armfuls of these freshly baked treats back with me on the train to London.

In the real world, there I was seated in a rather spartan and uncomfortable meeting room, drinking machine coffee from a plastic cup. Was I offered a Twiglet? No. Was there a Twiglet in the room? No. (No products at all, in fact). Could I scent a waft of freshly baked Twiglets drifting into the room from outside? Surely I could.

Anyway, the Jacob’s Cream Crackers problem was explained to me. And yes, it was a very big problem. Not only did it threaten the survival of the brand, but possibly the factory itself – including my beloved Twiglets and other products.

So I asked to be told everything about Jacob’s Cream Crackers. What are they? How did they start? Why? When? What are the ingredients? And so on.

What emerged was a fascinating story.

In the late 19th Century, to catch a ship to America, you went to Liverpool.

For those aboard, the problem was that the bread, fresh on the day you set sail, went stale and mouldy a few days later and you couldn’t eat it. So William Beale Jacob and his brother Robert created a way of dehydrating the bread and making it into a ‘cracker’ which would last the length of the journey across the Atlantic.

Most importantly, I was told, to this day, none of the ingredients in a Jacob’s Cream Cracker are any different from yer basic loaf of bread: no e-numbers, no added ingredients, no colourings, no preservatives, ‘free from trans fat’ indeed.
.
We are talking cooking, not chemistry, here.

With this insight, and a twig of an idea in my brain, I returned (empty-handed and hungry) to London.
 
With my colleagues, we presented Jacob’s with three key insights:

1. In today’s consumer psyche ‘biscuits’ are perceived as a treat not quite as naughty as ‘sweets’ but still with those negative connotations of e-numbers, preservatives, colourings, lashings of sugar and, if you are lucky, a dollop of chocolate. Not good for you at all, but quite fun and harmless now and again.
 
2. Why are pure-as-you-like Jacob’s Cream Crackers shelved alongside ‘biscuits’? They are not ‘biscuits’. They are dried bread. So why not persuade your retailers to move Jacob’s Cream Crackers, over to the bread counter? After all, like bread, they are most commonly eaten with cheese or some other accompaniment.

3. And then, because the low margins in what is now a commodity product would preclude an advertising budget, why not differentiate the Jacob’s brand from the rest by re-designing the packaging to tell the fascinating and life improving, if not life saving, story of William B and Robert – a story which only Jacob’s can claim?

It all seemed pretty obvious to me. Certainly worth a go.

Do you know what the client response was?
 
“We have forwarded your recommendations to our International HQ and been instructed that must keep our brands with our retained international advertising agencies, so we regret that we shall be unable to proceed with your proposal”.

Crackers, or what?

Posted in Blog posts | 1 Comment

How creative awards save clients money as well as increase agency reputations

Originally posted by Hugh Salmon, Jun 23 2010, 07:59 AM

Bonjour to the great and the good sunning themselves in Cannes, while we all celebrate last week’s IPA report ‘proving’ (no less) the connection between ‘creativity’ and ‘business success’ (http://tinyurl.com/3273fpt) – although I think two findings contradict each other, more of which later.

‘Creativity’ is hard to define. It is intangible and subjective.

Sometimes, even the creators of award-winning advertising themselves fail to recognise the creative essence of their own work.

For example, for me, the Cadbury ‘Trucks’ execution missed the core insight behind the success of the earlier, breakthrough, award-winning ‘Gorilla’ commercial which is that eating chocolate is pure self-indulgence.

That naughty confection can only pleasure the mouth in which it melts.

That (male?) gorilla ain’t banging them drums for anyone but himself. Just watch him preparing to savour his personal moment. He’s not there to offer ‘joy’ to anyone else as, it seemed, ‘Trucks’ set out to do.

Nor can I agree that ‘Surfer’ is the greatest commercial of all time. Do we really connect that undeniably brilliant film with the experience of waiting for a Guinness to be pulled in the pub? I do a lot of this and find the two experiences – watching the ad and drinking the beer – strangely separate.

Lastly, on this personal – and purely subjective – executional journey, at Kirkwoods in the 80s, I was privileged to work on the ‘Toys in Front of the Fire’ commercial for British Coal – http://tinyurl.com/2u7m2f6. (1’13” in).

When the account moved on, ‘Dog kisses Cat kisses Mouse’ won shedloads of awards. But who made the real creative leap? I know what I think.

So you see, ‘creativity’ is subjective. What do I know? Who am I?

That is what makes awards so important. They recognise work that has been commonly, albeit subjectively, agreed to be ‘creative’ by a number of people. Not just BP ‘small’ people. Important people. People who know.

Creative awards are also important to those who have created the work.

Individually, there is the opportunity for a pay rise or a new, better job.

Corporately, awards can win new business from clients who are impressed

in this way – because clients, with their own careers, love the glory too.

But surely, from a business, rather than entertainment, point of view awards should be a means to an end, rather than an end in themselves?

Years ago, back here in London (Knightsbridge actually) I was up for a job at Lowe Howard-Spink. These were the glory days when the agency was independent and Sir Frank was on fire.

There I waited, all suited and booted, awkward and lonely, in the strange Reception (all Receptions are strange if you have never been there).

Of the reading material on offer, I went for the agency brochure which, in pre-Google days, was a key, if rather last-minute, piece of learning.

Frankly, I couldn’t believe it. Not only did the brochure gloat over all the creative awards the agency had won but it claimed that winning these awards was the agency’s prime objective.

‘Hold on!’ I said to myself, fidgeting nervously in my suit. If I work here, my job will be to persuade ‘my’ clients that our aim is to win awards, over and above ‘business success’ (IPA term not mentioned in Lowe brochure).

As an account man, would this philosophy suit me? Would I fit?

Then it hit me.

What do creative awards mean? What is ‘creativity’? Original, unexpected, impactful, memorable, award-winning? All of these? Whatever. And what is the benefit of ‘creativity’ to the clients who pay for it?

Surely, if ‘creativity’ includes impactful and memorable then, de facto, the client won’t need to spend as much in the media to i) become noticed by customers, ii) help them remember the message and iii) persuade them to do what we want them to do? The more ‘creative’ the message, the less it costs for consumers to notice it, remember it and act on it. Simples.

Throughout my career, I have stuck by this argument and been amazed that creative agencies haven’t made more of it.  

So, back to the two findings of last week’s IPA research:

1. “Pound for pound, creativity makes ad campaigns more efficient; on average, creatively awarded campaigns (i.e. in major awards competitions recognised by The Gunn Report) are at least 11 times more efficient.”

There you go. I’ve been right all along. QED. Phew!

2. “Creatively awarded campaigns that invest strongly in Excess Share of Voice (ESOV) perform particularly well, suggesting that many creative campaigns could further improve ROMI [Return On Marketing Investment] by investing more in Share of Voice (SOV).”

Hang on. Doesn’t this second finding contradict the first one?

If ‘creatively awarded campaigns’ are at least 11 times more efficient, why would you need to chuck in more SOV to improve your ROMI? Isn’t there a mathematical non sequitur here (quite apart from acronym overload)?

Of course, ‘investing strongly in ESOV’ is likely to improve performance, but why does this ‘suggest’ that more investment, rather than less, could further improve ROMI for ‘creative campaigns? Why would you need to? 

Remember, ‘E’ in ESOV stands for ‘Excess’. Exactly.

So I am sticking with my position.

I am confident, in Finding One of this research and thus the full backing of the IPA that the more ‘creative’ your advertising, the less you need to spend in the media for consumers to notice and remember your message.

In fact, in this digital age, you may not need to buy any media at all.

But Creativity? Innovation? Upstream thinking? Absolutement.

Posted in Blog posts | Leave a comment