Has the advertising industry finally lost its soul?
In the flurry to embrace technology, many creatives have lost sense of their identities and become just great salesmen of machines, writes Havas' Valerie Madon
When I was five, I was most happy when I got to draw and paint with my grandmother.
When I was 14, I was most happy during still-life art class staring at an eggplant trying to capture the light on its curves.
When I was 21, I was most happy when I quit university to join art school, disappointing every member in my family.
When I graduated from art school, I was happy even if I thought I would be designing greeting cards for the rest of my life.
Till today, I never doubt that this is who I am and what I was meant to do.
I believe many people in our industry would feel the same.
Like musicians, we are the lucky few in the world that get to make a living from just being who we are and doing what we love. We may not be the next Michelangelo but we have the gift of creativity, which not everyone gets to hone. We have this special ability to solve problems with a heart.
As our industry advanced to find solutions more efficiently with programmatic, machine-learning and more, we stood by and watched with ignorance for a long time. Until today, we live in uncertainty and fear that we will be replaced.
It is more important than ever to remind ourselves of why we are in our roles today, the gift we have and the value we bring. We cannot and should not ignore the role of technology. But if brands need to speak to people, only humans can do that best because:
Machines have data. But we have feelings.
Machines will predict. But we have instincts.
Machines will repeat. But we surprise.
Machines can make moving images. But we create films.
Machines mix sound. But we create songs.
Machines perform jobs. But we build relationships.
Technology is here to enhance our lives, not replace it. But more often these days, we’ve become just great ‘salesmen’ of machines. In the flurry to embrace technology, we’ve completely lost ourselves.
We over-promote the products of others and forget our own business of talent. There’s a surge of ‘consultants’ only because we have stopped being partners to our clients. In a bid to be everyone – digital, social, shopper etc, we risk becoming no one. Instead of leading our clients, we have become followers. Followers of the mighty establishments like Google and Facebook, only because we have forgotten who we are and what we are capable of.
This is not a debate about creativity versus technology because it’s irrelevant and futile. This is a reminder to myself and for everyone who still gets excited when they encounter a great campaign or experience a genius creative solution. If brands need us and clients have not given up on us, have we given up on ourselves?
Fortunately for us, our creative talent is a timeless ability and we need to leverage it now more than ever to get back into the game. If we want to lead again, we cannot be crippled by complacency.
We have to catch up and train the younger ones in the business. We have to leave our arrogance of ‘know-it-all’ behind and live in the spirit of curiosity to ‘learn-it-all’, a humbling quote from the CEO of Microsoft, Satya Nadella, who turned his giant business around.
All the headlines today paint a gloomy picture of what our industry has become – struggling to meet numbers, loss of talent, lack of leadership and the list goes on. It’s not untrue and everyone in this business is trying to find the way forward.
In trying to do so, it is important to ask ourselves what we do best that no one else can do as well. A product or service that machines cannot replicate. And that is our creative gift – our one unique talent and reason we are still in this business.
Valerie Madon is the chief creative officer for Havas South East Asia
WHO WHO WHO the fuck is all this bilge targeted at man?
Can’t see the big boys and girls being glued to a word.
Can’t see the poor trainees empathizing with such sentiment either. The smarter ones among them have one eye on high octane options with Google – not even FB, where she briefly err existed.
Dreary verbal flow and jaded syntax.
What’s going on with the edgy Australian Mumbrella standards Eleanor? Why do we have to suffer an inferior brand of voice?
Seriously.
ReplyStill waiting for new work from Havas…
ReplyI am sure Valerie is also awaiting great work from yourself. Lets not kid ourselves no one is really doing great work in Asia.
Reply“…great work from yourself.”
Fix your grammar chappie. You sound like some low cost writer.
ReplyInsightful visionary original and so ahead of her time…as always….LOL!
ReplyWas there really no one else to fill this space? Does Mumbrella have to feature this just to fill a space?
Aren’t you being condescending by imposing such a read on us, here in Singapore? Where’s the thought leadership we have come to expect from Mumbrella over Marketing-Interactive? This is as low brow as the aFaqs reportage from Mumbai.
ReplyHello Seriously Eleanor,
I must say your IP address does come up quite a lot on this comment thread [under a variety of monikers], so I’m guessing it’s fair to assume you feel quite strongly about our choice of authoress.
Regardless, both myself and I imagine a number of readers are of the opinion that the chief creative officer of Havas in this region should have the right to have a say on the current state of the industry.
But as you know, we always welcome counter views, so if you feel like putting a name to an opinion, please feel free to submit something my way. Editorial guidelines are here: https://www.mumbrella.asia/guide-submitting-opinion-pieces-mumbrella
Cheers,
ReplyThe Ever-Seriously Eleanor
Show us some of your own soulful work first (or even Farooqa’s for that matter) and we’ll answer your question.
ReplyThanks to people like her, Singapore’s advertising will keep struggling to mirror the success of Thailand and Japan, with no success.
ReplyLadies and gent, please give a big round of applause to the president of the all talk no action club.
There comes a time in every leaders life when their deeds must match all their cliche verbiage and rhetoric. The gap between the two in this case is getting wider and wider. Zero credibility.
ReplyQuite alarming to see the number of ‘I’s and ‘we’s in this piece.
ReplyToo many creatives are all about me, myself and I.
Advertising is just such a small cog in the huge machinery that’s the capitalist society.
By all means, create dreams – but create it for the consumers, not for the overfed egos in the creative department who wants to score some metal.
By all means, be the musician, the artist, the film director, but the pursuit of creativity should not be done at the expense of the client’s marketing budget.
Advertising is the art of selling, selling and selling.
Advertising will not die, as long as capitalism does not. Those who paint a gloomy picture of advertising is from the glass half empty crowd.
A person who gleans an invaluable insight from a sea of numbers(and make good out of it) is as creative as a copywriter, art director, film director.
Well said Valerie.
The human mind is intricately woven with emotions and feelings which algorithms and technology cannot replicate. However agencies need to find the right recipe between the human and machine minds to work efficiently towards creating lasting relationships between brands and consumers.
The only irony to this would be if CMOs are replaced by technology!
Replyhttps://www.economist.com/news/business/21739758-advertising-agencies-are-under-pressure-change-archaic-and-inefficient-elements-their
Somehow The Economist makes for so much more stimulating reading than the person who drafted this piece. Wouldn’t you agree, Eleanor?
Does Valeria earn as much as her peers in London, New York or Tokyo? Going by her narrative, I’m guessing not.
O you poor ignorant one, please read that link above. Read, anything progressive. It will hold you in good stead, if even in your nineties.
ReplyTo the chase then!
1. What is it about an article like this that makes you, personally, believe we can profit, as readers?
2. If you are going to indulge writers like this, can we at least have our counterpoints published so that young fertile minds (interns) don’t end up believing in all the trash she advocates?
The local ad scene has never been in this shabby, thanks to people like this. Doesn’t Mumbrella have a genuine interest in molding the thinking of future generations? And will this article not destroy more than it will nurture?
Marketing-Interactive has already sold its soul, by plummeting to the nadir of respectability, just to pimp tables at their degenerate events.
We hold Mumbrella in much higher esteem. Please don’t say we’re wrong to do that.
There’s only one way to arrest our diatribe. Please stop letting daft speak like this through your stringent filters. PLEASE.
ReplyYou could program a bot to trawl the interwebz and pick up all the meaningless phrases she’s used and string it into the yawn of an article like this. Needs to take lessons in writing from BobH and DaveT.
ReplyIn the flurry to establish desperate thought leadership, one person has lost sense of her identity and become just a poor salesperson of ice cream.
ReplyWhere’s Gomez?
ReplyI hope this is not her topic for the next marketing conference hosted my mumbrella….hollow words.
ReplyGood question. Possible answer is that we lost our soul every time we do ghost/scam/initiative ads like a anti-rape necklace that does not really work for women, a red cross app that expects untrained strangers to do emergency first aid or an award submission website for a provision shop too poor to pay for one.
For creatives to keep chasing glory at a personal level, our industry will continue to suffer as a whole community. It’s a good moment to reflect on this and a good call made with this article. Hope to see more from the writer in this matter.
ReplyWhen will creatives in advertising realise they’re in the business of selling products? That clients award (rather than give) agencies budgets to craft stuff beyond flimsy untraceable brand awareness / feel good bits that get forgotten the second after they get watched? And that scam doesn’t exist in the real world?
Maybe someone should tell her that if she’s really intent on making a respectable living as an effective creative in the next couple of years, feeling a little overwhelmed trying to keep up with technology is par for the course & might make her a better creative. If not then maybe advertising isn’t it for her anymore?
ReplyA little over six months ago, Val said, “I get most satisfaction from applying my creativity to help our government, which has done so much for the nation. My last project to help revamp our Central Provident Fund (CPF) statement is a highlight in my career.”
https://www.mumbrella.asia/2017/07/got-valerie-madon-havas
Today: CPF Board picks Saatchi & Saatchi over Havas for creative duties
http://www.marketing-interactive.com/cpf-board-picks-saatchi-saatchi-for-creative-duties/?utm_campaign=20180403_mktdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_source=SG&utm_content=breaking
Looks like even her CPF Statement design – a highlight of her career – isn’t getting poor Havas any new biz traction.
That’s alright. [Edited under Mumbrella’s community standards]
ReplyShe claimed that in Mumbrella last year. At least it gave R3 and the client a headstart in flushing Havas out.
ReplyI’m not a fan or friend of Valerie’s but objectively speaking, I think most of the detractors here either want her job (and salary) but can’t sell their way into it or were probably fired by her at some point in their careers because the bitterness reeks. Whether you think she deserves her title or the right to pen this piece, at least she has a voice and isn’t afraid to put her name on it. She’s one of the few women who hold senior roles (and has lasted doing so) – so whatever you might think of her, at least she’s wily, ballsy and tough enough to make it to where she is. And if you don’t like it, grow a pair and tell it to her face. If not, then STFU and go wank in your little corner. 🙂
ReplySpot on! Daft attempt at masking identity by investing only an opening sentence to establish neutrality, and then go ballistic with her defence.
ReplyNot even a Digital Navel.
ReplyIn Singapore, the three most powerful ladies are Dawn Lee (TBWA), Lou DLP (Pub) and Ee Rong Chong (O).
ReplyAnd all three keep a low PR/media profile. They ascend with the assurance that their performance, alone, will see them in global leadership roles soon.
No BS. No insecurity – just great motivational records. No ineffectual spouses who write their press releases. The work (and we’re not talking invisible necklaces or CPF statement design here). The performance. The nurturing, and the glory.
ReplyNo small surprise that these three powerful women strut their stuff with grace, poise, beauty and femininity. Heels can only elevate that much higher.
ReplyNice try, but you need to try another tack. Nobody’s buying that you’re all that.
ReplyToo predictable.
ReplyGoofed up, MISTER. Backfired.
ReplyYes, Val. Everyone has lost their soul except you. So, about that necklace you did in 2014 that was supposed to keep women safe, how many women are using it today?
ReplyRupal Parekh is a seasoned Adage journo before she crossed over to the actual business. She is networked up the wazoo so you can automatically assume she is about a million times more intelligent, articulate and influential than those with recycled views dressed up in that charming ahlian syntax.
Having said that, even Rupal’s recipe for success seems like the desperate clutching of straws. The single most potent reason agencies are losing cannot be captured by any piece of current jargon. Or the stupid explanation of losing one’s soul. It is plain and simple the mismanagement of time.
If you were to calculate the amount of time these agency fuckers waste on every project, you’d see exactly why they lose money. First of all, it’s near impossible to get all the senior fuckwits in a room to agree on something. By the time the stars align, a week has gone by…all unbilled. Then they will meet and do the ego dance and agree on some garbage that no one is allowed to disagree with. And the client slaps them down….and then the whole fucking shitshow goes on a repeat loop.
ReplyI’m not sure contributing an opinion piece deserves some of these seemingly personal attacks.
The article didn’t knock my socks off nor did it incite me to post pretty rude comments…
Come on agency people, play nicely now!
ReplyIf you come to mumbrella and write condescending, unbecoming rubbish backed by zero cred, then people will let you know how they feel.
ReplyOK, this is not going to win a Pulitzer, but at least she has an opinion and is prepared to share it in a public forum.
If anything the petty comments here validate her point about the state of the industry.
ReplyValerie’s point is that in an age of automation our humanity, expressed through our creativity and passion is our competitive edge. If you disagree with her I’d love to hear another point-of-view, one that furthered the discussion and not an ad hominim attack. My feeling is that she is absolutely right.
ReplyBs, I don’t know Valerie, never heard of her before this piece, but did take the trouble to understand what she’s trying to say and found that I agreed with her. Also appreciate the fact that she has a hopeful take. So to my point, you don’t agree? What’s your take on the rise of automation in advertising? (Love your flip on “Sb” btw. Droll.)
ReplyA brighter hub? Third time lucky? Finally?
ReplyHave your say