One task I had as Assistant Brand Manager was to put together a compilation of all TMWTG ads as a memento for senior managers and for trade contacts. It’s a great reel as you can see here .

Before TMWTG, Guinness was perceived as an old man’s drink. The brand needed rejuvenating and to become relevant to the nation’s lager drinkers. A whole load of expensive research had been commissioned (I think from the Henley Centre) that identified Individualism as an emerging social trend. This was Thatcher’s 80s and people wanted to be different and parade their boom-era confidence. Guinness was perfect for this – it looked different and made you stand out.

Rutger Hauer was chosen because he looked like a pint of Guinness: black clothing and shocking white hair. He’d appeared in cool, cult films such as Blade Runner and the Hitcher and was an inspired choice.

Some insider memories of the campaign:

• The barbershop ad was predominantly aired with Rutger saying nothing. The ‘lost teddy bear’ edit was only shown late at night to freak out people just back from the pub. We had loads of calls from people claiming to have had a telepathic experience.
• The Dark Glasses commercial was shot in LA (those were the days). It’s the light, darling!
• The then Senior Brand Manager made a cameo appearance as a butler in one of the ads.
• The ads set in a tibetan monastery, and inside the stomach of a whale were made as a pair and cost a mammoth £1m. Though the joins seem pretty clunky now, they were pioneering in their use of CGI.
• In 1994, Rutger’s contract had run out, but a follow-up campaign had yet to be agreed. Guinness needed an ad, but had none to run. The solution was to edit Rutger’s face out of the portable TV in Chain and replace it with a pint.
• We Have all the Time in the World by Louis Armstrong was released as a single and made number 2 or 3 in the charts (a big deal at the time). Originally from the soundtrack to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, it was chosen (thankfully) ahead of Nigel Kennedy’s rendition of the Four Seasons.
• The alternate, thrashy guitar version of Chain ran as a top-and-tail on late-night TV – 30 seconds forward at the start of the break, and 30 seconds reverse at the end. This was an attempt to surprise and appeal to yoof drinkers.
• The guitar edit also featured in a live Guinness experience we toured around student campuses. Some guy with one of those  3D motion/flight simulators that look like transit vans on hydraulic legs had  approached us and shown how you could feel you were in the ad. People loved it, though the man himself had to be stopped from telling everyone the distinctly off-message statement that Guinness was ‘a meal in itself’.
• A script was put together for Chain II, but never made.
• “It’s not easy being a dolphin” caused a great stir, dividing drinkers into either cooing advocates or those who thought advertising was becoming over-indulgent.
• The campaign came to an end after seven years and 27 executions because the ads were no longer recruiting new drinkers. Everyone admired the ads, but they were no longer acquiring anyone new. People had either already joined the club, or decided it wasn’t for them. The next ad, was the much less cerebral, and equally loved, Anticipation.

Do you feel the ads have stood the test of time?

If they didn’t, then credit is still due to them as a testamant to the power of their campaign idea

It won’t be.

As the paltry sales of GQ’s iPad app indicate, simply having an app isn’t enough. The dirty truth is that no-one ever wanted a magazine. Just as Coke sells happiness rather than fizzy drinks, what people actually get from mags are:

1. Signalling. What magazine you hold up on the train carriage, or have on your coffee table sends a message about how you see yourself – be it Viz, the Economist or Wallpaper
2. Passing the time. Mags work great to wile away train journeys and lazy bath-times
3. Special interest Whether you love cars, photography, cycling or houseboats, there’s a mag for you.
4. Sense of belonging People like feeling part of a community and sharing tips.

Magazines have delivered on these benefits very well for decades. The challenge is that digital does all of these better, or changes them:

1. No-one knows what you’re reading. It’s the device itself that says something about you. iPad v Kindle, and iPhone v Android is the new Mods v Rockers.
2. You’re never alone with a mobile. Yes you can read magazine-like articles and look at professional photos, but you’re more likely to listen to music, watch episodes of Glee, email your friends or check-in at a foursquare location.
3. Niche interests are hyper-served by digital. I’m not just interested in digital photography, I want to read in-depth articles on not only Canon lenses, but that particular lens, and those particular types of shots
4. Sense of community has of course been owned by the massive, real-time, rich media interactions of social media. I want to know now what people think of that Cameroon goal.

That all said, magazines will not die. Print has winning attributes of portability, ever-lasting battery life and brings a simple, tactile pleasure. However, it will of course change. There will be fewer titles and producing them will become a leaner, tougher, much less pleasant game. Print dollars really will be replaced by digital cents. Get over it.

My counsel is:

• Think brand and not product. Top Gear is the shining example of a media brand that has transcended its format and is thus less vulnerable to channel shift.
• Embrace failure. There are no certainties in this era of disruption. Things will not settle down, and it is delusional to ‘wait and see’. No-one has a right to survive. The only viable strategy is to keep testing and keep learning.

Usually in these cases, there is a web-savvy way to deal with the wild west of social media, but in the case of the viciously satirical fake BP PR twitter account, I confess I’m at a loss what I’d do. Sample tweet:

We honestly didn’t think this was going to be a huge deal. No one cares when this happens in Nigeria

Not that I have any sympathy with BP over this, but if you were given the brief of responding to this (and assuming you’d accept the gig), what would you do??

These “did you see…” conversations seemed set  for the cultural junkyard in the noughties, thanks to greater choice of viewing, the explosion of excellent TV DVD box sets and Sky+ powered time-shifting. We were all watching different stuff.

I think that’s changed again. I wrote 9 months ago about  real-time watercooler moments: the emerging behaviour of using social media services such as as facebook and Twitter while watching an ‘event’ programme such as X-Factor.

Up until now, this has been pretty disjointed and not something most media owners had properly considered. However, the advent of ITV Live, conceived and led by friend and former colleague Dominic Cameron is changing all that. It’s the first serious attempt to create a joined-up TV/social experience. It recognises that people like to talk with friends and fellow fans about the experience they’re sharing – and provides the tools and content to do just that.

It’s a fledgling service, and has its clunky moments, but the ITV team should be praised for leading the way in this field globally.

They’ve even been audacious enough to run the service around matches they don’t have the TV rights to – so people can watch a game on the BBC and discuss it on ITV Live. Neat.

I wrote last year about how staying likeable would help lessen worries about Google’s size and influence. After a year of fairly flat launches (Wave, Buzz), it’s good to see they’ve got their playfulness back (and some cool products too).

Meanwhile, facebook is the new 200lb gorilla that could do with a refresher in the importance of likeability. The current concerns about privacy seems to be getting real traction.

Serious analysts like Mary Meeker are forecasting that the mobile internet will overtake the fixed by 2013*

To this end, I wanted to share an excellent plugin called WPtouch I’ve found for WordPress that optimises any blog for iPhone viewing. The difference is remarkable:

Before

After

* that’s fully two years before Back to the Future forecasts flying cars and hoverboards

Woo!

1. It’s a great sofa computer. It looks fabulous of course, and it storms for browsing, looking stuff up and casual email.
2. It’s also a great work netbook. It’s small and light enough to have in every meeting, and fits in smaller rucksacks. No more ugly corporate laptop bags. It’s excellent for presentations (and not just as a novelty)
3. It’s a terrific media player. Both for wandering around the house playing WiFi radio (5 Live Sports Extra and Indie 103.1), and also as a temporary kitchen TV (for iTunes purchases)
4. Apps are the key. The early ones aren’t perfect – developers are feeling around for what works – but it’s surely where this machine will fly. And not just games – I can’t wait for Remember the Milk HD.
5. Great for reading. MyTimes is an elegant feed reader and InstapaperPro looks fantastic.I’ve used the iPad to read some lengthy PDFs (thanks to Goodreader) and it’s preferable to having 50 sheets of A4 to carry around

Hmmm…

1. It’s not so much a mobile device as a portable device. it is the wrong shape to use whilst actually moving. To type on it, you need to get yourself comfortable. The biggest accessory sale is going to be something that lets you prop it up at a nice angle to type on. Meanwhile, I hear rubber doorstops work well(!)
2. Correcting typos feels more awkward than on an iPhone and often knocks me off my train of thought. It is possible to type up notes and actions during a meeting, but it’s certainly slower than a keyboard. In fact, I think I can type faster on an iPhone as its narrower screen allows double thumbs action!
3. It’s not a primary workhorse. Numbers has poor Excel compatibility, Google Docs editing seems limited and of course Photoshop and the like aren’t (yet) available.

Overall

I love it, but it’s not essential in the way my iPhone is. And I can’t see it replacing my laptop anytime soon (indeed, it’s telling that it didn’t even occur to me to type this post on it).

But if you like shiny new mac stuff, and you can afford it, you know you’ll get one anyway.

And btw – it’s not going to save the newspaper/magazine industry. But that’s for another post…

Google must be thinking very hard tonight.

So watching Steve Jobs introduce the iAd platform at yesterday’s iPhone 4.0 preview yesterday, I wasn’t expecting much.

But it’s just possible, as Del Trotter might have said, that “they’ve only gone and bloody done it”.

And it is pure testament to unconstrained thinking. Audaciously, they’ve not only decided to get in the mobile ad game, but redefine it. And do better-than-TV along the way. AND suggest that search driven ads (hello Google) don’t work for mobile.

Check out the video. What do you think?

Full video here

Via Boing Boing

Now you can eat at Maloney & Porcelli as often as you like and never worry about your expense report raising any eyebrows

Thanks to b3ta for the link

Unskippable segments on DVD are the ugliest form of interruption advertising.

It’s never OK to deliberately give your customers a bad experience. DVD manufacturers are there to entertain, not to lecture.

Ahead of the filming of the fourth series of the IT Crowd, he’s asked fans to help dress the set

…send us your poor huddled zines, your artwork, your comics, your T-shirts, your memes. Anything you think should be in there that we might have missed

Not only is this financially sensible, but it’s also a great way of engaging fans, giving them a deeper sense of ownership and a real reason to spread the word about the new series.

Nope.

David Hepworth is an unmissable writer on entertainment and culture, and also occasionally strays into marketing. This piece on the the difficulty of competing with Apple on rational grounds struck a chord:

Playing with it [a Sony Walkman] just now it struck me how difficult it must be in the personal electronics space these days, having to compete with Apple. It doesn’t matter how many qualities your product might have, Apple is the one that holds the high ground where dwells desire. A year ago a young friend demonstrated all the features of his iPod competitor, many of which were superior to Apple, but he did it more in sorrow than conviction, as if he knew that the playground prestige battle had already been lost

It reminded me of this similar article in Penny Arcade, which nailed it so brutally and beautifully that every tech CEO should staple it to his desk.

It’s got to be so annoying to compete with Apple… when you come out with what is (on paper) a better version of the same thing, maybe even multiple times over, it’s too late.  You made a “product” to compete with their “product,”… only to discover that they hadn’t made a product at all – they made a narrative.  A statement about how technology should interface with a life.