Tag Archives: advertising blogs

agency spy is dead, long live agency spy

Because of a combination of technical difficulties with WordPress and a client presentation that went far too long, I am late to the news that my favorite advertising gossip blogger is throwing in the towel as of June 1st. That’s right, Agency Spy is retiring.

As of lately, of course, there has been another writer at the Agency Spy blog…but, with all due respect, as a writer and commenter he pales in comparison to the original. Add in the fact that comments require registration at the Mediabistro site, the layout is tougher to read and advertising people seem to not like reading a blog with advertising on the site and perhaps George Parker is right about the blog being fucked.

I know that I am going to read less frequently without the superspy.

In related news (I have always wanted to type that seriously, just like I have always wanted to say “follow that cab” seriously, preferably in a foreign city while wearing a tuxedo and carrying a gun and a license to kill), another blog favorite is no more: Agency Tart.

It is tough to blog every day, especially with the demands of an advertising job pulling away so much time. I know that I struggle with the amount of time it takes, but am in the lucky position of being a writer where it is easier for me to take my laptop down to Starbucks and write…people expect me to do stuff like that and sort of assume it’s for work. And it usually is…ahem.

Best of luck to both former bloggers. Enjoy the real world. It’s much more fun.

ad blogs are everything that is wrong with the universe ever

I haven’t posted much recently about Bob Garfield because this isn’t a Bob Garfield blog, it’s an advertising blog that has occasionally reserved a scathing assessment for the bearded one…but when AdPulp’s mild-mannered David Burn started in on Bob Garfield, I knew that I could hide behind the mountain of briefs and unfinished projects no longer.

garf.png

Yep, it’s time to look at Bob’s recent article and bash it:

Lost Souls?

Trying to Explain the Difference Between Commentary and Vandalism

Whenever Bob starts to talk about other peoples’ souls, he is really talking about how upset he is that other people, specifically bloggers, disagree with him.

Why do people kill themselves? Schizophrenia. Depression. Despair. Agony. Shame. Who can say?

Nobody can say, but I know that Bob is going to try.

I didn’t know Paul Tilley, the DDB creative executive who committed suicide a week ago, and I would never presume to divine what was going on in his life, much less his head, when he jumped from a Chicago hotel room to his death. But I do know this: In his last days, whatever else was tormenting him, he was also under professional and personal attack from persons unknown — most of them, presumably, subordinates — who used the shield of internet anonymity to mercilessly disparage him.

I called it. Did you see that? I totally called it.

Bob thinks that blogs were either the cause or, in some, way correlated to Paul Tilley’s suicide.

A quick thought directed to you, Bob: maybe you could just leave Paul Tilley to rest in peace and not use him to further your anti-blog agenda. It is really unseemly to do something like this. Soulless, in fact


Skipping down past some trite phrases and adjective-laded invective against bloggers that is just too tiresome to comment on, but you can read here if you like, we get to:

Once again, I have no insight into what motivated Paul Tilley to take his own life; correlation is not causation.

Correlation may not be causation, but there is a reason that attorneys correlate events to try to prove guilt…and there is clearly a reason that you try to correlate blog posts with Paul Tilley’s death.

Hmm, I wonder what that reason would be?

Suicide is a dark, desperate, often unknowable act, and those who believe the man was essentially blogged to death believe so knowing virtually nothing about his non-professional life, much less his inner one.

After drawing a line between blog posts and Paul Tilley’s death Bob, like a lawyer withdrawing a question after a sustained objection, has already done his damage and now pretends that he never got his hands dirty.

But it is easy to see why his suicide has triggered such a backlash, with ad blogs at pains to account for their treatment of the man. I surely can’t but wonder whether the vicious public assaults on his competence and character — assaults destined for digital immortality — did not pain his tortured self at least as much as such things have pained me.

The vanity and self-absorption it must take for a person like you, a mere critic, to compare yourself to the Executive Creative Director of DDB Chicago, and that you have tried to compare the pain that a man who committed suicide felt with your own hurt feelings…it is utterly dumbfounding.

There are not words for how sad a person you are.

The ad bloggers (after, of course, offering gushing condolences to the grieving family) have been quick to dismiss such connections as asinine — and maybe they’re right.

I am among those bloggers who has dismissed such connections as asinine…because they are, not to mention that the belittle the life of a man. As for those bloggers that commented on Mr Tilley and then offered condolences to the family, maybe they meant the gushing condolences because as humans, they were able to understand the pain that Mr Tilley’s family must have been feeling no matter what they may have felt about Mr Tilley’s business practices.

But the bloggers are still evil, right?

But as Tilley’s worst detractors continue to use these blogs to posthumously slime the departed, the lords of the flies could do worse than to think about the loss of the human soul.

After an entire article bashing bloggers and correlating their posts with a man’s suicide in a limp attempt to further his anti-blog agenda, Bob finishes up by actually blaming the commenters on blogs, internal consistency of what he is saying be damned.

The good news: we’re all off the hook!

The bad news: we’re still soulless, evil bastards who ruin people’s lives and by the way need to control the comments section better.

It could be worse.

morality in a new media

There have been a lot of recent articles (Google “Agency Spy + Paul Tilley”) about advertising blogs and discussion of whether or not they are good or bad. Most journalists, as you would expect, played up the negatives. However, on the whole, the top-drawer blogs aren’t bad (and certainly aren’t immoral), especially when they keep any personal criticisms to public figures. Public figures, whether they be politicians, sports stars, businessmen or even advertising executives, are open to public scrutiny, criticism and attendant commentary. They do things that matter, and whenever people in power are doing things that matter, transparency is a good thing.

Transparency keeps people honest, rewards those who are at the top of the heap with recognition and praise and criticizes those who do criticizable things.

The internet has empowered a new form of transparency through commentary in the form of anonymous blogs and anonymous comments on those blogs.

Though most of the scoops and commentary are materially no different than the leaks that might uncover Congressional corruption or a brand asking agencies for work behind the back of its agency of record, the blog platform allows them to go directly to readers with the truth.

It also lets anonymous posters go directly to readers with opinion.

I can understand, because it is obvious, that nobody enjoys being railed against on advertising blogs. And perhaps it makes it worse not to know who is railing against you.

But public figures get railed against, especially when they do things that are criticizable.

This is not a post about Paul Tilley (it is time to stop the conceited act of presuming what did or did not affect him before his death and to let the man rest in peace). This is a post about the moral demands on bloggers when the post and allow comments on their blogs.

The first demand is that bloggers only target public figures.

Were a blog to post negatively about someone like Alex Bogusky, it is unlikely to be particularly affected (though, like Bob Garfield, his feelings might be hurt and, if he did something dumb, he would likely be embarrassed) either by the post or the fact that it lives, cached, in the online world for a long time to come. Bogusky has achieved much and his work stands for itself. His position is secure. He is a public figure and criticism of public figures is fair.

A Junior Art Director, on the other hand, is not so lucky as to have an impressive body of work logged and a negative post about that person, whatever the truth or motivation behind that, could be career damaging and reputation ruining.

Hand in hand with that, it is incumbent upon bloggers – your favorite blogger included – to manage the comments section the same way they would manage their posts.

Bloggers are not journalists. But they do have the same demands of integrity. Will I suddenly start writing under a by-line? No. It is unlikely that I would be able to blog freely and interestingly if I had to worry about what potential clients or employers might think, not to mention my own employer. It is even less likely that I would be able to support myself as a full-time blogger, and I wouldn’t want to anyway because I love what I do.

My integrity as a writer is not jeopardized by my not using my name. I cite and link to facts where relevant, explicitly say what is rumor and what is not, give my opinion is as engagingly as I can and otherwise try to be as fair as possible in all that I say. If you have an issue, you can comment or e-mail. When I comment on people, they either don’t get named or they are public figures. Oh, and if I say things that aren’t true or am grossly unfair, this blog’s credibility is hurt and people stop reading. Just like a journalist (except, strangely, for former Enron advisor Paul Krugman).

Maybe all of this is morality in a new media, maybe it’s not. But it is the operating procedure on this blog and working off of those principles lets me sleep soundly at night.

adomatica’s cool weekly feature

The blog Adomatica, which is a more Austin and interactive-centric look at the ad business, has a feature that I really like. It’s called “Who’s Watching Who” and is a list of agencies that have read the blog or contacted the blogger in the last week:

adomatica.png

Too bad the idea has already been done, otherwise I am well tempted to copy it.

It’s a great idea because not only does it give a little bit of institutional credibility to his blog – immediately I thought “wow, people from Crispin and GSD&M are reading his blog” – and a little bit of interest – I also though “hey, did someone from the same Circle One that contacted me contact him, weird” – but it gives the company that contacts him a good bit of SEO as well.

A fair trade, especially with Tribble Ad Agency out there ready to pounce on any agency that drops the ball on SEO.