Dave Trott: The truth about awards
April 9 2009, 7:47 am | | 15 Comments
Here’s some thought-provoking pre-Easter fare…
Dave Trott has some straight-shooting comments on advertising awards:”They’re very nice, but they are not what we actually do”, he says.
15 Comments
Are a bunch of awards the measure of a creative? Or is the ability to work through the line on any brief or any medium more of an indication of talent and ability?
It always goes back to the same argument. Advertising creatives have this pathetic outlook. They think they are rockstars that create art, which is a load of hand on it crap. We sell shit, plain and simple. We just make things look pretty to sell shit. If you want to be a rockstar, win awards and get your ego stroked, become a rockstar. Or actually become a real writer or real artist and create art that people give a shit about.
but I give a shit when I open the fridge and there is no beer in it. the same can be said with any other product.
hmmm beer
9:57 if you were a hot bird I’d propose to you.
The hair-pulling bitchfight between the Brand Republic bloggers responding to Trotty’s all-too-brief article is a cut above the illiterate name-calling on this blog.
Hear Hear 2,58. And look…they also post pics of themselves with their usernames. How terribly civilised.
A list of ads that have won at Cannes
1. Carlton Draught Big Ad
2. VW ‘When was the last time you went for a drive?’
3. The India Times (Grand Prix)
4. Guinness ‘Some things are worth waiting for’
5. Burger King, Whopper freakout
A list of ads that didn’t win at Cannes
1. The Ian Thorpe ‘fully sick’ ad
2. Bunnings Warehouse TVC
3. 2008 Dick Smith Electronics catalogue
4. Liquid viagra spam
5. Every ad done by McCann Eriksson Sydney
Guess what Mr Trott, creativity sells.
6:18 Um, I think Mr Trott knows that creativity sells, but I think his point is that just because you don’t win an award, doesn’t mean to say you’re not any good.
6:16, you ignorant pissant, Dave Trott was one of the first to introduce the discipline of highly creative, ruthlessly simple, effective, motivating, award-winning work across all his agency’s accounts in the early eighties when you, no doubt, were still shitting your nappies. Or worse as I suspect, not even born. His agency GGT was the one all the best creative people in London – and the world – aspired to work at. Young people like you are now.
Like all of us who’ve won awards, with the perspective of time, and the sad observation of the current generation’s obsession with scamming to win awards (thereby rendering them valueless in the real world), he is merely pointing out that awards are not the be-all and and-all of advertising and not a universal yardstick to evaluating good advertising. Got that?
6:18 you are a dick. There isn’t an agency in the country who doesn’t wish they did Bunnings. It mightn’t make the grade at Cannes, but so what! It’s still bloody good retail. Maybe when you grow up, get married, have kids, a mortgage, pay school fees you’ll appreciate that most agencies would rather be making ‘shit’ Bunnings ads every week than one Big Ad every two years, Cannes Gold or not. In fact, I’d bet most Australian marketing directors would be more impressed by Bunnings work than Australia’s Cannes winners.
“There isn’t an agency in the country who doesn’t wish they did Bunnings.”
Right, of course. I bet Droga 5 and The Glue Society are all pulling out the knives to get that account.
Sad cunt – on the blog at 12.07am over a long weekend.
11:42am, I don’t see the point of hang-ups about awards. I don’t see the point of your post either.
Goodbye.
Yeah I love that Bunnings spot.
Fucking awesome.
But still retail driven, unmemorable poop.
Since when did all the bottom feeders get internet access?
Dumb, dumb comment, 6.18.
The fact is, you can just as easily pull out a list of ads that won lots of awards but sold nothing – or, in fact, so undermined a brand’s values that sales went backwards.
That, I think, is Trott’s point. Yes, many ads that sell stuff win awards, but in our industry we should be thinking about the sales first, and then the awards, not the other way around. They’re nice, but not the point of what we do.
Oh, and also, the ads you mentioned might or might not have sold product. Most of them are additions to long running campaigns for products that had great brand reputations already, so they can hardly be be given sole credit for sales results.
And a number of the ads you had on your ‘bad ad’ list are actually hugely successful at selling stuff. Which makes me wonder what point you were trying to make.
Perhaps you might also consider the likelihood that the category makes a difference as well.
Like I said: dumb, dumb comment.
Some of the people here are missing the point.
The point is awards are not a sign of greatness. Its the work itself, and what it’s achieved.