Confessions of an Executive Producer

this blog posting was sponsored by...

If you missed it this week, the Federal Trade Commission revised their rules on the relationships between advertisers and product reviewers. The past rules stated that anyone who reviews or endorses products must disclose any connection (such as payment, free goods or free services) they have with an advertiser. This rule has been applied to all forms of traditional media - tv, radio, print, etc. It is now being  applied to all forms of digital media including bloggers.

For the record, I have never been contacted to endorse any products, push any services or promote any brands. However, I'm willing to try. If any marketer is reading this, I'll be glad to write glowingly about your product for free stuff or a small cash payment. And, if i do so I promise to tell everyone I did. As a matter of fact, if i don't, consider it your obligation as a law abiding citizen to report me to the FTC.

The public statement the FTC made in regards to this ruling is interesting to me from a few perspectives:

1. The government acknowledgement of the power of the online community be it Facebook pages, Twitter feeds or the blogosphere to sway public opinion, to be influencers and tastemakers. 
2. It changes the perception of the digital world from no longer being consider "new media" to be consider just media. They are going to be held accountable and regulated like traditional outlets.
3. Rather than write regulations specifically for the digital space, the FTC instead opted to extend existing rules written for an entirely different platform.

The thing is who really cares. We are marketed to everywhere all the time. Cross promotion has been elevated to an art form just ask anyone in product placement. Who is the government trying to protect? The gullible. Are they saying without regulations online independent media producers will deceive people into buying inferior products that they never wanted to purchase in the first place? I wish I had that much sway. Or, are they saying bloggers are so influential they can be bought by brands like some modern day payola scandal? Cool. I'm for sale. Or maybe they are saying it's okay to influence an audience to purchase stupid shit as long as you tell them you were compensated to do so?

The most humorous thing is whoever decided to expand this law doesn't understand much about the internet except that it's become very popular. If you look at the most popular blogs or the influencers with big followings on Twitter, they are successful because they are transparent and genuine. People flock to them to get away from the filtered world of agenda driven media, to escape corporate owned messaging. If people start using their earned platforms to monetize it in a way that no longer represents an honest fair value proposition with their audience, their following will face rapid decline. They don't need a government regulator to enforce full disclosure and honest brokering with their readership, it's already engrained in the culture. 

At the end of the day, I believe the law has very little impact. It is probably a rule that won't be enforced in a medium that doesn't need enforcing. At least not on this particular topic. At least the government gave us all the nod that were powerful enough force to be monitored by Big Brother. 

***This blog posting was brought to by Epoch Films. They make the best commercials anywhere. Come on down. They're having a two for one special this month, buy one spot get a banner ad for free. And btw, I was paid to say that.

hope in context

I received an email from a self-described "long time reader first time writer" of this blog. He praised me for my willingness and commitment to speak out. I ate that up. But, he wrote a very long critique of my writings. His primary issue was my shortcomings as it related to providing hope. Here's an excerpt:

"...Last autumn our entire country shifted direction under a simple message of "yes we can" which promised nothing if not hope for a better future. So I'm going out on a very think and sturdy limb here by suggesting that hope is a message that universally resonates with an audience. But when I read your blog, frequently I'm left feeling bereft of hope....I mentioned this because I get you're a man who hopes to bring change to his company and industry. But sometimes I'm left with a feeling of hopelessness about doing so...."

I took this critique to heart. I went back to my past postings and re-read many of them. It's hard to be objective about your own words but I tried. What I found we're a few typos and a lot of pragmatic positivity. Or as others may call it, hope. 

I'll readily admit I'm often critical of what is happening to our business. We are unquestionably an industry in transition. It is talked about very often privately and not enough publicly. There are problems, issues and hurdles that must be discussed transparently and honestly to help us find resolve. Without openly addressing the realities of our current state, there is little chance of, well...hope. 

My commitment has always been rooted in these two defining principals - transparency and debate. I'm honest about my actions and my own short comings. And I never make a critique without offering a solution. Whether you agree or disagree with my assessment is irrelevant. What is relevant is stoking the flames of thought and dialogue. It is in these conversations, whether within a group or with oneself, where we discover new possibilities and dare I say, hope. In keeping with this spirit, I felt it was important to address this email publicly.

With that said, I want to honor his request by answering his question.

"What is it about this business that you like and I don't mean the first class airfares, town cars, rich dinners, French wines, the beach houses, access to location shoots civilians only dream about, four star hotels or God forbid, the rates we bill -- but what gives you hope in the morning as you trudge down to the Epoch offices to face the epic masses of hopless?"

Great question. It's a dog fight between the four star hotels and the rich dinners. 

Sarcasm aside, I feel very fortunate to have found this business and for it to have found me. As difficult as times may be, there are a lot worse industries to work in and few better. It's hard to admit but I do love this business, the good and the bad. Other than pure ego, why the hell else would I write about it everyday. So, what gets me up every morning to do it again and again?

Building talent. The Epoch staff. Running a business. Haggling anonymously with cost consultants. Trade unions. Bringing my dog to work. Our directors. The competition. Tackling a different project every day. Problem solving. Making a sale. Providing opportunities. Treatments. Agency producers.  Single bids with lots of money and good creative. Relationships. Writing this blog. Making reels. Creatives. My peers. Employing people. Pre-Pro meetings. Free lunch Fridays. Doing business with different cultures. Freelancers. Paying my mortgage. My partners. Making stuff...

Should I continue?

larry bird and the x-man

A friend of mine was critiquing my blog. One of the issue he brought up was too much transparency. It wasn't honesty he had a problem with. He questioned whether I was giving away too much. As if informing competitors and clients on my views of the future or how I conduct business will give them an edge. Or maybe just take away mine. There were other points he made I agreed with but not this one. It reminded me of a story.

    

In 1985 Xavier McDaniel was drafted in the first round by the Seattle Supersonics. After his rookie season he went back to his hometown for the summer. His friends all wanted the inside story of the NBA. Who was real deal and who wasn't. One of them declared that Boston Celtic All-Star and reigning league MVP, Larry Bird, wasn't all that. He was hyped because he was white. He looked to the X-man for confirmation. X just shook his head and told about his first encounter against the Celtics.

It was a regular season game in Seattle. It was a close game throughout. Late into the 4th quarter, the Celtics were up by one. Seattle had possession and with :08 seconds left on the game clock, X hits a shot from the corner over Larry Bird putting the Sonics up by one. 

The Celtics immediately called timeout. The hometown crowd is cheering wildly as both teams walk to their respective benches. As Bird passes by McDaniel, he says "Too much time". 

After the timeout, the Celtics set up at half court to inbound the ball. The players begin jockeying for position trying to gain whatever advantage they can. As the ref begins to hand his teammate the ball, Bird whispers in the rookie's ear. "I'm getting a double screen up top. I'm going right around it. Getting the ball in the corner. Taking one dribble then nailing the game winner....and there ain't nothing you can do about it." Just then, the ref blew the whistle. Play began. And, that's exactly what Bird did. 

It didn't matter that he gave away the play. He believed that if his team executed to perfection they'd succeed. Knowing someone's strategy doesn't make it simple to stop or easy emulate. You still need to have the tools, the skills and the confidence. Bird had all of those. And what if in this meaningless regular season game Xman had stopped him? I suspect it would've made Bird and his team better. They would've figured out why their plan failed and found another route to success. In the end, it wasn't about what others do, it's about you do. 

I hope someone takes whatever I write about and applies it. That they say NO to unfair business practices or wants to innovate their business model or seeks to out communications with peers. I believe competition makes us better. Sharing our strategies makes the industry stronger. And, all of us benefit. 

blogging on 'boards

Last Friday my first blog posting for Boards Magazine appeared on their website. Boards, more than most trade publications, is working to adapt to the shift in media. This reason, among others, is what prompted me to give Boards more free content and myself less free time. 

Boards prominently featured my blog posting on the front page. They also promoted my postings on their Twitter feed and Facebook page. I applaud the good use of social media. I think they should do more. 

 

Specifically, on my post I mentioned my blog and all the other Epoch associated companies. They only provided a URL link to the blog but not to the other companies. My guess is they want to remain neutral by not being a traffic conduit for the companies they cover. The only way to be truly agnostic is to provide links to every company they mention. This is not free promotion. It is a service to their readership. 

Charles Day wrote in his own Boards blog posting that Boards should no longer view themselves as a publication. It is a community destination. A place where industry ideas are exchanged and shared. A resource for information throughout the entire advertising space.  Boards does not own that brand but should. 

 

I was amazed at the amount of content they provide with such a small staff. I don't think they could individually produce any more if they worked 18 hours a day. Thank goodness it's the information age. There is an infinite amount of content to be repurposed. 

If I were the publisher of Boards I would be to the Industry what the Huffington Post is to News, the daily destination of everything Advertising. I'd continue with their staff editorials, feature articles and regular bloggers. But, they should also organize relevant content linking to other industry trades and mainstream publications. Pick up the best of Ad Week. Ad Age. Shoot. Creativity. NY Times. Wall Street Journal, etc. Use the competition to build the Boards brand as the online leader. Another thought is to have a continually updated stream of Twitter feeds from industry leaders. The possibilities are endless. 

Like every other print media, Boards needs to find a way to transition their revenue from paper to pixels. Becoming THE all encompassing online resource for the advertising industry is the first step to achieving that end. 

Print is expensive to produce and the scarcity of space creates a limit on revenue. Yes, that scarcity is what also allows publications to charge a premium but that stream is drying up fast. There is a reason Creativity became a quarterly and Seattle doesn't have a daily paper. The new currency is an online interactive audience. Once Boards brands itself as the industry's daily news source large audiences will be built and ad revenue will follow. 

I don't mean to be critical of a publication that just provided me with a free forum to express my views. Selfishly, I want a one stop shopping site for all my industry info needs and I hope it will be Boards.

give the people what they want

I was contacted recently by Boards magazine about writing a monthly column. I was flattered but was thinking, do I really need another responsibility.

I spoke with Ed White who made the case that he needed opinion pieces and an insider perspective. This was essentially what I was already doing but Boards could provide a much larger audience. He wants free content and more industry transparency. I want a larger platform to increase my readership and promote Epoch companies. He convinced me. Now I have to write something by September 1.

At Ed's suggestion I went back to revisit some of my past postings. There were a few topics he thought would be relevant. I decided to check out my most popular postings. Thank you Google Analytics.

Here are the results in descending order:

5 - Vendor Client Relations - I posted a video that used real life examples to illustrate the absurdity of vendor/client relationships. Not surprising since this entertaining and provocative video went crazy viral.

4 - Viva Community - This was a follow up to a piece about the AICP needing to become more engaged in social media. In the posting I made a case for more unity amongst the production community and the AICP to be the catalyst for change. I made specific suggestions on how to accomplish that.

3 - Endangered Species - I wrote about the lack of training occurring within agencies. This along with the layoffs has left a dangerous deficiency in the quality of agency producers. Thus the name of the post.

2 - A House Divided - It was about issues the AICP and it's membership are working on to create a more constructive and healthier business community.

AND THE MOST POPULAR POSTING IS...

1 - Relationships Matter - Ringan Ledwidge opting out of the Rattling Stick/Epoch US alliance to join Smuggler.

By the way the voting wasn't even close. I was upset to learn Ruby losing her tooth or the ribs I made on Memorial Day barely qualified.

What does this tell me about what people are interested in? It needs to be funny content that is worth forwarding (#5), topics people don't ever speak about that strike an unknown chord (#3), or relevant and controversial industry issues (#4, #2). But, what people really love is good old fashioned gossip (#1). There is a reason TMZ is one of the web's most popular sites and my wife watches Access Hollywood. We are nonetheless products of the US Magazine Generation.

I could be too cynical. Maybe the draw wasn't gossip. Maybe it was simply rare for a production company to speak publicly about the departure of talent. Maybe people wanted to gain valuable insight into the relationship between directors and their production companies. Or maybe it really was just good dirt. Probably a combination of the two.

This exercise wasn't as fruitful as I had hoped. It still leaves me unsure what to write about for my Boards debut. I do have a few ideas I'm tossing about. At least I can safely eliminate the recipes for my Labor Day BBQ.