Ads, music and brand recognition
For the second time in a week, my attention has been grabbed (meerkat-style) by the music playing in a television advert. For years I’ve thought that ads created for a European audience have some of most appropriate and top quality soundtracks of any in the world, so it’s not a new thing. But as the amount of time I spend watching the TV declines, it’s not as regular an occurrence.
It’s often an electro beat that makes my ears prick (Smart’s choice of Stomax’s Midnight Mutations for its latest ‘fortwo’ model originally inspired me to write this), but sometimes it’s the riff of a dirty hip hop bassline that puts butterflies in my stomach.
Link: 
Other times it will be a heartfelt piece of instrumental that mirrors so exquisitely the emotive storyline of a show. In fact, it was the gut-wrenching piano solo – Nuvole Bianche by Ludovico Einaudi – from one of the This is England 86′ trailers that sparked the conversation again tonight.
Ludovico Einaudi – Nuvole Bianche by benjaminaaron
My earliest recollection of an ad truly creating a branded ‘hit’ was Levi’s project with Mr Oizo/Flat Eric, but this is something different. This is about discovery. I actually find that I’ll wander off down strange paths and new playlists (case in point, the This is England 86′ soundtrack is BLINDING and I was reunited with Fatlip’s Today’s Your Day)
Can I always remember the brand that got me there in the first place? God no (I had to go looking for the Smart ad above, and it took a while). But I remember the visuals and the music. Maybe that’s just because my mind is wired like that, but just maybe there’s an untapped opportunity to tie the two together in a smarter way, like Levi’s achieved in a way few have been able to replicate.
In the meantime, I urge you to listen to the tunes above. The Fatlip track in particular makes for a great accompliament to a run in the sunshine.
Paglia, Gaga and a mess of an article
I wrestled with myself (so to speak) for some time about writing this post. I’ve just finished reading Camille Paglia’s article on Gaga in The Sunday Times after a morning of watching my friends and those I admire rant about how terrible the piece is.
From the off, the £2 it cost for me to purchase said paper was put into Murdoch’s pocket begrudgingly. I have beef with the Times. Every time I read its Sunday supplements, I cringe at its coverage of technology, how narrow-minded the writer’s opinions usually are and how late to the table it is at discovering ‘hot new trends’. You know, like the Internet.
Most recently I explained my issues with one of its stories on haul videos for my new media age column, which had my blood boiling for several reasons, but largely because the writer had once again missed the point.
Anyway, I digress. Having also read a fabulous story from Grace Dent in The Guardian earlier on, courtesy of Miss Blackett, I realised several things. First I may not want to add to the echo chamber, but getting this pent-up anger out of me is wise. Second, I don’t need to write an essay to convey my utter disregard of this opinion piece being presented as an ‘exposé’ and last, in order to not fall into the same trap as Paglia, the best way is to write bullet points. See Dent’s very amusing (but also incredibly accurate) insights on the link above as best practice on how to do the latter.
1. The sub header of the front page splash. “Camille Paglia demolishes a cultural icon”
Well, that’s just silly isn’t it? One woman taking down an artist with 25 million digital downloads alone? 800 million views of her videos? (This was even referenced in Paglia’s post, but not by a specific number or even a ballpark figure). Earnings of $62 million in 2009 alone? Don’t be absurd.
2. Incorrect stats.
Over 10 million Facebook ‘followers’? Actually, these figures currently rest at just over 17 million likes. Get it right if you’re going to attack her, for god’s sake.
3. Opinion, not fact.
The first few hundred words are, to a point, Paglia setting the scene. Her distaste for Gaga is obvious, but then in paragraph five, the personal attacks start. I can just about handle a writer positioning other quotes and proven facts to make a point in an aggressive fashion, but when you realise that this feature is almost entirely made up from Paglia’s own impressions of what’s going on in the world, you realise that it’s really just an opinion piece. The big hoo-ha about Paglia having uncovered that Gaga represents the “death of sex” is nothing more than one woman’s impression.
4. Getting catty.
You’ve probably guessed that Paglia is not a little monster by now. However, relying on putting Gaga down by referencing her “goofy, rabbity grin”, calling her “creepy” or even saying that her songs are nothing but “nursery rhyme nonsense”, is nothing more than playground bullying. It’s a sad thing to read, and throughout the feature, the most prominent takeaway is that Paglia has just let her own feelings go to her head.
5. Attribution.
“She told a magazine with messianic fervour”. For real? You aren’t even going to reference the source by name? (It was Vanity Fair’s September issue, by the way).
6. Lily ‘f**king’ Allen?!?!
Anyone who puts Lily Allen in the same group as Beyonce needs their head looking at. Not to mention when referring to the former as “a magnetic presence in music today”.
7. Gaga presents herself as…A SEXUAL ATHLETE, does she?
There are no words.
8. “Atomised, telegraphic text messages”
SMS, yeah? Paglia is trying to make the point that things ‘aren’t how they used to be’, but this particular reference is pretentious beyond belief.
9. Those aren’t the lyrics!
Chopping up references to Gaga’s songs while using them as examples of what a bad influence she is is not only really bad practice, but it’s tantamount to bending the evidence to suit your own means.
There we go. There’s much more, but this is (unbelievably) a heavily- edited version of me ‘not ranting’. I’ve chosen to skip all the rubbish in there about my generation being ‘mute’ and superficial, because I think Caitlin Moran – another Times writer – will do a pretty good job of responding to those claims.
You can read another story of mine about Gaga and her partnership with Polaroid here, where as you’ll see, it’s clearly marked ‘opinion’.
Chowney out.
Image via thesundaytimes.com, vanityfair.com and Facebook.
A rare thing indeed
This is 16-year-old Cher Lloyd’s X Factor audition. I like her very much.
For a change, Cowell might have just have uncovered a real bit of talent here.
She’s cute, original (chosing to sing the Keri Hilson version of Soulja Boy’s Turn My Swag On) and seems naturally nervous yet not phased by the concept of the show.
I just hope that the X Factor machine, the publicity and the sudden interest in such a young girl’s life doesn’t become too much for her.
Watch out for Cole and Imbruglia, whose faces say a thousand words. Namely, ‘I’m consumed by jealousy’. Priceless.