Maybe I'm Gravy

How The Technology In Your Pocket Can Help Reduce Gun Crime

Every iPhone has a 'Find My Phone' feature. Why doesn't every gun have a tracking technology that registers its movement?

What if authorities knew the location of every one of these lethal weapons after they left the store?

What happened in Newton is the one of the saddest things that has ever happened in the United States. While the tragedy has led to unprecedented online chatter about gun control, that doesn’t mean that privately owned guns are going to be banned or new gun control legislation is going to happen anytime soon. There’s too much history, red tape and bureaucracy in our country. There are too many people who believe that the right to bare arms applies to their handguns and semiautomatic weapons that serve no useful purpose other than to kill. Gun control has been debated before and it will be debated again. But even if there’s new legislation, people who want to get their hands on a gun are going to find a way to get one.

 

We need to stop asking how a person ends up owning a gun or why they want to own one. Sensible people are never going to understand why someone would want a lethal weapon in their house, just like gun advocates are never going to back down that the second amendment gives them gun rights and the reason they want one is none of your damn business.

What if the question wasn’t how or why, but where?

When a psycho decides to commit a heinous crime, the location of a gun is more important than how or why they have the gun. Tragedies like the one in Newton happen when guns enter public spaces and no one knows a lethal weapon is around until it’s too late. Technology exists that could alert the authorities when a gun enters a location, such as a school or a mall, where it could be used to cause harm.

If guns were equipped with tracking technology, the kind that help you find your iPhone after you leave it in a cab, there would be a huge reduction in gun crime. Future tragedies could be prevented.

Even before tragedy struck, tracking would make an impact. People who know or think they’re being tracked would be less likely to commit a felony. People who steal a gun would hesitate to use it because they’re not sure it’s being tracked or not. In the case of people who don't care, like the psycho Adam Lanza, tracking would alert the authorities that a gun was dangerously close to a school and they could respond faster.   

For tracking to work, not only would all new guns need to have the technology built in, all current guns would have to be retrofitted. This would take years. But from day one having a small number of guns being tracked would help reduce gun crime. There are about 200 million privately owned guns in the United States. In 2011, handguns killed over 10,000 people in our country. No matter which way you look at it, any action that reduces this number is a step in the right direction.

Is this a compromise to making privately owned guns outright illegal? Yes. But it's a realistic compromise and a sensible use of technology that already exists. While some people would call this type of tracking an invasion of privacy, I’d argue that it only impedes gun owners’ rights when they try to take a weapon into a place where it shouldn’t be. I’d also argue that if you choose to own a gun, there are certain responsibilities you have to be held accountable for. It’s like clicking the Terms & Conditions box on Facebook. You get some, you give some. Gun ownership needs to be a two-way street.

We have the technology. We use it in our fucking phones for chrissakes. It's time we use tracking technology to save lives. If guns were tracked, the how or why someone had a gun would matter less and the where someone had a gun would matter more.

The how and why people own a gun still needs to be better regulated, but adding a third factor to the equation would contribute to a reduction in gun crime and lead to fewer tragedies. Location matters.

Enough debate. Let technology do what it’s supposed to do. Make the world a better, safer place.

 

Don’t Be Afraid To Fail

 

In the past, brands would rely on complex marketing research and complicated business plans. This system worked like a charm. No one cared that it took forever. Then this Internet thing came along. And everything in the world changed except how companies build their brand.

Many brands continue to rely on market research when they could be turning to market evidence. This is what brands have to gain from social networks. Not likes, not follows, not fans. But market evidence: the massive amounts of real-time data and feedback that people give up for free online.

Google Managing Director Torrence Boone talks about the importance of getting a “minimum viable product” on the market. This is the absolute bare essence of a campaign or experience. It's not perfected, it's not heavily researched. It's built and pushed out of the nest. The important thing is putting something into people’s hands that they can respond to. Launch it, get market feedback, revise accordingly, repeat. Start-ups like Path, Instagram, and Foursquare have done this effectively. And, if you look at their history, their platforms have changed dramatically. And they’re doing pretty okay now.

Part of the problem is that most of the briefs or strategies that agencies work with don’t take iterations, failures and rethinking into consideration. Clients aren’t used to working this way so they don’t allocate time or money for this kind of market research. They can’t afford a failure or multiple iterations, even if it means an improved product in the long run. Because of the ways brands are built, they usually focus on results, not ideas. They don't have time, resources or money to iterate and see how people use their product and why. So they want something that’s safe, something that doesn’t ruffle any feathers. Something that they can put out into the world and forget about.

Problem is, they're not the only ones who forget about it. 

For brands, failure isn’t an option but, due to an outdated process, it's often acheived. For tech start-ups, failure is an understood part of the process. It doesn't guarante eventual success. But it helps more than it hurts. The faster you fail, the faster you can fix what's wrong and get it right.

We’re living in a world where the fast are going to beat up on the slow. That’s why the start-up model has the agency model in a sleeper hold. Failing isn’t the same as being a failure. It’s a natural step in the progression of creating something great.

And that’s perfectly okay.

Building a More Agile Agency

 

Since that fateful day agencies started sprouting up along Madison Avenue, they’ve been modeled after clients. They've been built for process management and stakeholder management. Good business has been the center, even if creativity is the overcoat. But the business of advertising has changed and agencies can't be successful by mirroring how clients work and operate anymore.

Clients want work faster and cheaper and better. To deliver, agencies need to become more nimble, flexible and cost-effective. Which, like most things, is easier said then done.

During Creative Week, Google Managing Director Torrence Boone brought together leaders from three of Google’s agency partners. AKQA/My CCO Rei Inamoto, BBH CEO Greg Anderson and Big Spaceship CCO Mike Lebowitz. Everyone weighed in on their own definitions of agility.

There's no formula for being more agile, so understandably each agency has its own unique process. Based on the Google work each agency has produced (What Do You Love? by Big Spaceship, Chrome spots by BBH, AdWords Thanks You and Google Sandbox by AKQA), they all know what they’re doing.

So… how the hell do they do it?

Reduce logistics.
Rei Inamoto pointed to eliminating the studio department as one way that AKQA has reduced logistics, leaving final design responsibilities to creatives. Removing the studio layer means that creatives are more invested from start to finish – they execute their ideas instead of handing off to specialists.

Operate like a newsroom.
Agencies need to get out of the meeting business and get into the making business. There’s too much overhead, too much process, and too many barriers getting in the way of an agency’s #1 goal: producing work. Greg Anderson talked about getting his creative team to operate like a living organism that produces content.

Replace perfection with experimentation.
These days, it’s more important to get the basics of a product or campaign to market. Don’t worry about making it perfect – get the bare essence of your product into people’s hands. Launch it, get market feedback, revise accordingly, repeat. This is what successful start-ups like Path, Instagram, and Foursquare have been doing. And they’re all doing pretty OK.

Switch the agency mentality.
Agencies like BBH built their reputation on creating masterpieces and crafting their work to perfection. This attitude needs to go. Everyone at an agency needs to get on board and understand that it’s more important to create work faster.

Hire doers, not thinkers.
Greg Anderson said that BBH has moved away from hiring idea teams – teams that think but can’t execute. Teams that lack the craft to build the idea they come up with are just getting in the way. Michael Lebowitz added that being clever and having good taste is no longer a job. 


Cast for talent.
Greg Anderson called BBH the land of misfit toys. They look for people with the right mindset, regardless of department or title. With the right people in place, an agency can cast for projects, not staff for them. Interpersonal relationships matter; good working relationships create additional efficiencies.

Deconstruct the process.
Being agile isn’t about quick fixes. It’s about finding a new path to the end goal of creativity. Michael Lebowitz gives his teams a framework instead of a process. This allows each team to bubble up their own unique process that works within the overall framework. His teams almost operate as mini-agencies. Unique processes lead to more unique work and allow each team to focus on their strengths instead of worrying about adhering to an inflexible system.

Integrate every department.
The different stages of each project shouldn’t feel like a baton pass. The brief can’t spend six weeks with strategy before being handed off to the creative department, who suddenly only have two weeks to come up with an idea, who then hand off to tech, who have one week to execute it. At AKQA, Rei Inamoto says the goal is to combine strategy, storytelling and software to build emotional and useful connections with people. This means that technology, creative and strategy work together at every stage of a project. When each team is a stakeholder from the beginning, each team member is more invested.

Work for a company that works differently.
Maybe you're not in a position to change the agency model on your own. But you can support it and put yourself in a better position by joining an agile agency. One that doesn’t just understand the importance of agility but understands how to implement it.

While there's no formula to agility, an agency can make a plan. One that starts at the top and doesn't stop until the work goes out the door. In this agile age, one thing is for certain: the inflexible will be left behind. And when they are, it's best to not be working there.

Looking for something? Check the Bulldog.

VW JETTA: BAD DOG, GOOD VOLKSWAGEN

The only thing I don't like about this ad is that my bulldog wasn't cast in the leading role.  

   

Gravy of the Week: My favorite campaigns of 2012. 

Playing With Another Man's Muscles

OLD SPICE: MUSCLE MUSIC

Old Spice isn't afraid to refresh what they're doing. Luckily for the rest of us, creating new iterations of The Man Your Man Could Smell Like is not their style. Muscle Music is their latest way of telling the world Old Spice is a powerful product.  

They've created an interactive symphony of testerone that's equal parts music video and interactive soundboard. The transition between the two parts is seamless, an important distinction in a world where people don't want to think or do—they just want to be entertained. 

Building the experience as two parts solves for the Empty Box Problem. That's the idea that asking people to start something from scratch—aka giving them nothing by an empty box to fill—leads to fewer interactions. Too many people aren't sure where to begin, feel intimidated or simply could use a little motivation. It's the difference between being asked to "write a blog post" and being given a prompt like "what do you think of Paul Ryan's abs?" 

Give people a starting point—in this case a video demonstration of Terry Crews showing Muscle Music in all its glory—and the Empty Box Problem has been solved. The Vimeo video shows people what Muscle Music can do and inspires people to play around with Terry's muscles on their own.

Enough barrier. Watch the music and play some muscles. My favorites: comma, period, left square bracket (the one next to p) and a. 

Read more about it here 

Gravy of the Week: My favorite campaigns of 2012. 

Acting Desensitized to Make a Difference

REFUGE: HOW TO LOOK YOUR BEST THE MORNING AFTER

This is scary good. That's because it's scary—a battered woman cares more about covering up than getting beat the F up by an abusive partner. Domestic violence isn't a topic that should be taken lightly, but too many victims of abuse don't react to violence like they should. They brush it off, make up excuses, cover it up, go about their day. The video claims "65% of women who suffer domestic violence keep it hidden" and advises "Don't cover it up."

It's a powerful message. It's even more powerful because the host is a well-known make-up artist Lauren Luke, who usually provides YouTube tutorials on how to apply make-up.  

Check out the campaign here.  

   

Gravy of the Week: My favorite campaigns of 2012.

A Product That's a Store For Itself

WELCOME TO THE MINI STORE

MINI has gone literal with the idea that "the best products sell themselves." They've taken their cute little cars and turned them into traveling stores. Which makes sense because brick-and-mortar stores suck. They're great for window shopping and impulse buys, but horrible for buying anything you already know you want. There is nothing you can buy at a physical store that's not cheaper online. And nowadays you can get just as much customer service online. You can get ratings, reviews and comparisons. So what if there's not a dude in a pressed polo shirt making it sound like you're making the best decision ever by selecting the Black & Decker 4-Slice Pop Up Toaster 3000? It's not worth the markup.    

MINI asked themselves what if a product didn't need a physical store? What if the product became the store? They know that one of the biggest obstacles they face is getting potential customers to visit a dealer. Society as a whole looks at car salespeople are high-pressure scumbugs. If they're actually not is besides the point. It's a stereotype that's become so engrained in our heads that it's what people think when they walk into a dealer. It's become second nature to go car shopping with a sense of distrust, and to expect the salesman to be a smiling spawn of the devil. Buying a car is a huge, personal decision—the outside influence of a highly biased and financially-motivated salescreep doesn't do anyone any good... except the auto manufacturer.

MINI knows this system isn't working. They know that people do their own research, then visit a dealer as the final step, not as a fact-finding mission. Customers don't want to step into enemy territory because that shifts power to the manufacturer. So potential buyers do anything to avoid the death-grip handshake of a snaky salesman and feel like they're the one choosing the car they're buying. 

But what if the product left the dealer's lot and came to you? What if the store wasn't on enemy territory, but on neutral ground? What if it felt like a low-pressure convenience instead of an all-out assault? 

What if even the press release was great: “MINI has announced the opening of 10 new MINI stores." Head cocked, you’ve got my attention.

Products that act as their own store have other advantages:

They're portable and immediate. They show up where you want them and you experience the product without delay or hesitation.

They're transparent and straightforward. If you're in the car, you can't embellish anything about its performance. And there's nothing the salesperson can say that overrules what you're seeing directly in front of you.

They’re buzzworthy. If you want a MINI or not, if a MINI store drove up to you, it's worth taking it for a test drive and talking about it. The store is an experience unto itself.

Throughout the years, MINI has done a lot of things right. And they’ve nailed it again. Here’s hoping they open a few new MINI stores in New York City. 

 

Shirts That Do Good

UNICEF GOOD SHIRTS

Love this simple campaign by BBH with the artistic help of Justin and Christine Gignac. Each shirt depicts an item of aid for the horn of Africa, and each shirt costs the exact same as the depicted aid item. So when you buy a shirt, you really get that shirt plus the warm fuzzy feeling you get when you donate something to people who need it.

Buy your good shirt here.

Gravy of the Week: My favorite campaigns of 2012.

What the Movies Can Teach You About a Big Idea

I wrote this for Makin' Ads, a blog for students of advertising, portfolio school hopefuls and anyone else putting their book together. 

What the Movies Can Teach You About a Big Idea

Greg has written before about the importance of having a great elevator pitch. Here’s another way of looking at it. This is something I picked up on after attending the Creative Week panel The Idea Matters… Still.

 
Your best idea should be like a great movie plot. For any great movie, you can reduce the plot down to a single sentence. For example:

Boy’s parents murdered, so he starts wearing a cape, fighting crime and talking in a deep, gravelly voice (Batman).

New York cop single-handedly stops terrorists from robbing an office building, all before the helpful proliferation of cell phones (Die Hard).

Nerd steals website idea from good-looking jocks and becomes an awkward billionaire (Social Network).

Your best ideas should be this simple and accessible. Try this test: take one of your ideas, write it down in a short sentence on a blank piece of paper. No visuals, no technology, no strategy, just an organized jumble of letters.

 
Now stare at it.

 

Does it still seem like a big idea? Does it pop? Does it wow? Do you look at that sentence, want to fold it in three and overnight ship it to Gerry Graf, Jeff Goodby and Dan Wieden?

Or, without all the glitter, does it seem empty, boring, unspectacular, less than large?

If, sans glitter, it’s not ready for the limelight, then figure out what it needs. Is it too complicated or gimmicky? Is it just a tactic? Is there something missing or is there something there that doesn’t have to be?

Boiling your idea down to a single, naked sentence can separate the great ideas from the good ones. Because all the glitter we sprinkle on our ideas makes them look better than they really are.

We’re storytellers, after all, and part of telling a story is making an idea seem bigger and better than it is on its own. When we present, there’salways more than the idea. There’s backstory and visuals. A beautiful presentation. People with varied areas of expertise go into an exorbitant amount of detail about each carefully-thought-out step of the process. Then, once sufficiently built up, the big idea is revealed with reserved aplomb.

And it’s glorious.

But if you start with a less-than-great idea, the final product will always have something missing.

Greatness.

So before you put all that effort into presenting and selling your idea, write it down in one single thought and stare at it.

If it still seems like the best idea you’ve ever seen, you’ve got a winner. Just imagine how great it will be once you add all the glitter.

 

The Book Burning Party That Saved a Library

This campaign for Troy Public Library has got to be one of the best social media campaigns of the past year and it's definitely one of my favorites. It shows how powerful social can be, even without much of a budget or resources. It also says a lot about what's necessary to cut through the clutter and get people to take action. I was glad to see it honored at the AICP Next Awards yesterday. 

 

Here's the story behind the campaign from agency Leo Burnett Detroit:

"Troy, Michigan couldn't afford to keep its library open, so it scheduled a vote for a tax increase. A strong anti-tax group waged a dominating campaign against it. Posing as a political group, we posted signs around town that said, "Vote to close Troy library Aug 2, book burning party Aug 5." We invited everyone to our Facebook page, adding Twitter, Foursquare, want ads, flyers and more to drive engagement. The campaign became international news as outcry over the idea of burning the library's books drowned out the opposition and galvanized support for the library - which won by a landslide."

Gravy of the Week: My favorite campaigns of 2012.