Is this permitted under the Geneva Convention?
Got quite a few comments and emails about the previous “dark side” post. Gee, and I thought I had the silliest story about focus groups. To clarify: my problem really isn’t with testing, it’s with the institutionalization of testing. The big tech companies tend to burn research into the process, which means that no work goes unmolested. More agile companies either apply research on a case-by-case basis or rely on the judgment of the agency/client team instead. Brazen, I know. But line up the work and see whose creative is better.
In some corporate cultures, the marketing people simply can’t get a campaign blessed by superiors unless it’s already been blessed by research. This is done to ensure that the creative delivers the message, and to ensure that “bad work” never runs. In my opinion, the latter is not only subjective, it’s extremely defensive. It indicates a core belief that mistakes are forever, and that smooth sailing is more important than shooting for greatness.
Here’s a shocker: throughout some of Apple’s more successful years, we never tested a single print or TV ad. I’ll deny it if you ever repeat this, but we did air a few clunkers along the way. Amazingly, the company did not go under, customers did not mutiny and no foreign countries invaded as a result. We simply pulled the ad that didn’t work and ran one that might do better. That’s because we had a client who believed that the more zealously you guard against failure, the more likely you’ll achieve it.
