For men of a certain age, Pink Floyd represents a milieu—brooding, melancholy, emo before emo had a name. I started listening to Floyd in high school and being a kid who always felt like an outsider, The Wall really resonated with me. In college, I started exploring their back catalog and Animals and Wish You Were Here became my favorites. Of course, as a designer, I have always loved the album covers. Storm Thorgerson and Hipgnosis’ surreal photos were mind-bending and added to the music’s feelings of alienation, yearning, and the aching beauty of being lost.

I hadn’t listened to the music in a while but the song “Two Suns in the Sunset” from *The Final Cut *periodically pops into my head. I listened to the full album last Sunday. On Tuesday, I pulled up their catalog again to play in the background while I worked and to my surprise, all the trippy cover art was replaced by white type on a black surface!

The classic image of the prism and rainbow for The Dark Side of the Moon was replaced by “A PRISM REFRACTS LIGHT INTO THE SPECTRUM.” It’s essentially alt text for all the covers—deadpan captions where the surreal images used to be.

“ROWS OF HOSPITAL BEDS ON A BEACH” for 1987’s A Momentary Lapse of Reason.

“A WALL OF WHITE BRICKS WITH RED GRAFFITI” for The Wall.

“TWO MEN IN SUITS SHAKING HANDS ONE MAN IS ON FIRE” for Wish You Were Here.

And my favorite—“PHOTO WITHIN A PHOTO WITHIN A PHOTO” for Ummagumma.

What is going on? Are they broken images replaced by alt text? Some folks on the internet think it is a protest against AI art.

But in reality, it’s part of a marketing campaign because Pink Floyd’s official website has also been wrapped in a black cloth…

Maybe it’s not cloth. Looks more like black plastic. And that’s because it’s very likely coinciding with the 50th anniversary of Wish You Were Here, which famously shipped to stores wrapped in black shrink-wrap, forcing buyers to just buy the record on faith.

There was a conceptual reason behind it of course. From Wikipedia:

Storm Thorgerson had accompanied the band on their 1974 tour and had given serious thought to the meaning of the lyrics, eventually deciding that the songs were, in general, concerned with “unfulfilled presence”, rather than [former lead vocalist and founding band member Syd] Barrett’s illness. This theme of absence was reflected in the ideas produced by his long hours spent brainstorming with the band. Thorgerson had noted that Roxy Music’s Country Life was sold in an opaque green cellophane sleeve – censoring the cover image – and he copied the idea, concealing the artwork for Wish You Were Here in a black-coloured shrink-wrap (therefore making the album art “absent”).

I’m curious to see if there is a big reveal tomorrow, the actual anniversary of my favorite Pink Floyd album, and maybe the most fitting tribute to absence they could pull off.

UPDATE 9:05 PM, September 11, 2025:

At midnight Eastern Time, Apple Music updated with a new pre-release album from Pink Floyd with cover art—the 50th anniversary edition of Wish You Were Here. It’ll be fully released on December 12.

I was in London last week with my family and spotted this ad in a Tube car. With the headline “Humans Were the Beta Test,” this is for Artisan, a San Francisco-based startup peddling AI-powered “digital workers.” Specifically an AI agent that will perform sales outreach to prospects, etc.

Artisan ad as seen in London, June 2025

I’ve long left the Bay Area, but I know that the 101 highway is littered with cryptic billboards from tech companies, where the copy only makes sense to people in the tech industry, which to be fair, is a large part of the Bay Area economy. Artisan is infamous for its “Stop Hiring Humans” campaign which went up late last year. Being based in San Diego, much further south in California, I had no idea. Artisan wasn’t even on my radar.

Artisan billboard off Highway 101, between San Francisco and SFO Airport

There’s something to be said about shockvertising. It’s meant to be shocking or offensive to grab attention. And the company sure increased their brand awareness, claiming a +197% increase in brand search growth. Artisan CEO Jaspar Carmichael-Jack writes a post-mortem in their company blog about the campaign:

The impact exceeded our wildest expectations. When I meet new people in San Francisco, 70% of the time they know about Artisan and what we do. Before, that number was around 5%. aHrefs ranked us #2 fastest growing AI companies by brand search. We’ve seen 1000s of sales meetings getting booked.

According to him, “October and November became our biggest months ever, bringing in over $2M in new ARR.”

I don’t know how I feel about this. My initial reaction to seeing “Humans Were the Beta Test” in London was disgust. As my readers know, I’m very much pro-AI, but I’m also very pro-human. Calling humanity a beta test is simply tone-deaf and nihilistic. It is belittling our worth and betting on the end of our species. Yes, yes, I know it’s just advertising and some ads are simply offensive to various people for a variety of reasons. But as technology people, Artisan should know better.

Despite ChatGPT’s soaring popularity, there is still ample fear about AI, especially around job displacement and safety. The discourse around AI is already too hyped up.

I even think “Stop Hiring Humans” is slightly less offensive. As to why the company chose to create a rage-bait campaign, Carmichael-Jack says:

We knew that if we made the billboards as vanilla as everybody else’s, nobody would care. We’d spend $100s of thousands and get nothing in return.

We spent days brainstorming the campaign messaging. We wanted to draw eyes and spark interest, we wanted to cause intrigue with our target market while driving a bit of rage with the wider public. The messaging we came up with was simple but provocative: “Stop Hiring Humans.”

When the full campaign which included 50 bus shelter posters went up, death threats started pouring in. He was in Miami on business and thought going home to San Francisco might be risky. “I was like, I’m not going back to SF,” Carmichael-Jack says in a quote to The San Francisco Standard. “I will get murdered if I go back.”

(For the record, I’m morally opposed to death threats. They’re cowardly and incredibly scary for the recipient, regardless of who that person is.)

I’ve done plenty of B2B advertising campaigns in my day. Shock is not a tactic I would have used, nor would I ever recommend to a brand trying to raise positive awareness. I wish Artisan would have used the services of a good B2B ad agency. There are plenty out there and I used to work at one.

Think about the brands that have used shockvertising tactics in the past like Benetton and Calvin Klein. I’ve liked Oliviero Toscani’s controversial photographs that have been the central part of Benetton’s campaigns because they instigate a positive *liberal *conversation. The Pope kissing Egypt’s Islamic leader invites dialogue about religious differences and coexistence and provocatively expresses the campaign concept of “Unhate.”

But Calvin Klein’s sexualized high schoolers? No. There’s no good message in that.

And for me, there’s no good message in promoting the death of the human race. After all, who will pay for the service after we’re all end-of-lifed?

I’ve been seeing this new ad from Coinbase these past few days and love it. Made by independent agency Isle of Any, this spot has on-point animation, a banging track, and a great concept that plays with the Blue Screen of Death.

I found this one article about it from Little Black Book:

“Crypto is fundamentally updating the financial system,” says Toby Treyer-Evans, co-founder of Isle of Any, speaking with LBB. “So, to us it felt like an interesting place to start for the campaign, both as a film idea and as a way to play with the viewer and send a message. When you see it on TV, in the context of other advertising, it’s deliberately arresting… and blue being Coinbase’s brand colour is just one of those lovely coming togethers.”

Let me tell you a story…

Imagine a smoky wood-paneled conference room. Five men in smart suits sit around a table with a slide projector in the middle. Atop the machine is a finned plastic container that looks like a donut or a bundt cake. A sixth man is standing and begins a pitch.

Technology is a glittering lure, but there’s the rare occasion when the public can be engaged on the level beyond flash, if they have a sentimental bond with the product.

My first job, I was in-house at a fur company with this old pro copywriter—Greek named Teddy. And Teddy told me the most important idea in advertising is “new.” Creates an itch. You simply put your product in there as a kind of calamine lotion.

But he also talked about a deeper bond with the product. Nostalgia. It’s delicate, but potent.

Courtesy of Lions Gate Entertainment, Inc.

Of course, I’m describing an iconic scene from the TV show Mad Men, in which Don Draper, creative director of Sterling Cooper, a mid-level advertising agency on the rise, vying for Kodak’s business.

Draper weaves a story about technology, newness, and nostalgia. As he clicks through a slideshow of his family on the screen, he channels the desire—no—need of everyone, i.e., consumers, to be loved and how the power of memories can take us there.

Teddy told me that in Greek “nostalgia” literally means “the pain from an old wound.” It’s a twinge in your heart, far more powerful than memory alone. This device isn’t a spaceship. It’s a time machine. It goes backwards, forwards. It takes us to a place where we ache to go again.

It’s not called the Wheel. It’s called the Carousel. It lets us travel the way a child travels. Round and around and back home again, to a place where we know we are loved.

This isn’t brand strategy. However, it is an excellent illustration of how using insights about an audience and the uniqueness of your brand can create a powerful emotional connection. You see, one of Don Draper’s gifts is his instinct about people. He can immediately get deep into a single person’s heart and manipulate them, and he can also apply that skill to audiences. It’s about understanding what makes them tick, what they care about, and then combining their desires with whatever is unique about the brand. (Ironically, in the show, he knows himself the least.)

What is brand strategy? It is identifying the intersection of these two circles of the Venn diagram and finding the emotional truth therein.

Understanding the essence of brand strategy

In Alina Wheeler’s seminal book on brand identity called Designing Brand Identity, she emphasizes that:

Effective brand strategy provides a central, unifying idea around which all behavior, actions, and communications are aligned. It works across all products and services, and is effective over time. The best brand strategies are so differentiated and powerful that they deflect the competition. They are easy to talk about, whether you are the CEO or an employee.

Wheeler goes on to say that brand strategy is deeply rooted in the company’s vision, which is aligned with its leadership and employees, and encapsulates a deep understanding of the customer’s perceptions and needs.

A brand strategy enhances the connection with ideal customers by clearly defining the brand’s value proposition and ensuring the messaging resonates with their needs, preferences, and desires. It streamlines marketing by creating a cohesive narrative across all channels, making it easier to communicate the benefits and unique selling points of products. Furthermore, a solid brand strategy amplifies brand awareness, setting a foundation for consistent and memorable brand experiences, which fosters recognition and loyalty among the target audience.

The core elements of an effective brand strategy

There are five essential elements of brand strategy:

1. Brand purpose and mission
2. Consistency in messaging and design
3. Emotional connection and storytelling
4. Employee involvement and brand advocacy
5. Competitive awareness and positioning

Brand purpose and mission

All good brands must exist for some reason beyond just the financial aspect. No consumer will have any affinity with a brand that’s only out to make money. Instead, the brand needs to have a higher purpose—a reason for being that is greater than themselves. Simon Sinek’s Start with Why is a great primer on why brand purpose is necessary.

A brand’s purpose is then distilled into a succinct statement that acts as the brand’s mission. It is the unifying internal rallying cry for employees so they can share a common purpose.

Branding is consistency in messaging and design

Target’s brand is very consistent with its white and red color palette.

Keeping the message and design consistent is critical to making a brand stand out. This means always sharing the same core message and look, which helps people recognize and trust the brand. It’s like they’re getting a note from a familiar friend. This builds a strong, trustworthy brand image that people can easily remember, connect with, and love.

Emotional connection and storytelling

Nike celebrates the athlete in all of us.

Creating an emotional connection and weaving compelling storytelling into the fabric of a brand goes beyond mere transactions; it invites the audience into a narrative that resonates on a personal level. Through stories, a brand can illustrate its values, mission, and the impact it aims to have in the world, making its purpose relatable and its vision inspiring. This narrative approach fosters a deeper bond with the audience, turning passive consumers into passionate advocates. Engaging storytelling not only captivates but also enriches the brand experience, ensuring that every interaction is meaningful and memorable.

By integrating authentic stories into the brand strategy, companies can give light to the human element of their brand, making it more accessible and emotionally appealing to their audience.

Competitive awareness and positioning

Understanding the competitive landscape and strategically positioning the brand within it is crucial. It involves recognizing where your brand stands in relation to competitors and identifying what makes your brand unique through techniques like SWOT analyses and competitive audits. This awareness enables a brand to differentiate itself, highlighting its unique value propositions that appeal to the target audience. By carefully analyzing competitors and the market, a brand can craft a positioning strategy that emphasizes its strengths, addresses consumer needs more effectively, and carves out a distinct space in the consumer’s mind, setting the stage for sustainable growth and loyalty.

More than a logo: The power of storytelling in brand strategy

The character Harry Crane reacting to Don Draper’s Carousel pitch.

Brand strategy is much more than just a pretty logo or shiny new website. It’s about creating a meaningful connection with a brand’s audience, as demonstrated by Don Draper’s memorable pitch in Mad Men. The key lies in storytelling and emotional resonance, moving beyond the novelty to forge a genuine bond with customers.

Alina Wheeler’s work further highlights the importance of a unified narrative that aligns with the company’s mission and resonates with both employees and customers. A successful brand strategy differentiates the brand from competitors, not just through its products or services, but through the story it tells and the values it embodies.

To navigate the complexities of brand development effectively, creating a narrative that speaks directly to the audience’s needs and desires is essential. Building a brand is about more than just standing out in the market; it’s about creating a lasting relationship with customers by reflecting their values and aspirations.

What is brand strategy? It’s a secret power.

Apple’s Think Different campaign celebrated iconoclasts and invited those consumers into their tent.

Not all clients know they need this. Effective brand strategy is key to all successful brands like Nike, Apple, Patagonia, and Nordstrom. It’s the foundation upon which all lasting brands are built. These companies don’t just sell products; they sell stories, experiences, and values that resonate deeply with their customers. These brands stand out not only because of their innovative offerings but also because of their ability to connect with consumers on an emotional level, embedding their products into the lifestyles and identities of their audience. This deep connection is the result of a carefully crafted brand strategy that articulates a clear vision, mission, and set of values that align with those of their target market.

Moreover, an effective brand strategy acts as a guiding star for all of a company’s marketing efforts, ensuring consistency across all touchpoints. It helps businesses understand their unique position in the market, differentiate themselves from competitors, and communicate their message in a compelling and memorable way. By investing in a solid brand strategy, companies can build a robust and cohesive brand identity that attracts and retains loyal customers, driving long-term success and growth. In a world where consumers are bombarded with choices, a well-executed brand strategy is not just a secret power—it’s an essential one.

From an advertising standpoint, I believe Apple has been on fire recently. (Disclaimer: I have been an Apple fanboy since 1985 and used to work there many years ago.) Beginning with the “What will your verse be?” iPad ad that debuted in mid-January, they’ve continued with the “You’re more powerful than you think” iPhone 5S that began airing recently.

When I first saw “Your Verse” on TV it stopped me in my tracks. Using audio of Robin Williams speaking to his class in Dead Poets Society, it features footage of people using the iPad around the world for making music, photography, tracking tornadoes, playing professional hockey, and more. The haunting melody combined with the breathtaking images and Robin Williams’ voice really struck a chord with me. It evoked a deep sense of wonder and faith in humanity. These were real people doing extraordinary things with this product. In the mere three years that iPad has been available* it has created a whole new category of devices and enabled millions of people to do ordinary and extraordinary things.

Here’s the text from the speech:

We don’t read and write poetry because it’s cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. Medicine, law, business, engineering. These are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love. These are what we stay alive for. To quote from Whitman: “O me, O life of the question of these recurring, of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities filled with the foolish. What good amid these? O me, O life.” Answer: That you are here. That life exists, and identity. That the powerful play goes on and you may contribute a verse. …That the powerful play goes on and you may contribute a verse.” What will your verse be?

It ends with a challenge, raising the question for the viewer, “How will you make your dent in the universe?”

And just this week, Apple debuted a similar people-do-awesome-things-with-Apple-products video called “Powerful.” It features people using the iPhone to make music, perform art, video their kids, and more. It’s set against a youthful cover of the Pixies’ “Gigantic.” The film is an anthem much like the iPad ad that preceded it, and about how Apple products have empowered millions of people to do some pretty cool things.

(As an aside, I think “Powerful” is better executed than “Your Verse.” My issue with the first ad is that it had too many cuts in it. And the voiceover did not lend itself to a 30-second or even 60-second ad. Only the 90-second version works. Whereas all the cuts of “Powerful” are just as effective. And additionally interesting, my sources have told me that “Your Verse” was done internally at Apple. I would suspect that “Powerful” was also executed in-house.

As a second aside, this is one of the rarer moments when Apple’s campaigns are integrated, with a strong digital presence. See for yourself: Your Verse, Powerful.)

So what’s the takeaway?

These ads are not meant to convince the non-believers to buy Apple products. Instead, they’re both calls-to-arms for the Apple faithful. It’s their CRM strategy if you will. These ads are meant to inspire “the rest of us” and reinforce that we made the right choice in terms of the iOS platform and devices. These epic films depict a world made better by Apple products which makes us feel good. With Samsung and other Android devices eroding at Apple’s historic lead, this is exactly what they need.

These ads are reminiscent of Apple’s classic comeback “Think Different” campaign. Here is the text of the commercial that launched it:

Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. But the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.

As documented in Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs, Apple needed to make a statement that they were still a viable company able to make world-changing products. Isaacson writes, “It was designed to celebrate not what the computers could do, but what creative people could do with the computers.” And he goes on to say that this ad wasn’t only directed at the general public, but also to Apple employees who had forgotten what Apple stood for.

And I believe rallying the base is exactly what Apple is doing again.

• iPad was announced January 27, 2010, at MacWorld in San Francisco and began shipping April 3, 2010.

There’s been a lot of chatter in recent weeks about how so-called “digital” agencies are or are not ready to be the lead for a campaign. But I think the question is a little off.

Instead the question should be “Why are clients splitting up campaign work based on tactic?”

Despite the maturing of digital agencies such as Razorfish (for whom I work), R/GA and AKQA, today’s clients are still sending digital work to digital agencies and traditional work to traditional agencies. And equally bad is having a third company plan and buy their media (sometimes there’s a traditional media agency and a digital one). Why is this bad?

OK, the end-zone is down that way 50 yards! Make sure you talk to each other along the way. Now go! [Download PDF]

I’ve seen it time and time again: if you want an integrated marketing campaign, how could you possibly brief all the companies and hope they work together and come back with something good and cohesive? The agencies will pay lip-service and say they’re collaborating, but there’s only so much collaboration that can happen in reality. Each agency is moving fast and really has no time to talk to the others. Plus there is always unspoken political jockeying for protecting the work each agency does have and trying to steal more business from the others. I strongly believe that this model is inefficient (money and time), makes agency people insane, and creates less-than-stellar campaigns.

What should instead happen is the client needs to brief one agency who will create a singular idea and execute on that idea across different tactics and mediums. Therefore the messaging, art direction and strategy for the campaign are cohesive.

Let the one Agency bring in specialists as needed to serve the idea. [Download PDF]

Agencies should not be labeled “digital,” for digital is only a tactic. I’d say the same with “traditional.” What clients should ask for is strong strategic work that drives results. Let the agency—regardless of its label—decide on who to sub-contract to if necessary.

When we see clients trust their agency and its vision, we witness great work all around:

• TBWA\Chiat\Day + Apple
• Crispin Porter + Bogusky + Burger King
• Goodby, Silverstein Partners + Sprint

Oh wait. There isn’t a “digital” agency on that list. But there soon will be.

Further reading:

• Why Digital Agencies Aren’t Ready to Lead
• Why Digital Agencies Are Indeed Ready to Lead
• What if we held a controversy and nobody cared?
• Digital must be anchored at the heart of agencies

Please feel free to use the above diagrams which I’m making available through a Creative Commons license.

In the age of digital and social media, and in the age of realtime marketing, what matters more? The big idea or the smaller idea and execution?

Many digital agencies have been experimenting with new ways of working to try to get at those ideas and executions that a traditional agency couldn’t dream of. I was working at Organic when we rolled out the “Three Minds” initiative, meaning that for every brainstorm, we needed to have at least three people from three disciplines in the room. This is similar to what Big Spaceship has been trying to do by throwing together teams of creatives, strategists, technologists and production.

Digital agencies think that this is a point of differentiation. They think that online, social and viral are so complex that they need all this brainpower to figure it out. What ends up happening when you put a technologist and/or producer into a room with creatives? Executions. It’s a natural and inevitable thing. And I believe it’s a distraction from getting to a better and bigger idea.

I believe that when you add in people whose jobs are to make things (technologists build, producers produce, etc.) too early in the creative process, before the idea is baked, you shortchange the idea. The idea becomes smaller and less compelling.

Creative teams go there all the time too. Too often do I hear an art director or copywriter say “OK, so the idea is a game within a banner.” No. That’s not the idea. That’s an execution. What’s the idea?

People may argue that the mass audience doesn’t care about the idea; all people will remember is the commercial, billboard or Facebook app (no one remembers banners). I disagree. People remember the campaign which was essentially that story dreamt up one late night in a conference room by a creative partnership.

In the traditional advertising agency model, the two-person copywriter and art director partnership is designed to tell stories. The idea isn’t a TV spot, a print ad or a billboard. The idea isn’t a banner, a microsite or a Facebook app. The idea is a story. It’s a story with a hook, that draws people in, makes them feel something and act on that. And as humans, we love stories.

I believe that for digital agencies to compete with the traditional ones, they need to be better at developing compelling ideas. A big traditional shop can always farm out a digital execution, but digital agencies can’t farm out the idea generation.

Fellow Razorfisher and social media guru Shiv Singh asks, in the age of social media, do big ideas matter less? Truth be told, I’ve been thinking about how to craft my reaction to this since I first read a similar tweet from Michael Lebowitz, CEO of Big Spaceship about how the old ad agency creative partnerships are being replaced with other roles.

@bigspaceship: where(sic) putting the art director & copywriter together was the structure of the tv age, we put strategy, tech, design and production together

The quick gist is that there’s a shift towards execution versus concept. The art school I went to had a very strong and simple philosophy that it taught its students: concept is king. In crits we were always asked, “Why did you pick that typeface?” or “What is that color supposed to signify?” or “Why did you choose that style of photography?” etc. There had to be a reason for all the elements in our designs and that reason had to be rooted in the concept.

Concept was not about layout. A concept (or idea) was your point of view on the message you’re trying to convey. And the acid test for whether the concept was a true concept was whether or not you could verbally sum it up in just a couple of sentences and have a completely different design to support that concept.

Oftentimes the word “concept” gets thrown around in our industry. It has become a stand-in for almost any creative deliverable. Three designs are not three concepts. A concept, however, can be executed in three different ways.

Next time, a more direct reaction to if big ideas still matter. Hint: They do.

A couple of weeks ago, I happened upon a site called crowdSPRING. I forget exactly how I got to the site, but what I found there made me feel a little icky and left a bad taste in my mouth. I wrote a tweet about it (which in turn updated my Facebook status) and many of my designer friends had strong negative reactions too.

Stepping back a bit, what is crowdSPRING? It’s a website that allows companies to post briefs for design projects (mostly logos and websites), with the expectation that dozens if not hundreds of designers from around the world will post their solutions to those projects. Finished solutions. Not portfolios, resumes or even sketches. But the finished logo, website comps, CD packaging design, etc.

Why the ick factor? It took me a few days to process it internally, but I eventually came to this conclusion: the site sucks time away from thousands of budding designers. They are all working for free. Only the lucky ones whose solutions get chosen are paid. Imagine if you ate dinner at five different restaurants and only paid for the one dinner you liked? That is what’s happening on crowdSPRING: free work.

This Forbes article talks about pushback from the design community. I’ve long been against spec work. It’s just plain wrong from the free work angle as I’ve already illustrated. The AIGA has also had a long-standing policy against spec work because in their mind it compromises the quality of the work. How? Company asks for free submissions; young, inexperienced and unqualified designers submit solutions; established professionals stay away. That is a recipe for sub-standard creative work. Or how about designer Mark Boulton’s argument that spec work is bad for business? “Architects are invited to submit bids, proposals and designs for prestigious competitions. The winner gets the contract and the glory. The losers get nothing; the work is conducted speculatively.”

My friend and colleague at Razorfish, Garrick Schmitt wrote an article at AdAge.com titled “Can Creativity Be Crowdsourced?” He posits that crowdsourcing creativity is here to stay. Whether it’s finished product ala crowdSPRING or inspiration ala FFFFOUND!, there is a place for it. I honestly don’t know if crowdsourcing creative output in an ethical way is possible. Maybe. But crowdsourcing creativity is entirely possible.

Rivers Cuomo from the band Weezer did a collaborative songwriting project called “Let’s Write a Sawng” on YouTube last year. He started with a single video, saying that he needed help writing a song. He led his large base of fans through the process, breaking it down step-by-step, starting with suggestions for a title, through lyrics and melodies. What worked was that he crowdsourced for ideas, picked the best ones and came up with a compelling pop record. On NPR’s Fresh Air he mentioned that if the song were ever officially released, it would probably break a record for songwriting credits.

Intel also experimented with crowdsourcing via an advertising program call Mass Animation last year. Via Facebook they invited animators to animate shots that would be part of a larger animated short film. I think it works here too because an animated film is very much like an open source dev project: the work can be divvied up into small discreet parts and worked on by volunteers. Intel goes one step further and has promised to credit and compensate contributors whose work appears in the final film.

I think the aforementioned two examples ultimately work as crowdsourced creative because they were volunteer collaborative efforts. Rivers Cuomo’s fans or Intel’s animators really wanted to be part of a project larger than themselves. Whereas design contests or sites like crowdSPRING feel unethical are because they’re requesting intellectual capital without investing a dime.

Yesterday the design and advertising community was abuzz over the leaked presentation deck (PDF) for the new Pepsi logo by the Arnell Group. Yes it is absolutely a work of pure horseshit. But, I was reminded of the decks that my colleagues and I create every day and how somebody’s horseshit may be someone else’s chocolate cake.

We all have to sell our work. Ideally the concepts and ideas come from a well-formed strategy, but that doesn’t always happen. Many times the strategy must back into the creative. In other words sometimes you might have a great idea that you’ll need to justify after the fact.

This is even more true if you’re dealing with a purely formal exercise such as redesigning an iconic logo like Pepsi’s. A good design strategy would be to do the due diligence and look at the different historical variations of the logo and then just have at it, coming up with dozens if not hundreds of iterations. But afterwards when you find the new design you subjectively like, you’re going to need to explain in an intelligent, tangible, evidence-based manner detailing how you arrived at that solution—especially if you’re getting paid $1 million for the effort. So that’s when you break out the horses and shovels.

(via Brand New)

Update: Validation that the Arnell strategy deck is all BS from a freelancer:

(the logo design) nothing to do with any of that bullshit on the PDF, that was (I believe) just a way to keep the client entertained (like we, viewers of this PDF were) and make them feel like their money (1.2B) was worth something.