Here’s a delayed overreaction to a comment posted at Essay 4076. Let’s start with the comment, followed by MultiCultClassics rhetoric…
---------------------------------
First off: You can’t blame a guy like Brownstein for recruiting out of the ad schools. I’d do the same thing if I were him. Here’s why: The ad schools replaced the old agency training programs. This guy Siechrist figured out that he could get people to pay him for two years worth of the same training agencies used to pay people to go through. So bottom line is a graduate of Miami Portfolio Commonwealth Center is the equivalent of a second year junior. There’s a lot less training to be done and at a small shop like Brownstein’s—that’s a distinct advantage. Bigger agencies, however, have no such excuse and they’re the ones who should be looking at community colleges and the like for talent.
Second off: The “Creative Revolution” of the 1960s came about when outsiders joined the ranks of ad agencies. Advertising, believe it or not, used to be a very posh, very WASPy, Ivy League dominated business. DDB was one of the few places that Jews and Italians could get jobs. And the very New York ethnic sensibility those people brought to their work was what created the creative revolution. Hence the stereotype of the Jewish copywriter and the Italian art director. There also seemed to be far more women in the field at that time. I mean Mary Wells was a big enough name that she could start her own agency. There just aren’t any women even remotely close to that position right now.
I find the male-ness of creative departments (and the female-ness of account management) to be almost as shocking as the white-ness of agencies.
And Bill [referring to comments from Bill Green of makethelogobigger] is right that rather than look in our own backyard for new talent, agencies are far more likely to reach out and grab someone who was big in Kuala Lumpur or Buenos Aires because it makes them seem worldly and “global.” Whereas a kid from a community college would just seem “out of touch.”
And finally, the fact that we have ethnic agencies, a veritable Negro League of advertising, is astounding to me. Because it basically says, “Use Ogilvy to sell IBM to people in the U.S. and the rest of the world, including all those black people who live in places like Kenya and South Africa. But if you want to sell to black people who live in places like New York or Los Angeles, you need a special agency, because they’re completely different than the rest of the planet. Astounding.
---------------------------------
First, the ad school perspective is debatable. The old agency training programs, particularly for creatives, remain an industry myth. Even the shops boasting formalized development courses rarely executed anything in regimented fashion. Art directors saw semi-structure when starting in the mount room or studio, but that also varied from agency to agency. Regarding the notion of ad school graduates being better equipped, well, it just ain’t so. Having hired numerous interns and entry-level creatives in recent years, including ad school alumni, it’s safe to report all the kids are equally inexperienced. Despite the hype and hustle by people like Ron Siechrist, it’s nearly impossible to give students real-life work simulations—especially when scenarios are unique for each agency. In the end, you won’t get it until you’re actually doing it. But hey, that’s just our opinion.
Secondly, the “Creative Revolution” mini-dissertation is fascinating, and could probably explain the industry’s chronic exclusivity. But that’s a topic for another post.
Finally, the fact that Madison Avenue continues to run “a veritable Negro League of advertising” is indeed astounding—and nobody’s more astounded than the players in the segregated arena.
For starters, let’s clarify a point. The “Negro League” conditions technically apply to any agency with a cultural focus: Black, Latino, Asian, GLBT and more.
It’s also important to note most of these shops launched and grew for different reasons than the agencies of the “Creative Revolution.” Minority shops seek to address legitimate and specific communication objectives. Their expertise covers audiences historically ignored by advertisers and “general market” agencies. Plus, the shops radically transformed minority representation in media (i.e., minorities in advertising used to mean Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, Rastus, The Frito Bandito, etc.).
In short, minority shops are established on a fundamental—and universal—advertising tenet: Know Your Target.
Sure, a lot of the original minority shop founders were indulging their entrepreneurial spirits too. Ditto the contemporary leaders. As the majority of these minorities started in “general market” agencies, they likely hoped to call the shots while escaping the real and perceived restrictions.
While we don’t officially speak for every minority shop in existence—or any minority shop, for that matter—we’ll go out on a limb to proclaim there’s much the companies did not foresee. These areas could be categorized as “astounding.”
It’s astounding that minority shops must provide services at discounted rates. Quiet as it’s kept, they’re routinely required to produce commercials, print ads, radio spots, etc. at prices well below their “general market” counterparts—and well below industry standards. Additionally, they have to do it with tighter schedules and smaller staffs.
It’s astounding that minority shops inevitably satisfy everyone’s quotas. Clients expect minority shops to almost entirely hire minority vendors, a mandate never placed on “general market” agencies. Plus, clients use minority shops to silence Jesse Jackson and fulfill their personal minority obligations. That’s one reason why the shops maintain minority ownership when absorbed by global holding companies (i.e., minority officers retain a 51% share of the shop). Qualified shops without minority ownership status have been eliminated from new business pitches because of their lack of alleged authenticity. And of course, “general market” agencies use minority shops to excuse their diversity deficiencies.
It’s astounding that minority shops are professionally pigeonholed. They’re systematically excluded from AOR opportunities. Damn, they seldom get the chance to compete on “general market” assignments when a client conducts shootouts with their roster of agencies. Were agencies from the “Creative Revolution”—or the current devolution—ever ordered to only carry out the Jewish and Italian ads? Such constraints totally handcuff a minority shop’s ability to expand, since the minority universe features a surprisingly finite number of clients.
It’s astounding, bewildering, mystifying, bizarre, frustrating and downright insane that minority shops are forced to perpetuate cultural stereotypes. It’s tricky trying to finger a sole culprit here. The pioneering minority shops introduced breakthrough imagery, and soon everyone desired a carbon copy. Or clients requisition blatant caricatures to justify the expenditures—hence the glut of gospel choirs, family reunions, piñatas, chili peppers, Zen monologues, etc. Or clueless clients duplicate their narrow vision of minorities (“Afro-Americans like to dance, right?”). Or the fear of straying from the safe and politically correct induces the clichéd and artistically incorrect. Or a percentage of minority creatives are fucking hacks. Whatever. Shit happens. Then it gets sold, assembled and broadcast on BET or Telemundo.
It’s astounding that our racist industry relegates minorities to corporate ghettos. We’ve made the “general market” agencies so unwelcome to non-White people that they opt to set up alienated enterprises rather than confront the constricting barriers and glass ceilings preserved by a majority class too old to change yet too young to retire (it’s amazing how those who repelled outsiders with discrimination now cry “Ageism!” to deny obsolescence).
Yes, it’s astounding that in the 21st century, Madison Avenue still runs a veritable Negro League of advertising. But be careful to aim your astonishment at the minority players. They’d love to battle on the same field—hell, they’d gladly settle for separate but equal terms. Given the chance ultimately awarded to Negro League baseball players, minorities would probably rule the ad game too. Which might render the White folks astounded.
