17610: On WPP Warehouse Production Property.

 

IndianTelevision.com spotlighted the grand opening of Devon’s Point, a production studio WPP is hyping as an AI-powered content factory.

Whoop-dee-damn-doo.

If anyone believes the warehouse is any different—or any better—than any facility at any White holding company or global flaming dumpster, well, you’ve bought a heaping helping of AI-generated bullshit.

IndianTelevision.com illustrated its report with the image depicted above of WPP CEO Cindy Rose in Devon’s Point. Or is she? Couldn’t a PR portrait be created via the wondrous technology with greater speed, efficiency, and affordability?

Will Devon’s Point utilize AI to fabricate triple bids?

WPP builds an AI-powered content factory as the production game changes

Devon’s Point combines virtual production, AI creative tools and human talent under one roof

By indiantelevision.com Team

LONDON: Artificial intelligence is moving deeper into the content production pipeline at WPP, which has launched Devon’s Point in East London as a global production hub combining AI-powered creative technology, virtual production and human talent.

The facility is designed to help WPP teams create and adapt content at scale, using AI and virtual production to build digital environments, product twins and localised creative assets without requiring conventional shoots for every market or setting.

WPP CEO Cindy Rose said the facility reflects the company’s push to make greater use of its AI capabilities as it looks to become a growth partner for global brands.

At Devon’s Point, teams can place a vehicle on a virtual production stage and create footage of it driving through locations such as the Swiss Alps or Tokyo without leaving the facility. WPP is also using the site to develop digital product twins and AI-powered creative environments that can be localised at scale.

The approach could reshape how brands produce and distribute large volumes of content, particularly as AI reduces the time and cost involved in creating multiple versions of campaigns for different markets.

WPP is also using Devon’s Point to bring AI closer to creator-led production. Its new creator studios are designed to help teams produce real-time content as brands increasingly rely on creators and earned influence to shape consumer discovery and purchasing decisions.

These capabilities are connected to WPP’s data intelligence and media operations through WPP Open, the company’s agentic marketing platform.

The facility also forms part of WPP’s push to build an AI-native creative workforce. Members of HEX Studio, its frontier AI studio, and participants in its Creative Technology Apprenticeship programme will work from Devon’s Point on live client projects.

Rose said the growing capacity of AI-generated content does not diminish the role of human creativity and craft. Instead, WPP is positioning the two as complementary, with creative practitioners continuing to develop ideas while AI expands the scale and speed at which they can be executed.

The launch comes a year after Rose took over as WPP CEO and highlights the company’s broader strategy of combining creative, production, data, media and AI capabilities through its technology platforms.

With Devon’s Point, WPP is effectively turning AI from a campaign-side experiment into part of the production infrastructure itself.

17609: Converse Defender Tells Everyone To KKKalm Down.

 

Adweek published yet another perspective on the Converse lynching controversy, allowing an author to figuratively hang himself.

The color commentator closed by remarking, “I fully expect this column to incur similar wrath from the sanctimonious corners of the internet where offence is easily taken and blame must then be immediately apportioned.”

Okay. Challenge accepted.

For starters, the author seems oblivious to having assumed a stereotypical role in the matter. That is, he’s the Angry Old White Guy.

It’s a waste of time attempting to school the culturally clueless. Although it’s particularly annoying in this case, as the author boasts having a PhD in Marketing and hypes his MiniMBA programs.

He’s clearly out to educate the masses versus consider the opportunity for a teachable moment. Self-absorption always trumps self-enlightenment, self-improvement, and self-awareness.

The final proclamation underscored his ignorance: “It just requires everyone to calm down.”

Yes, calm down despite once again experiencing the lashing disrespect of an industry historically mired in systemic racism.

Calm down by being told how to respond to offensive material by a bona fide representative of the offenders.

Calm down when even the unintentionally biased avoid accountability as intentionally as card-carrying KKK members.

From Converse to Ed Sheeran, Let’s End These Tedious Apology Tours

Converse, Oxford United, and Ed Sheeran all got dragged through the same ritual for mistakes that were accidental or not even theirs

By Mark Ritson

It was a rotten week for Converse. 

On Sept. 3, the Nike-owned brand posted a new campaign on social media for the Chuck 70 X built around Karina, the very famous singer from K-pop group aespa. 

In the key image she stands in a long white skirt, wearing the shoes and holding a second pair in one hand, framed by a spotlight cut in the shape of the Converse star.

Two weeks passed.

Then, someone noticed that the edge of the star projected onto her skirt made a shape a bit like a Klan hood. And that the shoes hanging from her hand could be read as a body. Then a second image surfaced, from Converse Malaysia, of models on a ladder reaching for sneakers strung from a tree branch. 

The two pictures welded together online into a single verdict.

Converse was now running “the most racist ad of the season.” The work was “shocking,” “abhorrent,” “repugnant.” Even if it was unintentional, the fact that it had gotten past legal, marketing, and leadership was itself an unforgivable offence.

Converse apologized within a day, pulled everything and promised to do better, but not enough for Louisiana Congressman Troy Carter. 

“Lynching is not a creative concept. The Ku Klux Klan is not an aesthetic,” he raged. “This campaign should never have been created, approved or released.” Nike and Converse, he said, should explain publicly how the images had passed through their approval process.

Step back from the heat for a second. Nobody seriously thought, for even a moment, that a Korean photographer shooting a Korean pop star for the Korean market was evoking the Klan. It was an accident. And the instant the claims were made, Converse said sorry, and pulled the work. 

Which prompts a question nobody in the pile-on bothered to ask. 

What else was Converse meant to do here?

It didn’t matter, though, as a wrong had been done, and offence taken. It didn’t matter whether it accidental or not, or whether an apology had already been offered.

Penalties must apply. 

The same script ran in England last week around the same time at Oxford United, a third tier football club. The team was founded in 1893, and a new range of American college-style clothing celebrated the fact with UNITED across the shoulders and a big 93 beneath it.

The collection went live on Sept. 11.

Almost immediately, someone inside the club worked out what a United 93 shirt looks like on the 25th anniversary of 9/11. The range and the posts promoting it were gone within two hours. That should have been the end of it.

It wasn’t. A week later, the club was being roasted on CNN, ESPN, and the Washington Post and had issued a full confession. The shirts “should not have reached the point of sale and we take full responsibility for not undertaking proper due diligence.” Again, nobody suggested any of this was deliberate. And again, the mistake was fixed within hours. But still an apology was required.

Then there is Ed Sheeran

On Saturday night, Sheeran delivered the most extreme entry in this new genre: an apology for something he demonstrably did not do. 

In Philadelphia, before playing a note, he stood in front of 60,000 people and said, “I am making mistakes and I’m so, so sorry.” 

He was apologizing for a rapper’s politics, a stadium owner’s ban, and a promoter’s decision, none of which were his, to an audience that just wanted to hear Shape of You. 

A man who has spent his career steering clear of every political issue going found himself in the middle of the most intractable one on earth. Through no fault of his own he found himself apologizing.

We have reached a very low point. The combination of crisis management, the fragmentation of culture and the insidious effects of social media have turned this decade into an unpleasant, sanctimonious place. Where the only option for innocent people is to eat humble pie with a double serving of reputational rescue slathered on top.

Converse set out to offend no one, and when it did, it made amends the same day. Oxford United made an awful accidental mistake and fixed it immediately, then apologised anyway. Ed Sheeran just wants to play music but must first apologize for things he did not do and does not understand. 

I fully expect this column to incur similar wrath from the sanctimonious corners of the internet where offence is easily taken and blame must then be immediately apportioned. 

Real harm, deliberately done, deserves an apology and consequences, and brands that drag their feet deserve everything they get. A mistake with no intent behind it deserves a correction. That’s all. 

“We’ve withdrawn it” is a complete sentence. It does not need “we understand.” It does not need “we’ll do better.” It just requires everyone to calm down.

17608: Mo’ Motions, No Motion In WPP Whistleblower Lawsuit.

 

MediaPost reported the latest motion sickness in the WPP whistleblower lawsuit, spotlighting a motion filed by the alleged whistleblower opposing a motion filed by the global flaming dumpster to dismiss the case.

Seems like lots of motions without any forward motion.

Foster Files Motion Opposing WPP’s Summary Dismissal Request

By Steve McClellan

Alleged WPP whistleblower Richard Foster filed a motion Friday opposing WPP’s request that the New York State Supreme Court judge hearing the case toss it before it goes to trial.    

Foster argues that his lawsuit should move forward because he has provided enough facts to support his claims that WPP and its media division retaliated against him after he reported what he believed were unlawful business practices—primarily misappropriating client media rebates and repackaging them for sale by its own principal trading unit.  

In late 2024 Foster submitted a report to WPP Media CEO Brian Lesser describing what he contended were legal and governance problems. Last month, Foster submitted details of a separate investigation by Sony that concluded that WPP Media siphoned $350 million in media rebates in China in a single year for its own use that properly belonged to clients. And he argues that the Sony probe backs up his own assertions that WPP wrongfully pocketed client rebates.   

A separate hearing has been scheduled for October where WPP will present its case for sealing the Sony material, which it has said is not relevant to the Foster litigation. Foster will argue why the Sony probe details should be allowed as evidence.  

According to Foster, Lesser acknowledged that the report raised "legal issues,” but instead of addressing the concerns, allegedly shared the report with an executive whom Foster had criticized.  

After that, Foster says he was gradually pushed aside, excluded from important meetings and projects, and ultimately fired in July 2025. 

“Defendants ask the Court to decide three questions on the pleadings: what Foster believed, what he communicated, and why he was the subject of months of retaliation,” Foster states in his latest motion. “Each is a question of fact that is not appropriately decided on a motion to dismiss.” 

He argues that the court must assume his factual allegations are true at this early stage. He argues WPP is asking the judge to weigh evidence and resolve factual disputes, which should happen later in the case, not on a motion to dismiss. 

Foster argues that Lesser knew about his concerns, and that retaliation began shortly after his report was delivered, and that there was a continuing pattern of adverse treatment leading up to his firing. 

He also notes that in previous filings by WPP, the company’s explanation for firing him is inconsistent—that it has characterized his departure as an "ignominious termination" while also saying it resulted from a global restructuring. Those explanations conflict and raise factual questions that should be resolved at trial rather than be dismissed now. 

Foster, who ran WPP’s content investment and branded entertainment unit, Motion, is seeking $100 million in severance and damages. He says the company offered him a seven-figure severance package conditioned on his silence, which he says he rejected.

17607: WPP Production Bids Farewell To Exclusive Bidding.

 

Campaign reported WPP Production has taken down its guidance on rigging the bidding system, a scheme that instructed staff to “actively convince” clients to assign all production work exclusively to the single White operating company, effectively avoiding the standard triple bid process.

The Trusted Growth Partner For The World’s Leading Brands appears to have reconsidered the questionable ethics and lack of transparency posed by such a maneuver.

Looks like WPP Production will have to earn jobs based on performance and capabilities—quite a challenge for the global flaming dumpster. Yikes.

17606: On Converse KKKicks.

BBC reported Converse yanked an Instagram advertisement following complaints that the image evoked KKK imagery.

At least they didn’t rename the featured shoe Chuck 70 burning cross trainer.

Converse pulls ‘deeply upsetting’ advert after backlash

By Amy Walker

American footwear brand Converse has pulled an advert that social media users said evoked Ku Klux Klan imagery, saying it recognised “that we got this wrong”.

The photo, posted to the company’s Instagram account, received backlash online after critics described lighting in the image as looking like a white pointed hood.

A pair of shoes, dangling in the picture, were also likened to an image of a lynching victim by social media users.

In an apology, first issued on Friday, Converse said the photo had been removed from its social media channels and it was working to remove it elsewhere. “This should not have happened and we will do better,” it said.

The statement also said: “We’re sorry. We understand why this image is deeply upsetting and recognize that we got this wrong”.

The photo was part of a campaign promoting its Chuck 70 X trainer, launched internationally on 27 August.

The campaign features the South Korean singer Karina, of the K-pop group Aespa, who is pictured in a series of advertisements for the shoes.

Founded in Massachusetts in the early 1900s, the popularity of Converse has skyrocketed since its Chuck Taylor sneaker was first introduced to US basketball courts in 1917.

The global brand has been a subsidiary of Nike since 2003.

17605: On Exposing Ugliness Of PepsiCo Pageantry.

 

More About Advertising published a lengthy perspective titled, “Ad agency pitch theatre is not a sport, but a beauty contest,” providing a probing analysis of PepsiCo global media duties shifting from Omnicom to Publicis Groupe.

The title poses two inherent flaws.

First, the PepsiCo business was awarded sans pitch. To play off the content concept, a winner was crowned without having to appear in the swimsuit competition—or any other pageant event. Indeed, it’s unclear how the decision was made, rendering the entire affair suspicious and potentially scandalous.

Second, the opinion piece was illustrated by the AI-generated image depicted above. A more accurate cartoon would have presented three Old White Guys, an Asian man, and a White woman. It’s an exclusive—and not very pretty—spectacle.

17604: Continuing Cola Wars Craziness.

 

More About Advertising opined on Ogilvy scoring a Coca-Cola European football project via a pitch featuring WPP Open X (presumably led by Ogilvy), Publicis’ Le Pub, Studio.One (led by former AKQA CEO Ajaz Ahmed), and Uncommon Creative Studio (co-founded by former Grey London Chairman and CCO Nils Leonard).

Was the pitch underway before Publicis Groupe landed PepsiCo global media duties?

Given WPP Open X was invented to solely serve Coke, facing competition from outsider enterprises does not seem to reflect favorably on the single White operating company and its offerings.

The scenario also indicates an industry shift, whereby reviews for major chunks of business are not necessarily closed affairs, exclusive privileges available only to a handful of White holding companies. Although it still involves cronyism and entitled relationships.

In the end, the self-proclaimed Trusted Growth Partner For The World’s Leading Brands hasn’t gained trust, realized growth, or been a partner for any brand in the world—and the global flaming dumpster now competes against ex-employees for assignments.

Coke goes great with humble pie.

More Coke pitches: this time Ogilvy’s on top

By Stephen Foster

They do love their pitches at Coca-Cola despite the creative part of the giant account supposedly safely harboured at WPP. This time it’s a WPP team led by Ogilvy reportedly winning a European football brief in a pitch against Publicis’ Le Pub (which handles Heineken), Ajaz Ahmed’s new Studio.One and Uncommon Creative Studio (there are nearly as many studios these days as pitches.)

Coke has invested heavily in football with some lively campaigns although this seems to be the first time it’s been a separate project. Coca-Cola is an official sponsor of the Premier League in the UK.

Nobody’s saying anything on the record but it’s an interesting pitch. Studio.One, the new creative company formed by former AKQA boss Ajaz Ahmed has already picked up a Christmas assignment from Coke. Ogilvy has won (or retained) a number of Coke assignments recently and seems to be the lead agency on WPP Open X work. Must be frustrating, not to say exhausting, having to keep repeating yourself though.