11842: Recruiting Or Recycling?

Advertising Age reported on the power and influence of recruiters in adland. Um, could one not argue these commission-hungry headhunters are minimally co-conspirators in perpetuating the predominately White status quo? Someone should demand that recruiters reveal their diversity hiring numbers.

Why Executive Recruiters Rule the Roost at Agencies

Cadre of Powerful Placement Experts Are Adland’s Hidden Creative Talent

By Maureen Morrison

Behind many great creative directors stands a great recruiter.

Though they largely operate behind the scenes, recruiters are crucial players in adland, populating the upper ranks at agencies and matchmaking potential hires with an agency’s culture. They know more about the creative-executive landscape than virtually anyone else in the business.

One top-level hire that had their helping hand was Jeff Benjamin, tapped as North American chief creative officer at JWT two years ago. Recruiters were also behind the 2011 placement of Linus Karlsson as chief creative officer at McCann (he has since moved to Commonwealth) and Mark Wenneker joining Mullen as chief creative officer from Goodby Silverstein & Partners in 2008.

Placing top talent has long been a tricky business, and it’s only getting trickier. Splashy names can attract headlines and business interest, but the wrong fit can be devastating for the agency and the individual. Personality and cultural fit are more important than a superlative-filled résumé.

Ask any senior creative to cite the big players in the space and they’ll rattle off at least one of these names: Dany Lennon, owner of the Creative Register; Gilly Taylor in Los Angeles, of Gilly & Co.; Patrizia Magni, who in 2007 founded Thread on the West Coast; Sarah King, who joined Ms. Magni in 2007 to launch Thread; Ann Marie Marcus, at Marcus St. Jean; and Susan Kirshenbaum and Nancy Temkin at Greenberg Kirshenbaum.

One newer player on the U.S. recruiting scene is Grace Blue, a U.K. firm that opened in New York two years ago and specializes in staffing for media and creative.

Ms. Lennon, a Brit who started as a copywriter in London, according to an Ad Club bio, is the most influential, well-connected and knowledgeable of the group. “In a business that’s so based on finding the most amazing talent, there’s one person that stands out as ‘the guy,’” said one chief creative officer. “It’s amazing the kind of relationships she’s built.”

Ms. Lennon, who has been in the business for 30 years, refers to herself as being in the “creative management and representation” business rather than recruiting. She said she provides services well beyond executive search, including career coaching and advice for creatives on their long-term career goals. Ms. Taylor, a 27-year vet who also casts a big shadow in the business, Ms. Temkin and Ms. Kirshenbaum said they also offer counsel to creatives and agencies.

No matter what you call them, these are powerful people—which is perhaps why no creative director would agree to be named in this article (it would be “career suicide,” said one), and why top recruiters zealously guard their client list.

“Recruiters can be really influential and persuasive as to who gets the opportunities, especially at the senior level where there are few jobs at the top and things bottleneck,” said one creative director.

Find the top dog

Most executives interviewed for this article had glowing things to say about recruiters—except those spurned or passed over for a big job because they weren’t backed by a recruiter with pull at major shops.

“Who knows what’s going on in the market better than an executive recruiter?” said one agency CEO. “You want to get their trust and use them as counsel. Information is a massive currency.”

A common misperception is that recruiters work for creatives, but their business comes from agencies. “They’re not agents, they’re scouts,” said one creative director. Agencies typically pay them on a contingency basis—meaning they get paid a percentage of the salary of the position they’re filling, estimated by some to be up to 30%.

So what kinds of creatives are recruiters looking to bring to agencies? “You can tell who is never going to be the top dog because they don’t possess that skill set that is going to be needed,” said Ms. Taylor.

To assess if a candidate has what it takes, she asks herself: Can they deliver that inspirational speech? Can they really collaborate with clients and instill earn their trust? Can they really present ideas? Are they good with new business? Are they motivating their creative department?

Aspiring chief creative officers, take note.

11841: Sterling Loses Lifetime Award.

In addition to receiving a lifetime ban from the NBA, Los Angeles Clippers Owner Donald Sterling will also lose a “Lifetime Achievement Award” that the NAACP was set to give him. Why, that’s nearly as outrageous as Rev. Al Sharpton celebrating the NAACP’s Centennial with Ogilvy.

NAACP to tighten up award policies amid Sterling scandal

By Bruce Golding

The NAACP announced Tuesday that it would issue new directives to avoid embarrassments like the since-scrapped plan to honor racist Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling.

The civil-rights group’s LA chapter was all set to give Sterling a “Lifetime Achievement Award” next month until he was caught on tape ranting at his then-girlfriend for publicly “associating with black people.”

In a statement right after Sterling’s lifetime ban from the NBA, the NAACP said: “We will be developing guidelines for our units to help them in their award selection process and prevent unfortunate decisions like this from occurring in the future.”

Interim NAACP President Lorraine Jenkins announced Sunday that Sterling would not be honored, as had been planned, at the LA chapter’s upcoming 100th anniversary gala.

She also issued a statement saying “we have strongly urged our Los Angeles unit to take the necessary steps to rescind the previous award they bestowed on him.”

At a Monday news conference, LA chapter President Leon Jenkins said Sterling “has given out a tremendous amount of scholarships, he has invited numerous African-American kids to summer camps, and his donations are bigger than other sports franchises.”

Jenkins, however, called Sterling’s recorded comments “devastating” and “off the scale,” adding: “I think that when you say things like that, you have to pay a price.”

He said his group planned to return an unspecified amount of donations it had received from Sterling.

But Jenkins said he would not demand that Sterling return the “humanitarian award” the group gave him in 2009.

“This is not a Heisman Trophy, dude,” Jenkins said.

11840: Sterling Banned For Life.

Los Angeles Clippers Owner Donald Sterling has been banned for life from the NBA for making racist remarks. What’s next for Sterling? He’ll probably land an executive position on Madison Avenue, where he’ll fit right in. Hey, his brother Roger Sterling will give him a job.

11839: Trouble In Paradise.

Adweek and Advertising Age reported the proposed Publicis-Omnicom merger is facing obstacles. Looks like the honeymoon is over before the marriage was consummated. But that’s what happens when a relationship is based on money, lies and ego. And it doesn’t help that it’s a union between two Old White Guys.

Are Omnicom and Publicis Laying Grounds for a Divorce?

Suddenly, merger obstacles are looming large

By Noreen O’Leary

By raising tax domicile issues related to its megamerger with Publicis Groupe, Omnicom Group has drawn a line in the sand. And in doing so, the American company has only fanned speculation of mounting marriage troubles, with CEO John Wren stressing to investors that there is no “Plan B” should the combined company fail to establish U.K. tax residency and incorporation in the Netherlands.

Wren’s statements to industry analysts last week represented the latest volley between him and Publicis CEO Maurice Lévy, who have been caught up in a game of verbal ping-pong. The remarks put pressure on Lévy in stalled management structure negotiations, sources said, even as Omnicom’s chief sets up investor expectations for a possible dissolution of the deal, which could carry a $500 million termination fee.

“Omnicom looks like it is trying to create a condition to get out of the merger. It’s almost like they’re looking for ideas to create plausible doubt,” said Brian Wieser, a senior analyst at Pivotal Research Group.

If Wren views the tax domicile designation as a deal breaker, Lévy as recently as April 17—in a conference call with industry analysts—focused only on French tax authorities, calling the situation a “normal process.” (In a press release last week, Publicis rushed out a statement acknowledging the more complicated tax issues.)

The backdrop to the tax issue, however, may be more telling. Sources said that Wren and Lévy have been butting heads since late last year over merger decisions. Also, integration meetings have been less frequent recently while holding company execs focus on the tax and Chinese regulatory hurdles.

One indication of the management stalemate is the companies’ inability, after nine months, to file a required S-4 SEC document, identifying company officers and corporate organization. Typically those filings are made within a few months of a merger announcement.

In public, Publicis is quick to refer to the deal as a “merger of equals.” And while the structure of Publicis Omnicom Group is 50/50, ultimately Wren becomes CEO. Nevertheless, Lévy, bristling at perceived lame-duck status, is already suggesting he may stay on for an additional two years, according to sources. New York-based Omnicom CFO Randy Weisenburger, meanwhile, has been widely favored to be named CFO. To some, it feels like déjà vu. When Publicis’ joint venture with what was then True North’s FCB in the 1990s collapsed, blame was laid on a power struggle for control between Lévy and his American counterparts.

Not withstanding the tax and regulatory hurdles, the companies may have another opening for walking away. Publicis, in its 2013 annual report, which came out two weeks ago, said that among the reasons either company could terminate the deal is if it isn’t possible to complete it before July 27, 2014. Publicis, in the same report, indicated that the deadline can be extended to Jan. 27, 2015, although it didn’t specify if that had happened. Publicis didn’t respond to inquiries, and Omnicom declined to comment.

For now, the merger delay has put on hold Omnicom’s stock buyback program, which the company is eager to resume, and reportedly is slowing the highly acquisitive Publicis’ deal making.

The current chilly public posturing between the two companies contrasts starkly with the chummy unveiling last summer of their plan to create the world’s largest marketing communications company, at $23 billion in revenue. Observers also noted how unusual it was for Omnicom general counsel Mike O’Brien to be on the call where Wren raised the tax hurdle. One source echoed a growing sentiment around tax residency: “It’s feeling a little bit like a beard.” The source added, “I think they’re just laying pipe in case they have to blow it up.”

11838: Why The L.A. Clippers Will Lose.

The Los Angeles Clippers will not win an NBA Championship this season. And there’s nothing that talented players like Chris Paul and Blake Griffin—or masterful coach Doc Rivers—can do about it. Alas, the team will face defeat because of owner Donald Sterling. News sources indicate Sterling told his trophy girlfriend that he doesn’t want her bringing Blacks to games.

In 2011, MultiCultClassics identified Offensive Karma as a key driver to a team’s downfall. Offensive Karma is defined by a team’s display of offensiveness in the form of words or actions rooted in bigotry, discrimination and ignorance—which then leads to the team’s ultimate demise in the championship tourney.

So at this point, Sterling has sealed the fate of his team. Now, the Clippers may succeed in defeating the Golden State Warriors; however, they will not end the season with a trophy and rings. Unless the Miami Heat or San Antonio Spurs proceed to hold Klan rallies during halftime shows, trumping Sterling’s ignorance.

11837: Dearth Of Diversity Solutions.

Campaign asked, “Why does ad industry lack minorities?” The answers were contrived, clichéd and culturally clueless—and included the obligatory need to reach minority youth. No, the real need is to reach Old White Guys with hiring authority, as they are the ones perpetuating the dearth of diversity.

Why does ad industry lack minorities?

In sharp contrast to the supercharged pace of change in Britain’s ethnic make-up, progress in boosting the number of staff from ethnic minorities in UK agencies has been snail-like.

Even though those numbers are gradually edging towards the national average of almost 13 per cent, they are well short of the 25 per cent figure in London, which is where most agencies are based.

An IPA study called The New Britain points out that, not only is the UK’s ethnic population now eight million and rising, but it is changing dramatically as Poles, Romanians, Lithuanians, Arabs, Chinese and Filipinos augment a settled Afro-Caribbean and Asian population. The changing nature of multicultural Britain only underlines the need for agencies to mirror it more accurately. Even now, 77 per cent of British Asians surveyed say mainstream advertising has no relevance to them.

The question is whether all the rhetoric about getting more of the most talented young people from ethnic minorities into agencies is being translated into action. Or will these communities—and the increasingly dynamic media that serves them—spurn adland’s messages?

Trade body

Paul Bainsfair, director-general, IPA

“If the industry was being given a school report on its diversity, the verdict would be: ‘OK, but could do better.’ Although the ethnic make-up of agencies isn’t far off the national average, it is nowhere near the average of around 25 per cent in London. That slow progress isn’t entirely the industry’s fault. A lot of parents from ethnic minorities cleave to the traditional professions. Their children are much more likely to be encouraged to become doctors or lawyers rather than try for an advertising career. We have to improve our communication with young people, whatever their backgrounds.”

Agency head

Chris Hirst, chief executive, Grey London

“My agency, along with almost every other in the country, has a relatively narrow representation. That’s changing, but we still have a long way to go before we’re as diverse as the country as a whole. Ethnic minorities are underrepresented in every agency department. The result is that we don’t communicate as effectively with those minorities as we should. One problem is that most people in our industry have never worked anywhere else and we all recruit mostly from other agencies. If we can throw more people together from different backgrounds, we’re bound to get more interesting creative solutions.”

Agency head

Sanjay Shabi, director, CultureCom

“I’ve no doubt that the pace of change in the number of people from ethnic minorities working in agencies will accelerate. Not only is the IPA putting in a significant amount of effort but there are more ethnic role models. Magnus Djaba, Zaid Al-Zaidy and Karen Blackett, the chief executives of Saatchi & Saatchi, McCann London and MediaCom respectively, are among them. They show how those from ethnic minorities can flourish and progress in this business. Also, as ethnic-minority families reach their third or fourth generations, there’s less pressure on young people to go for careers in accountancy or medicine.”

Agency head

Shelina Janmohamed, vice-president, Ogilvy Noor

“The industry is still at an early stage in learning how to communicate with ethnic minorities. It has to recognise that some communities have needs nobody has previously considered. The most important thing is that people within agencies get engaged in the conversation about diversity. That’s what happened when Ogilvy Noor, the world’s first service offering advice on building brands that appeal to Muslim consumers on a global basis, was set up. The real challenge is finding people with the right professional skills. You need to have an innate sense of what’s right and what isn’t. That can be difficult.”

11836: Ronald McDonald 2014.

Mickey D’s has given Ronald McDonald fresh new gear. Shouldn’t the health department mandate he wear a McHairnet while in the restaurant?

11835: Top 50 Diversity Hypocrites…?

DiversityInc published its annual list of the Top 50 Companies for Diversity. As always, there are no advertising agencies or advertising holding companies among the fifty. Yet more disturbing are the regular honorees including Mastercard, Procter & Gamble, Prudential, Johnson & Johnson, AT&T, Marriott, Wells Fargo, Cox, Aetna, General Mills, Target, IBM, Colgate-Palmolive, Kellogg Company, Dell, Coca-Cola, Walt Disney, Kraft, Allstate, Toyota, Verizon, Comcast and JCPenney. That is, major advertisers display a staunch commitment to diversity while co-conspiring with advertising agencies where diversity remains a dream deferred and delegated. It would be most fitting if DiversityInc held a party to salute the winners and hired Pioneer of Diversity John Wren to deliver the keynote address.

11834: Most Beautiful Lupita Nyong’o.

11833: R.I.P. Madison Avenue Project…?

Back in 2009, Cyrus Mehri launched the Madison Avenue Project to expose the lack of diversity in the advertising industry. Roughly five years later, the official website appears to be gone, and there’s only a page dedicated to the effort on the website of Mehri’s law firm. Guess Mehri has raised the white flag.

11832: Catch A Cold—And Die.

An over-the-counter cold and flu medicine ad from India claims to help prevent automobile fatalities? This concept is a car wreck.

From Ads of the World.

11831: Rubin Carter (1937-2014).

From USA TODAY…

Boxer Rubin ‘Hurricane’ Carter dies at 76

The Associated Press

TORONTO (AP) — Rubin “Hurricane” Carter, the boxer whose wrongful murder conviction became an international symbol of racial injustice, died Sunday. He was 76.

He had been stricken with prostate cancer in Toronto, the New Jersey native’s adopted home. John Artis, a longtime friend and caregiver, said Carter died in his sleep.

Carter spent 19 years in prison for three murders at a tavern in Paterson, N.J., in 1966. He was convicted alongside Artis in 1967 and again in a new trial in 1976.

Carter was freed in November 1985 when his convictions were set aside after years of appeals and public advocacy. His ordeal and the alleged racial motivations behind it were publicized in Bob Dylan’s 1975 song “Hurricane,” several books and a 1999 film starring Denzel Washington, who received an Academy Award nomination for playing the boxer turned prisoner.

Carter’s murder convictions abruptly ended the boxing career of a former petty criminal who became an undersized middleweight contender largely on ferocity and punching power.

Although never a world champion, Carter went 27-12-1 with 19 knockouts, memorably stopping two-division champ Emile Griffith in the first round in 1963. He also fought for a middleweight title in December 1964, losing a unanimous decision to Joey Giardello.

In June 1966, three white people were shot by two black men at the Lafayette Bar and Grill in Paterson. Carter and Artis were convicted by an all-white jury largely on the testimony of two thieves who later recanted their stories.

Carter was granted a new trial and briefly freed in 1976, but sent back for nine more years after being convicted in a second trial.

“I wouldn’t give up,” Carter said in an interview on PBS in 2011. “No matter that they sentenced me to three life terms in prison. I wouldn’t give up. Just because a jury of 12 misinformed people … found me guilty did not make me guilty. And because I was not guilty, I refused to act like a guilty person.”

Dylan became aware of Carter’s plight after reading the boxer’s autobiography. He met Carter and co-wrote “Hurricane,” which he performed on his Rolling Thunder Revue tour in 1975.

Muhammad Ali also spoke out on Carter’s behalf, while advertising art director George Lois and other celebrities also worked toward Carter’s release.

With a network of friends and volunteers also advocating for him, Carter eventually won his release from U.S. District Judge H. Lee Sarokin, who wrote that Carter’s prosecution had been “predicated upon an appeal to racism rather than reason, and concealment rather than disclosure.”

Read the full story here.

11830: Madison Avenue Striking Out.

The New York Times reported Major League Baseball released figures indicating only 8.3 percent of players identified themselves as Black. In 2008-2009, Cyrus Mehri and the Madison Avenue Project presented research results showing even worse numbers for Blacks in the advertising industry:

Based on national demographic distribution data, 9.6% of advertising managers and professionals should be African-Americans. The actual percentage in 2008 is 5.3%, representing a difference of 7,200 executive-level jobs.

Gee, it seems like Blacks have a better chance of landing a job in the big leagues versus adland. Madison Avenue continues to strike out.

11829: Mack Trucking.

AgencySpy reported JWT Director of Trendspotting Ann Mack is bailing out of the Commodore’s ship of fools for a position with Facebook. It’s safe to predict the agency will proceed to interview any monkey with a Magic 8-Ball® and the ability to conduct Google searches to replace Mack.

11828: Yay! The Crazy Ones Is Over.

Didn’t bother watching the final episode of CBS series The Crazy Ones. The show presented Simon Roberts’ ex-wife, played by Marilu Henner. Guess Betty White and/or Rue McClanahan weren’t available. Oh, wait a minute. McClanahan’s dead. Wish this program were too.

11827: Most Promises Broken.

Saw this banner ad for the AAF Most Promising Minority Students program and couldn’t help but think of the patronizing hypocrisy inherent in such initiatives. Sure, many potential candidates receive unique opportunities through these endeavors. Yet it’s also true that the supply exceeds the demand; that is, not every minority student applying for a slot lands an internship—or heaven forbid, an actual job.

If the industry is indeed concerned about diversity, let’s spend just one year where every minority student interested in the field is awarded an internship. Hey, let’s go further. For 2014, let’s fill every single intern position with a minority. Is anyone crying reverse discrimination? Um, there have likely been years in the past where every intern in adland was White. So why not turn the tables for a season? After all, the unemployment rate among minority students is disproportionately high. So mandating that internships should only be filled with minorities makes sense from business and social angles.

Perhaps Diversity Champion Sir John Hegarty and Pioneer of Diversity John Wren could join forces to support the worthy cause.

11826: Ripping John Wren’s Raise.

MediaPost News reported Omnicom President and CEO John Wren received a bump of over $3 million in 2013, boosting his income to roughly $18.1 million. Wonder how much of the pay increase served as compensation for being named a Pioneer of Diversity—despite failing to answer New York City Comptroller John Liu’s repeated requests to reveal the company’s hiring trends. Wren also neglected to publish the national report hyping Omnicom’s inclusion initiatives, which was initially promised to be delivered toward the end of last year. Of course, Wren proudly applauds all the contrived, pointless and patronizing examples of delegating diversity that he’s financed over the years. Hell, if Wren received $3 million for every legitimate, measurable diversity-related accomplishment he’s made in his career, well, the total amount wouldn’t exceed his 2013 raise.

Double-Digit Pay Raise For Omnicom’s Wren in 2013

By Steve McClellan

Omnicom CEO John Wren received a double-digit bump in total compensation in 2013 to nearly $18.1 million, up 22% from the $14.8 million he received in 2012, according to company financial documents.

That made Wren the highest compensated executive at the company last year. The biggest piece of that income came in the form of a $10 million cash payment from the company’s Non-equity Incentive Plan Compensation. He also drew a $1 million base salary as well additional performance based remuneration.

Wren’s big raise came as he managed Omnicom to a solid growth year in 2013—the firm posted organic revenue growth of 3.5%, tied with WPP at the top among the major holding companies and above the 3.1% average holding company growth last year according to Pivotal Research analyst Brian Weiser. (MDC, not included in that calculation posted organic growth over 8% albeit from a much lower revenue base).

Company CFO Randall Weisenburger was the second highest compensated executive at Omnicom in 2013 with total remuneration of just under $12 million, a 13% increase from the $10.6 million he earned in 2012.

Rounding out the top-5 highest compensated executives at the company last year were SVP Finance and Controller Philip Angelastro ($2.4 million); Treasurer Dennis Hewitt ($1.3 million), and General Counsel Michael O’Brien ($2 million).

Omnicom is the first of the major ad holding companies to report executive compensation for its top managers last year, although WPP reported last month that CEO Martin Sorrell received a roughly $38 million payout in early 2014 as part of long-term incentive compensation program.

Executive compensation has been a sore spot for many investors in recent years. Two years ago shareholders voted against WPP’s compensation package and as a result Sorrell agreed to a reduced salary, smaller contributions to his pension and more restricted opportunities under its long- and short-term incentive compensation programs. Most of the publicly traded holding companies this year will allow investors to vote on an advisory basis at annual meetings for or against their companies’ pay programs.

Omnicom also reported that it will hold its annual meeting this year on May 20th at the offices of its PR subsidiary FleishmanHillard, in Washington, D.C. With the company still awaiting regulatory approval for its proposed merger with Publicis Groupe, it’s not likely shareholders will be asked to vote on the merger at that meeting. The companies now hope to complete the merger sometime in the third quarter.

Omnicom has put up for re-election at its meeting its existing slate of members of its board of directors. Bruce Crawford, 85, is Chairman of the board.

There are no resolutions from shareholders on this year’s voting ballot. For the last two years, the Controller of the City of New York John Liu has submitted a proposal demanding that the company make public its filings to the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission. It was voted down both years. But Liu has asked Omnicom and Publicis to file data on the gender and ethnic make-up of their workforces in proxy materials distributed to shareholders before they vote on the merger.

11825: Crazy Dork & Mindy.

As predicted, CBS series The Crazy Ones persuaded Pam Dawber to embarrass herself on the pathetic program. There’s something about this scenario that accurately reflects the real advertising industry; that is, the prevalence of irrelevant people (e.g., Dawber and Robin Williams) seeking to regain or prove their relevance in pitiful fashion. It’s like watching a washed-out athlete well beyond his/her prime still struggling to stay in the game. The Crazy Ones is AMC series The Pitch, performed by C-grade celebrities. Stop the sadness.

11824: Mickey D’s Cannes Honor.

The New York Times reported the following:

McDonald’s was chosen to receive the 2014 Creative Marketer of the Year Award at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, to be held in Cannes, France, from June 15 through June 21; the award is to be presented on June 21.

Um, not lovin’ that announcement.

Seriously, what has Mickey D’s produced in the last year that would warrant such an honor? Additionally, 2013 and 2014 sales have barely been positive. Finally, Mickey D’s continues to display cultural cluelessness via its segregated marketing. McDonald’s as a corporation displays a certain dedication to diversity, yet it perpetuates hypocrisy by partnering with White agencies while throwing McCrumbs to minority shops. In short, the fast feeder creates mediocre advertising, fails to generate significant sales bumps and maintains the racist status quo in our industry—but ultimately earns the 2014 Creative Marketer of the Year Award at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity. Call it a Golden Arches Lion. Or maybe Golden Arches Lyin’ would be more appropriate.

11823: Big Mama’s Subway.

From The New York Daily News…

California woman sues Subway after she finds ‘Big Mama’ written on her flatbread pizza order

Allison Brown said she was mortified when she pulled her order out of her bag and saw the words ‘Big Mama’ scrawled on her box in black marker. Brown and her lawyer, Daniel Gilleon, plan to sue for sensitivity training to be part of Subway’s franchise agreements.

By Nancy Dillon

A California woman says a Subway restaurant worker was a flat-out bully when he wrote a tasteless fat jab on her flatbread pizza order, reducing her to tears.

She now plans to file a lawsuit demanding that sensitivity training be a part of the chain’s franchise agreements, she and her lawyer told the Daily News Friday.

Allison Brown said she was mortified when she pulled her order out of her bag on March 27 and saw the words “Big Mama” scrawled on her box in black marker.

“I just broke down crying. I couldn’t eat it. I kept thinking, ‘Big Mama’ doesn’t need to eat. It started really messing with me. I started thinking, ‘Maybe I need surgery. Do I really look that bad? What’s wrong with me?’”

Brown, a 45-year-old nursing assistant from Murrieta, Calif., said she immediately contacted the shop’s owner and was told the employee admitted writing the cruel remark, but countered that he only wrote it on one of her boxes, not all the items in her family’s order.

“The owner said the employee didn’t know better, that he just didn’t get it,” Brown told The News. “He begged me not to go to the media, so I tried to work with him, but then nobody was calling me back. It’s not right. This really hurt me.”

Brown said she called Subway’s corporate office the next day and cried through a message that was never returned. She felt the issue was getting swept under the mat, she said.

Eventually she had a lawyer send a letter demanding sensitivity training, not money. She turned down an offer of $5,000 for a confidentiality agreement and now plans to file a lawsuit under California’s unfair business practices law, her lawyer Daniel Gilleon told The News.

“This isn’t about money,” she said Friday. “This breaks my heart. Here Subway promotes itself as a place for people who need help eating better, then this happens. What if the wrong person got a box like mine? What if they saw that and tried to commit suicide?”

Gilleon said a letter sent by Subway’s corporate office this week refused to take any responsibility for the issue. He now plans to file the lawsuit in the next few weeks, he said.

“We’re going to do it for sure, unless they comply with our demand,” Gileon said, explaining that he took Brown’s case pro bono.

“They need to make sure all employees take training. And it’s something they should have done already. It should be in their franchise agreements,” he said. “If they can dictate how thinly the onions on the sandwiches are sliced, they can and should do this.”

In a statement to local ABC station 10News, restaurant owner Sanjiv Mehta said he tried to do what was right.

“As a small business owner, I do not tolerate discrimination of any kind. When I learned of this incident I immediately investigated and disciplined the employee involved. I also made contact with the customer in an effort to resolve this matter,” he told the station.

“Both the Subway franchisor and local franchisee have a zero tolerance for discrimination of any kind. The franchisee took immediate action to investigate and terminated the employee involved,” Kevin Kane, a public relations manager for Subway, said in an email to The News. “All Subway restaurants are individually owned and operated and matters involving restaurant employees are handled on the local level.”

“I’m never going to eat at another Subway again,” Brown vowed Friday. “They don’t deserve my money.”

11822: Miraculously Moronic.

It’s a miracle the idiots responsible for this ad are employed.

11821: Red Lobster In The Red.

Adweek reported Red Lobster’s creative business is up for review. First of all, “Red Lobster” and “creative” should never appear together in the same sentence—unless it’s to state that the seafood chain utterly lacks creativity. Secondly, it’s a safe bet that the winning agency will be Whiter than whitefish.

Red Lobster Reviews Its Creative Business

Annual media spending exceeds $156 million

By Noreen O'Leary

Red Lobster has launched a review of its creative business, which Grey has handled since 2010.

The restaurant chain's media spending exceeded $156 million last year, down slightly from about $160 million in 2012 according to Kantar Media.

Red Lobster owner Darden Restaurants, under scrutiny by activist shareholders, has said it is considering a spinoff or sale of the struggling seafood chain. A rep at Red Lobster confirmed the creative review and explained: "The search is happening because of Red Lobster’s upcoming separation from Darden."

Last month as the Orlando company reported third quarter earnings, it said same-restaurant sales at Red Lobster declined 8.8 percent from the year-earlier period. Late last year Darden CEO Clarence Otis told investors the company will continue to cut marketing costs because of those declining sales.

Pile + Co. is managing the agency search process, as it did four years ago when the New York office of Grey won the account from The Richards Group, then the incumbent of six years.

Grey, which launched the tagline, “Sea Food Differently,” is not defending, according to sources. The WPP Group agency also handles lead creative responsibilities for two other Darden restaurants: The Olive Garden and LongHorn Steakhouse.

Grey declined to comment, referring calls to the Orlando-based chain, which could not immediately be reached.

11820: Dove’s Real Bullshit.

From Jezebel…

Dove’s Latest Commercial Is Their Most Bullshit Yet

By Kate Dries

Dove has moved their marketing strategy away from merely using “Real Women” as models and towards manipulating “Real Women” as part of totally unscientific experiments that prove nothing. The latest iteration of this project is Dove Patches, a patch for your arm full of a magic substance that makes you feel more beautiful.

What brilliant former psychology major comes up with these ideas? At the start of the commercial, we meet several unassuming women who have been brought to meet with Dr. Ann Kearney-Cooke, who is a real doctor at The Cincinnati Psychotherapy Institute specializing in eating disorders and body image issues. She “prescribes” the women RB-X, a patch that has an unidentified substance in it. The women are supposed to wear it and report back about how it makes them feel about themselves. Miraculously, they feel better about how they look just from wearing it. So they’re shocked when they head back to the doctor and find out that there’s…

…in it. CUE TEARS. This is not a joke. There are tears.

Maybe those tears are because these women have just been duped into thinking there’s something they can take to make them feel beautiful that isn’t a patch version of an anti-depressant. Maybe it’s because they’ve just realized that they’ve allowed themselves to be filmed for a national ad campaign. I don’t know their lives. And neither does Dove! So it’d be nice if they stopped assuming that everyone’s version of hating what they look like or not feeling self-confident involves tears and can be fixed with a little Dove Reality Check™ or whatever they’re calling it this week.

“We have heard from thousands of women about how their complicated relationship with beauty affects their overall confidence and happiness,” Jennifer Bremner, brand building director of skin cleansing for Dove told Mashable. “By illustrating through the Dove: Patches film that a positive state of mind and openness can help them feel more beautiful, we hope to inspire all women and help change the way they see themselves.”

It’s definitely true that positive thinking works miracles. But that’s not what this campaign is really about; it’s about teaching women that Dove knows better. Dove is smarter. You should buy Dove because they’re on your side and they can teach you things. In a post I did yesterday querying which ads convinced people to buy a product they might not have before, several women admitted that the original Dove Real Beauty got them on the Dove bandwagon, so the brand’s decision to keep building on that goodwill was obviously a smart one. With Real Beauty and subsequent campaigns, Unilever has basically turned Dove into a brand that’s more associated with empowerment than its own products. That in itself is far more impressive than the fake magic properties of RB-X, which again, is not for sale — though Dove has a bevy of other products for you to choose from instead.

11819: News In Black & White.

At the grio, a story titled, “Skin-bleaching singer Dencia slams Lupita Nyong’o for signing deal with Lancome,” appeared alongside an ad for Meladerm.

11818: Sir John Hegarty, Bullshit Artist.

Adweek spotlighted AAF Hall of Fame inductee Sir John Hegarty, listing his five most provocative thoughts on creativity. Wonder if the old man has even five clichéd thoughts on diversity. If so, he’s welcome to drop them off in the comments section here.

John Hegarty’s 5 Most Provocative Thoughts About Creativity

‘Bollocks to failure,’ says the BBH co-founder

By Andrew McMains

John Hegarty is an advertising icon, as co-founder and creative leader of Bartle Bogle Hegarty. And with that comes many honors, like getting inducted into the American Advertising Federation Hall of Fame. That happens on Monday night.

Also, Hegarty has written a new book about—what else?—creativity. “Hegarty on Creativity. There Are No Rules” is blissfully concise and even fits into your coat pocket. As an Adweek public service, here are Sir John’s five most provocative thoughts in the book:

1. Collaboration is great for sex, not so much for creativity. In short, groupthink breeds blandness.

2. Bollocks to failure. Yes, it happens, but don’t dwell on it. Move on.

3. Nothing is original, so strive for something fresh instead. After all, it’s how others respond to your ideas that counts most.

4. Take your headphones off. Being creative means being connected to the world around you.

5. And finally, like Paul McCartney, everybody needs a Lennon—a partner who can challenge your thinking, and in the process, produce better art.

11817: Jay-Z’s A Five Percenter…?

From The New York Post…

Jay-Z’s bling from ‘whites are devils’ group

By Gary Buiso

Black people are the fathers and mothers of civilization, white men are the devil, the Christian god is nothing more than a ghost and only a small percentage of people understand the world.

These are just some of the beliefs behind the bling — the gaudy Five Percent Nation medallions worn by Jay Z and Carmelo Anthony.

Last week, all eyes at the Barclays Center weren’t on Jay Z’s better half, Beyoncé — but on the coaster-size golden pendant swinging from the rapper’s neck as the couple sat courtside. Asked once if the group’s symbol — an eight-point star with the number 7 in the middle — held any meaning to him, the rapper shrugged, “A little bit.”

So what exactly do Five Percenters believe?

“The rationale is that the black man is God and created the universe, and is physically stronger and intellectually stronger and more righteous naturally,” says Michael Muhammad Knight, an author of two books on the radical group.

“Whiteness is weak and wicked and inferior — basically just an errant child who needs to be corrected.”

The group was founded in 1964 in Harlem by Clarence Smith, who later changed his name to Allah, a former student of Malcolm X who disagreed with the Nation of Islam over the nature of God.

Smith rejected the notion of a supernatural deity and instead believed that all black men had God in them and that black women were “earths” who took on a complementary yet subordinate role to their gods.

The idea is empowering, Knight says.

“Anytime someone is saying you have to accept your conditions of oppression and slavery and pray to an unseen god — that kind of god is just being used to keep people down and to keep people from looking to themselves as a solution to their problems,” he notes. “If there is a problem, no one will fix it for you, except yourself.”

Five Percenters don’t consider themselves Muslim, but their name comes from the Nation of Islam’s belief that 5 percent of humanity are “poor righteous teachers” who exist to enlighten the masses about the truth of existence.

Members will sometimes refer to themselves as “scientists” to drive home the search for truth. And they face a tall task, because under their belief system, 10 percent of the world’s population controls the other 85 percent by spreading the belief in a “mystery God.”

To show followers the way, members must learn the Supreme Mathematics and Supreme Alphabet — powerful tools to decipher the meaning of the universe. In both, each letter and number represents a concept, for example, 1 is knowledge, 2 is wisdom, while A is Allah and B is be, or born. The number 7 on Jay Z’s pendant stands for God.

Caucasians, meanwhile, don’t enjoy an exalted status in the narrative of the Five Percenters.

“The first lesson I learned from the Five Percent was simple: F–k white people. Seriously. White people are devils,” Knight, 36, who is white and converted to ¬Islam as a teenager, once wrote.

He insisted the movement has been welcoming and that he views the controversial sentiment as a statement about power rather than biology.

“For me, it is about who is marked as privileged in the power relations of this society,” he says.

Some followers take exception to those who transform their flag into a fashion accessory.

“Jay Z is not an active member — no one has vouched for him,” Saladin Allah, a representative of the group’s upstate region, told The Post. “It was always understood that you don’t wear the regalia if you don’t totally subscribe to the life.”

11816: Translation Gobbledygook.

AgencySpy reported Translation is shuttering its Chicago office. Founder and CEO Steve Stoute wrote:

“As an agency our mission has always been to provide exceptional service to our clients, and to bring purpose and precision to our creative output. With the recent additions of President Nils Peyron and CCO John Norman in New York, and always with an eye toward the long-term growth of our organization, we have made the decision to bring our team together in New York and close Translation’s Chicago office. This was a hard choice for all of us, but one that will strengthen the agency immediately and for years to come.”

Is Stoute evolving into a bona fide adman? To construct a sentence that starts with “long-term growth” and ends with the announcement of an office closure is about as corporate as it gets. And adding that the move “will strengthen the agency immediately” sorta indicates there are serious financial problems at the shop—plus, it delivers a slap in the face to the Chicago staffers now seeking employment. Wonder if the severance packages included Jay-Z music collections.

11815: Dearth Of Sheroes…?

Campaign published a perspective from JWT London Chief Strategy Officer Tracey Follows, who wonders if a dearth of female superheroes might explain the lack of female leaders in the workplace. Holy crock of shit!

Where are the female superheroes?

Tracey Follows explains why a dearth of driven, daredevil role models on our screens (leather-clad or otherwise) are holding back women in the workplace.

There was an article in Forbes last month questioning why Marvel was not considering a Black Widow standalone movie. For those who are not up on their comic-book heroes, the new Captain America movie features Scarlett Johansson (pictured) as the Black Widow female superhero – a character who has already appeared in Iron Man 2 and Avengers Assemble. This news prompted the question to be asked on Twitter: when would a standalone Black Widow film (with Johansson) be in the works? Not any day soon, came the replies from those in the know.

It seems that, while the studios are happy to give prominence on the billboard and in the trailer to Black Widow, a film in which she is centre stage was thought to be pos¬sible but basically less compelling. Time will tell, but it reminded me of the female action superheroes that I looked up to as a child in the 70s: Wonder Woman, the Bionic Woman, even Charlie’s Angels. Where have they all gone?

It is actually an important question because we need young girls to grow up in the presence of female characters that are active risk-takers: female icons who are clearly seen to take on their enemies, their problems and even their ambitions, and risk it all in order to win.

There is currently a gap between how young men and young women view risk-taking, particularly in their careers, and that very much applies in the creative and media industries, where there is so much competition and sometimes little structured guidance about how to progress and succeed.

At JWT, we last month surveyed 280 UK professional and white-collar workers aged 18-34 in an attempt to uncover the reasons why. Looking at the answers from women, compared with those from men, gave us some insight and provided some thought-provoking discussion.

While both men and women rate themselves roughly equal on a risk-taking scale in general, women say they are most likely to take risks in the following areas: expressing their views and opinions; where they travel; and what they wear. Men, on the other hand, say they are most likely to take risks in these areas: their career; expressing their views and opinions; and their leisure pursuits. Leaving one’s interpretation of “leisure pursuits” aside (ahem), this clearly shows that men are more willing than women to be risk-taking in their career.

Digging a little deeper into the data, we found other differences, though. Where women differ is thinking that high risk is “challenging the opinion of a senior colleague or client” and “making decisions without sign-off from your boss”. Unlike women, men think of high-risk career activity as “making a hire on gut instinct”. This seems to indicate that, when women are thinking about taking a risk, they are viewing it in the context of how they would be perceived by an authority figure. Whereas, the risk-taking that men are thinking about is in the context of how well they are exercising their own authority.

Duberley Media’s Linda Duberley, a media training expert, explained that, while she works increasingly with men and women on media presentation skills, the women seem more worried about what others will think. “Men have little difficulty in accepting this and put themselves forward for training and coaching. Women find this more difficult because many of them think they will be seen as hogging the limelight,” she said.

It may be that more women shy away from “hogging the limelight” because they are less confident in their sense of authority and worry about what their boss will think. But speaking out on company policy or industry issues is part of contributing to and enriching the debate.

Another interesting finding from our survey came from the question about how they would categorise or measure recognition as a result of taking a risk. The top answer for women, at 78 per cent, was a bonus.

The top answer for men, at 71 per cent, was a pay rise. Again, this indicates that women tended to see risk-taking as something outside the norm. Usually something that is rewarded by a bonus is a mark of going beyond business as usual. Men, however, seem to see recognition coming in the form of a pay rise, indicating that they may see risk-taking as part of their job.

We need more female superheroes on our screens taking risks, so that we can produce more female heroes in the real world who will do the same. We need fantastic female superheroes who can not only imagine taking huge risks and putting themselves in “harm’s way”, but who actually do and live to tell the tale. Female heroes who risk it all with only their superpowers to rely on – and who, against all the odds, succeed in their quests. Women who reap the personal rewards and the public recognition, and themselves become superheroes for a whole new generation.

Tracey Follows is the chief strategy officer at JWT London and chair of Wacl Gather. “She who dares wins – exploring risk and reward in business and beyond” is the theme of Gather, the training day organised by Wacl and held at King’s Place, London, on 7 May.

11814: The Sex Crazy Ones.

In the latest episode of CBS series The Crazy Ones, Sydney Roberts hired a woman of color—Tiya Sircar as Allie—to be her personal assistant. Of course, Allie served as fresh meat for the White male/sexual predators in the agency. Diversity is dandy for deviants.

11813: Redskins’ Patronizing Pledge.

From The New York Times…

The Price of a Slur

By David Treuer

MINNEAPOLIS — THE idea of the “Indian giver” has always been deeply ironic, since it’s Indians who have been on the receiving end of some very bad gifts indeed. Last week’s offering from Daniel Snyder, the owner of the Washington Redskins, was only the latest.

On March 24, Mr. Snyder announced the creation of the Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation, a charitable organization with the stated mission “to provide meaningful and measurable resources that provide genuine opportunities for Tribal communities.” To date, the foundation has distributed 3,000 winter coats, shoes to basketball-playing boys and girls, and a backhoe to the Omaha tribe in Nebraska.

The unstated mission of the Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation is clear: In the face of growing criticism over the team’s toxic name and mascot imagery, the aim is to buy enough good will so the name doesn’t seem so bad, and if some American Indians — in the racial logic of so-called post-racial America, “some” can stand in for “all” — accept Mr. Snyder’s charity, then protest will look like hypocrisy.

In his news release and public statements, Mr. Snyder refers to “our shared Washington Redskins” heritage. To be clear: There is no “our” that includes Mr. Snyder. And there is no “Redskins” that includes us. There has been a sustained effort for decades by activists to change the name of this team and others. Members of my tribe, the Ojibwe, have been a big part of such efforts.

But the franchise, valued at $1.7 billion, has a long history of sacrificing decency at the altar of commerce: George Preston Marshall refused to integrate the team until 1962 (the rest of the N.F.L. began doing so in 1946). When the government forced the team to include black players, fans protested outside carrying signs saying “Keep Redskins White!” At stake back then was money (Marshall was afraid that he’d lose fans if African-Americans were on the roster). Money is similarly at stake now. According to Forbes, the Redskins are the eighth most valuable sports franchise in the world. Just consider the merchandise alone.

Seldom has the entwined nature of ethics and money and influence been revealed as so unavoidably intestinal in its smell and purpose: to consume the material, to nourish the host and to expel the waste. American Indians — who do not see or refer to ourselves as “redskins” and who take great exception to the slur — are that waste.

This isn’t merely symbolic. In 1863, the Cheyenne chief Black Kettle traveled to Washington to protest the government’s treatment of his people. Instead of redress, he received a presidential medal presented by President Lincoln. He was wearing the same medal when he was gunned down by the United States Cavalry at Sand Creek in 1868.

Census data shows that four out of the five poorest United States counties are found within the borders of Indian reservations. So, sure, the gifts of a backhoe and coats are much needed and much appreciated. But gift-giving to Indians rather than systemic change has been an all-too-familiar practice over the centuries, and whether the gifts are beads, backhoes or presidential medals, we know just how much they’re really worth.

Mr. Snyder has been quick to point out that he has the support of a handful of those he calls “tribal leaders,” such as the Lower Brule Sioux tribe vice chairman, Boyd Gourneau, and the Pueblo of Zuni governor, Arlen Quetawki, both quoted in the news release.

“Tribal officials” might be a better term here than “tribal leaders” because although they are elected, it is in no way clear that they actually represent the sentiments of their constituents any more than John Boehner represents the sentiments of most Americans. These officials’ public-relations-ready comments — “I appreciate your sincerity” and “the entire tribe is so appreciative” — are the diplomatic words of dignitaries, nothing more. It would be a mistake to assume that those words imply democratic consent.

The pity that Mr. Snyder seems to feel for Indians and our plight is intimately connected with age-old ideas and images — strength, bravery, a warrior spirit, noble savagery — all of which are conjured by the cartoonish use of Indian names and mascots. We are pitied and feared as Macbeth and Caesar and Achilles are pitied and feared: great but for a fatal flaw (a heel, an ego, ambition). Our tragic flaw, however, is having been subjected to hundreds of years of warfare, colonialism, racism and exclusion.

To pay tribute only to brave warriors and pitiful reservations is to engage in a fantasy that erases the lives of real Indians for whom the racial slur “redskins” is intolerable.

The name will change. Either the N.F.L. will make Mr. Snyder change the name, or we will. But in trying to buy off that inevitable end, Mr. Snyder has made a terrible mistake in confusing charity with donations. Charity, or caritas, can be defined as an act of generous love. Donations, on the other hand, are material objects for which the owner has no real need and can part with easily and painlessly. What Mr. Snyder has created is not a charity. It is a donation depot.

If Mr. Snyder’s hope is that by offering his donations and having them be accepted he has forged a kind of treaty with American Indian tribes — the exchange of coats for the return of good will — he can be sure this is a treaty Indians will break.

David Treuer is an Ojibwe from the Leech Lake Reservation in Minnesota and the author of “Rez Life: An Indian’s Journey Through the Land of His People.”

11812: Candidly Clichéd Conversing.

Adweek published a lengthy piece titled: A Candid Conversation With 5 Women Leaders of Advertising and Media. The points covered included the alleged dearth of dames in the industry. Sorry, this topic is less than 3 percent interesting.

11811: Hairy Army Regulations.

From USA TODAY…

Black female troops say grooming rule ‘racially biased’

By Michelle Tan, Army Times

WASHINGTON — Thousands of soldiers and others have signed a White House petition calling for the president to order the Army to reconsider just-released appearance and grooming regulations they contend are “racially biased” against black women.

The update to the Army regulation was published Monday, and among the rules are clarifications for Army-appropriate hairstyles. For example, the Army does not allow twists or multiple braids that are bigger than a quarter of an inch in diameter. The reg also bans dreadlocks of any style, and cornrows must be uniform and no bigger than a quarter of an inch.

Twists and dreadlocks have been prohibited since 2005, but the regulation at the time did not clearly define the specific hairstyles, Army spokesman Paul Prince said.

The new rule clearly defines the different hairstyles and gives soldiers specific guidance on what’s allowed, he said. Leadership training released in mid-March, published before the reg was official, includes photos of a number of unauthorized hairstyles, several of which are popular among black women.

“I’ve been in the military six years, I’ve had my hair natural four years, and it’s never been out of regulation. It’s never interfered with my head gear,” said Sgt. Jasmine Jacobs, of the Georgia National Guard, who wears her hair in two twists.

Jacobs, who started the White House petition, said she’s “kind of at a loss now with what to do with my hair.”

The Army defines “twists” as two distinct strands of hair twisted around one another to create a rope-like appearance.

Jacobs said twists are the go-to style for black female soldiers going to the field because it “makes it easy to take care of in the field,” she said.

Her hair is naturally thick and curly, making it impossible to pull into a bun, Jacobs said.

“Most black women, their hair doesn’t grow straight down, it grows out,” she said. “I’m disappointed to see the Army, rather than inform themselves on how black people wear their hair, they’ve white-washed it all.”

In the White House petition, Jacobs calls on the Army to reconsider changes to the regulation.

“Females with natural hair take strides to style their natural hair in a professional manner when necessary; however, changes to AR 670-1 offer little to no options for females with natural hair,” she said in her petition.

The changes are “racially biased, and the lack of regard for ethnic hair is apparent,” she further states.

Staff Sgt. Mary Johnson voiced similar concerns on Sgt. Maj. of the Army Ray Chandler’s Facebook page.

“As far as the twists, that really limits females with curly/kinky hair,” she said. “I can’t simply pull my hair back due to excessive knotting. I proudly wear twists in a professional manner every day and only took them down on the weekends. It makes it very difficult for ethnic females.”

Jacobs said she’ll likely wear a wig to her battle assembly because chemically relaxing her hair or putting it up in corn rows is damaging to her hair.

“I talked to my first sergeant, and he said we would (face non-judicial punishment) if we’re out of reg,” she said. “So I either get a wig or be NJPed, all because of the way my hair grows naturally.”

Jacobs said that before these clarifications, black female soldiers had more hairstyle options while maintaining a professional appearance.

“We feel let down,” Jacobs said. “I think, at the end of the day, a lot of people don’t understand the complexities of natural hair. A lot of people, instead of educating themselves, they think dreadlocks and they think Bob Marley, or they see women with really big Afros and they think that’s the only thing we can do with our hair.”

Prince said hair grooming standards are “necessary to maintain uniformity within a military population.”

“Many hairstyles are acceptable, as long as they are neat and conservative,” he said. “In addition, headgear is expected to fit snugly and comfortably, without bulging or distortion from the intended shape of the headgear and without excessive gaps. Unfortunately, some hairstyles do not meet this standard or others listed in AR 670-1.”