upvote

points

by Forgeties7912 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby Intermernet11 hours ago|
next
[-]
>they tend to air on the side of caution

Completely off topic, and for future reference, it's "err" not "air".

Completely fine mistake, stupid homophones and all. Just thought you'd like to know.

Also, these things happen to me all the time if I use voice dictation. I don't trust it because of edge cases like this.

reply
upvoteby Forgeties7910 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Voice to text, should’ve proofread better
reply
upvoteby Intermernet3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Probably, but I didn't dictate that comment.
reply
upvoteby JumpCrisscross10 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> they get it wrong but they tend to air on the side of caution

Then this guy [1] walks into the room and says no, be bold, who could possibly object to my life's work, and he gets his way because he's signing the cheque.

[1] https://x.com/pavandavuluri/status/1987942909635854336

reply
upvoteby staticassertion11 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Marketing teams are constantly out of touch with the message they want to convey vs the message that gets conveyed. The creative team is usually not even talking to the other teams that would drive decisions like this - they almost exclusively are an isolated team (purposefully, like how engineers are often isolated from customers) that talks to a separate marketing team that then manages things like legal/compliance, which then bubbles up to other orgs etc.

The people creating ads are just organizationally isolated in most cases.

reply
upvoteby Forgeties7910 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I worked in that world for a solid decade as a “creative” (video production) and when it comes to the big dogs, that is absolutely not true. They are incredibly top down and have to review everything. We have to pitch our ideas even when we’re in the door. They have strict brand bibles we have to adhere to. Ones that gave us free rein were the exception, not the rule.

Sometimes it was for no other reason than a bunch of people in house felt they needed to justify their existence, but regardless that’s how it was 90% of the time.

reply
upvoteby staticassertion8 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I feel like what you're saying is compatible. I'm not suggesting that things aren't top down or that you wouldn't have brand guidelines, that's actually exactly what I'm suggesting. I just mean that there is organizational isolation between creative teams and other teams, just as there is organizational isolation between engineering and other teams.

So it is unsurprising to me that a creative team might have been given brand guidelines and a goal, like "hey we want to sell this, we want people happy with this" (much more concretely, obviously) and that could lead to this sort of ad, and I think that's probably more plausible than the team going "we're going to psyop everyone into surveillance statehood".

reply
upvoteby esafak5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Are any of these brand bibles public?
reply
upvoteby throwawayqqq1111 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> on the side of caution which means the vast majority of the time they avoid situations like this

They'll avoid negative perception because this is their job, the message is still arbitrary.

reply
upvoteby tw0411 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> I have worked with many and they are incredibly sensitive to negative feelings/reactions.

And yet there are countless examples that show the exact opposite.

This made it through one of the largest marketing budgets in the world…

https://youtu.be/uwvAgDCOdU4

reply
upvoteby Forgeties7910 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
All of y'all keep saying variations of this yet the whole point is it’s the exception to the rule. The vast majority of ads aren’t controversial. That’s why it’s such a big deal when one is. It’s newsworthy and everyone has an opinion on that one ad.
reply