
Getting to the point of saying that advertising today needs to be either really entertaining or really useful was a good thing. But this philosophy feels like it's starting to become unfocused.
As things can tend to do.
It's not that a brand is either entertaining or useful. (If a product like soda can be both than anyone can be both.)
And it's certainly not to choose sides that being useful is somehow better than being entertaining.
It's simply that evaluating what's entertaining and what's useful should guide the choices we make when developing creative work and ideas. Concepts should run through these two screens.
Is this idea really entertaining? Does it emotionally connect? Does it move the audience?
Or.
Is this idea really useful? Does it help the audience solve a problem? Does it provide value?
We'll take either. We'll take both. It's not one or the other. It's whatever fits with the strategy.
I like the way Mike talked about this, about three-quarters in, a little while ago.