[jmtame]

i major in advertising at the university which started the first advertising department of any ;)

much of what he's saying is taught in the books--the emphasis on making a connection. the ironic thing is that 99% of all ads and marketing suck, so you interpret that as a flaw in advertising schools. it's the classic debate of "suits vs poets." suits just want to do something to get your attention, they don't care if it's obtrusive. poets want to go crazy, but stay relevant and humorous. not like a joke, which gets old. but they want you to look at their ad or campaign and ask "how did they do that" or laugh and want to see it again. part of marketing is about making a connection with the person on the other end. it's ironic that the more you try and "define" these silly things, like advertising, the less personable they become. it's like the academy is trying to create some science around what started and flourished as an art form.

there are scum everywhere, especially in advertising. but the top schools don't teach you the crap tactics that car salesmen use. it's just like any profession, you have good ones and bad ones. but yeah, it makes you want to say go kill yourself to the people who put zero effort into the whole thing. it becomes too much about sales and numbers for some people, and that becomes obtrusive and annoying. advertisers almost always get flack because they're seen as carrying out the corporate mission of increasing profits further. but believe me when saying that most companies' best advertising and marketing campaigns were created on the brink of product destruction, not as an attempt to generate enormous masses of profit.