What great horn players can teach you about advertising

"Maceo! Blow your horn!"

Repetition has no greater master than Maceo Parker - the legendary sax player whose horn lines helped make James Brown the "Godfather of Soul". Nobody made points more simply and more often than Maceo. And that's the essence of advertising.

Write a funky line. Repeat. Repeat again. Repeat once more. And again.

Good advertising is heavy on the repetition. The truly gifted - like Maceo - find ways to make the point fun; the kind of point you wanna hear over and over again. Bud Light's got it. Geico's got it. Apple's got it.

Write a funky line. Repeat. Repeat again. Repeat once more. And again.

Trane - Explore your possibilities

Have you ever listened to John Coltrane's "My Favorite Things"? Apart from the 13+ minute treatment of the title tune, it is an album of experimentation. As is "A Love Supreme". As is "Giant Steps".

Further experimentation - he switched from clarinet, to alto sax, to soprano sax. He played with Miles, Monk and Ellington. His spiritual life was a mixture of predominant and not-so-predominant beliefs.

Yet the Coltrane sound was distinctive. It was the essence of his character. While it embraced all forms, it engaged each form in its own way.

13+ minutes of "My Favorite Things" is not an accident. It's a fairly straightforward tune from a very straightforward musical. Trane isn't just playing a long version of the tune. He's pushing its limits. He's testing its boundaries.

Now how about you? Have you explored your parameters like Trane?

The tune of your advertising can stand it, if you stay true to your brand's character. Think VW. The same folks who had the nerve to take out full page ads in the 60's jokingly calling their car a "Lemon", recently sold their cars on safety, then 6 months later on fun (with a little help from Wilco's "Sky Blue Sky"). Different selling points? Of course. But does it feel out of character? No. They've tested their advertising's limits and found it freeing. And it can be for you, too.

Next time you look at a blank script, think of Trane. Then, test your boundaries.

Miles and Evolution

A related lesson comes from Trane's contemporary and early partner, the legendary Miles Davis. (I had a music teacher tell me once that Jazz History can be traced through the work of five people - two of whom are Trane and Miles. It's not a coincidence that they both have lessons to impart.)

While Trane tested the internal boundaries of a piece, Miles tested the boundaries of new forms altogether. Miles led the transition of Jazz from BeBop to Cool to Fusion. He was the major proponent of each form, and without him, it's doubtful the forms would have taken real hold. His willingness to embrace new forms kept him relevant as most of his contemporaries faded away or died.

Does that sound at all like someone that you can learn from?

Miles' example is one of courage. Like the freedom offered by Trane's boundary-testing, Miles offers you hope. You can try something you never have, and if you've got a strong enough character, it'll work.

So, if you're shying away from new forms of advertising, why are you? Is there a valid business reason like poor return? That's good management. If it's because you're not quite sure how, that's not fine. Better to learn than to avoid.

If you're not sure how, take another lesson from Miles - pair up with someone who does. Bill Evans worked with Miles to initiate the Cool movement. Herbie Hancock was there with Miles in the move to Fusion. Who do you know who knows what you don't? Or, who do you know who's willing to take the risk with you? Leverage that and you might be surprised by the results.

The "Amen Break" and Creative Work

PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO FIRST!

(Sorry, this entry is entirely based on the video above. And, YES, I'm aware the video is 17+ minutes in length. Trust me, it's worth the time.)

This interesting treatment on a popular (almost ubiquitous) drum break has some interesting implications for what we do.

First, I must agree with the premise that improvement of any kind in society - be it artistic or scientific - is ultimately the result of improving upon previously available forms. The wheel goes on to be a rubber tire, and it gets there in increments. The exciting variable in the equation is where it will go next.

In similar fashion, creatives inspire one another and ultimately build on forms seen previously employed by someone else. As one animator learns how to pull off an interesting trick in After Effects or Maya, others notice, study what was done, recreate it, and then go on to add their own twist to it. And then the cycle begins anew.

I can't begin to count the spots that I've done that were touched off because of what I saw someone else do. I have sampled from other writers and producers. Basic premises. Lines. Visuals. I've done it all, adding, along the way, my own twist to match the local flavors and tastes of my particular product.

This admission should come as no surprise or shock. We all do it. It's the reason "State of Our Art" and "Best of Cable" are 2 of the best-attended sessions at Promax every year - we're looking for our next "sample".

And what about the drum breaks you've put in the ether? How often have you seen yourself get sampled? Were you impressed with the results and the new twists the sampler added?

The odd part here is where the line is drawn. I'm okay with someone sampling my ideas. Honestly, it's all part of the game. I do mind it when a competitor does it, though, because it muddies the waters. It undoes any branding I might have accomplished by associating the same ideas with a different product - and that's just bad for everyone involved, both the samplee and the sampler. I won't even get started on how lazy it is, too.

But what really burns me is copy-theft. A line or two I can live with. We've all heard someone put something into words better than we can. And, as in the academic community, I don't think it's a sin, so long as proper attribution is offered in the proper context (simply, don't pretend like it's yours - that's bad form).

What I'm talking about is wholesale copy theft - an entire script completely lifted, with little more than the call letters or station name replaced. That's worse than bad form, that's television's equivalent of plagiarism.

Now, this raises some questions of its own. See, this doesn't fall under the umbrella of plagiarism. I recognize that plagiarism is difficult to define in our business. The crux of the confusion is "Who owns this stuff?" I'm the writer, the creator - but I don't own what I make. We saw what happened when Letterman got into it with NBC over intellectual property. It becomes murky because someone else is footing the bill and paying me for the work. (It's interesting that these distinctions didn't previously matter. We associate the Sistine Chapel with Michelangelo, not Pope Julius II - although I know dragging Michelangelo into this is a stretch.) When it's over, these works of ours enter into someone else's possession, where they lay claim to the intellectual property - not unlike ZeroG records did to The Winstons. I don't know that that's fair or not, I only know where I lean. (If you can't quite tell, I support the WGA strike, so there it is.)

But, all that aside, I'd be interested to hear readers' thoughts on all of this. Have you ever been sampled? Or had copy stolen outright? (I have, and if I ever find you...) Anybody wanna give credit where credit is due - you know, a shout out for a great idea you sampled? Have at it! I think this is one of those bigger issues we should take some time to consider.

Using the "Flywheel" Concept for your Brand

Brands take a lot of work to build. They take so much work, in fact, that it’s very easy to derail a brand-in-process. Often it simply takes a momentary lapse of patience.

There’s a very good chance you’ve watched it happen, or worse, done it yourself. A change in management, or a slip in ratings, causes everyone to rethink a market position and start building a new brand. Or maybe you never even bothered to consider a market position and you just run with whatever comes to mind next.

I’m going to refer, again, to Jim Collins, author of “Good to Great (Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t)”. Among the interesting ideas uncovered in Collins’ research is the “Flywheel Concept”. I think this concept has direct lessons for us.

A flywheel is used to harness kinetic energy. It captures movement and turns it into inertia. It starts with a bit of pushing. At this stage, the flywheel needs regular, steady effort. Over time, the effort needed to keep it moving becomes easier to apply – momentum begins to take hold. Then, after patient, deliberate efforts, the flywheel reaches its breakthrough point. Inertia starts to set in. Now, you need only apply effort at intervals to keep it moving. The wheel is moving primarily on its own momentum.

That’s how it is with brands. At first, they take an extraordinary amount of effort. It starts with proper design, just like a flywheel. The things got to be built to keep moving – so make sure it’s got “legs”.

Then comes the effort it takes to make it move. Steady, regular, patient effort. There are no shortcuts here! You can’t take detours! You’ve got to devote yourself to building the necessary momentum to make inertia kick in. Anything that distracts you from this effort is only going to trip you up.

As the momentum begins to take hold, the effort becomes easier. It’s tempting at this point to think you’re done – you’ve built enough momentum to move onto other things. DON’T! You’re not done! The effort still needs to be applied.

Inertia kicks in when your effort takes on a life of its own. Collins defines what that looks like better than I can, so I’ll leave you in suspense. That way, you’ll buy his book.

The trick to all of this is the effort and the patience. Lord knows our business is very often short on both. But if you think about the brands that have done it right, it’s amazing how the flywheel concept does work.

•Downy
•Oil of Olay
•Starbucks
•Apple
•Nike

As different as these products are, they have one thing in common: These brands have the flywheel in motion. They applied the effort successfully and now have the freedom to simply maintain the momentum.

Here's the kicker: Once kinetic energy has been harnessed, it takes an equal amount of effort to bring the motion back to a state of rest. In other words, if you do this right, you'd have to undo it just as deliberately. Effectively, it becomes something of its own insurance policy AND security system. Now that's quite a trick. More importantly, think of the implications for your business of a brand that moves on its own momentum.

Case in point: The Tylenol Crisis in the 80's. Here was an incident that threatened to quickly kill one of the world's best-known and most-used brands. But Tylenol had so much momentum in its brand that the general public wanted - deep down - to keep using Tylenol. That's momentum at work. Johnson and Johnson's response to the crisis: "Leverage our momentum". It engaged the public with honesty and care, going so far as to tell the public to stop using their product while they addressed the problem. Hell, they even invited 60 Minutes into their offices and labs while they worked it out! Momentum let them do that without killing the business. What's more, when J&J was ready to put the product back on the market, they gave their flywheel a nice steady push. They advertised and promoted their new safety bottles until the momentum was back in full swing.

These days, Tylenol is sold with the same respect for the consumer's need, and, interestingly, with warnings about its misuse. J&J took the honesty and forthrightness it showed in the crisis and turned it into part of their brand. That's brilliant. Lemons into lemonade right there.

Now think of the result if it had been someone else. If it had been a painkiller without the history and momentum of Tylenol. It would've been a very different outcome.

Read more about the flywheel at JimColiins.com.

Oh man, I wanna see the topical...