That’s a quote from an ad man called Howard Luck Gossage (great name; great quote) and is the title of a new biography about him.
He ran his own agency in San Francisco back the 1960s when all the action was taking place in New York (Bill Bernback, David Ogilvy, Rosser Reeves). He had, what seemed at the time and perhaps still now, some pretty crazy ideas about the way advertising should work, which now that I no longer work in an agency, seem exceedingly sensible. From the book, they include:
Didn’t believe that it was all about growth and the money. It was about maintaining the quality of the creative work and the culture of the agency. The agency never grew to be more than 15 people.
He thought about the point of advertising. As he put it “there is precious little awareness, and no real enquiry into the economic, sociologic or philosophic bases of advertising”. I would say that this is still the case. I was raised to believe that the point of advertising is to make money for the agency and make money for the client. No sociologic or philosophic enquiry there.
He believed that pumping out advertising with no real sense of who was receiving it and how it was being received was not only wasteful but unethical. He said: “I will go further and say that it is not only wrong to attempt to influence an audience without involving it but it is unethical and dishonest”. Strong words, but this kind of accounts for, at a guess, more than 50% of advertising these days.
He had a theory of the way things work (cybernetics, via Norbert Weiner) which could be applied to advertising. Cybernetics (roughly) is about recognising that there are feedback loops in the natural world. So for Gossage, he saw the creation of information loops as beneficial and indeed a life-enhancing way of making people respect others and accept responsibility for their actions. So, his ads featured ways to engage the audience so that they could help create the next round of work. No feedback, change the ads. By involving the consumer and getting their input into the campaign, it was evident that they were enjoying the work and more work would evolve that encouraged further feedback.
In this “he viewed advertising less as a commercial bludgeon and more as a conversation between equals”. And “people like to be treated as human beings rather than consumers and they react very well to it”. ‘Go Compare’ anyone?
He was, perhaps unsurprisingly, anti-billboards because he believed that no media owner had the right to sell that media because a billboard interrupted a view that belonged to the people.
He ended up working on saving the Grand Canyon from getting flooded (via an ad campaign), then helped make the Sierra Club famous before using his skills to launch Friends of the Earth. To him, this is what advertising should be for: “advertising was too valuable an instrument to waste on commercial products…it justified its existence only when it was used for social purposes”.
So, he said all this, but was also well ahead of his time in terms of thinking about social media, PR-generated stunts and interactive. What’s interesting is that the back cover of the book is full of modern-day advertising greats talking about how great Gossage was. For example, Jeff Goodby says “The best of Gossage is the best of advertising ever done, and what’s really amazing is the the work he did foretold what’s happening on the internet and social media right now”. To me, it’s more interesting to take his thinking in the round – to consider the points that I’ve highlighted above, not just the interactive/social media bit. It would make for a very different, more purposeful industry, where that purpose is beyond just trying to make money and sell stuff. Maybe one day more of his ideas will come to pass. I hope so.