Wednesday, February 4, 2009

It's time to dress Naked, I'm sick of their over exposed, pasty bodies

So let's pretend that I know someone who knows stuff. You can call them a source, or this someone could just as easily be my imagination. Either way, imagination or source, they are here to bring the fact to the fiction from this ridiculous jacket saga.

(For those who aren't familiar, stories here and here)

Before we even get there, let's just say regardless of what was effective, what wasn't, it was lowly. A bad idea and a bad execution. And frankly, I expect more from any agency, especially one that apparently focuses on communications. I've learned from Top Chef, if the food is bad you don't send it out. It's not worth the aftermath or the ensuing damage. Same with a bad idea, if you think it's bad, stop, regroup, reassess. It was pov. Full stop.

So. My right hemisphere tells me there was a strategy, a strategy involving what we saw- girl, girl finds jackets and so on and so forth (to be honest, I didn't fucking watch it. I wasn't going to put myself past the first 5 seconds). And it was seeded. Seeded by a seeding company. There was all that we saw, but then, then there was more.

There was to be some Witchery involvement. Witchery would perk up and shout from their vantage point "let us participate, we can help you find your guy". They would then help cast/find the guy or some other fucked up idea like that.

I had been thinking that the story we saw, as a total, seemed to be unfinished. The girl component that we saw seemed half done. It felt like something was incomplete. That's the other reason why it doesn't add up. But now, now we have steps, we have legs, we have a process. This is no accident of campaign. We have seen a fraction of what was expected before the plug was pulled.

The problem here, and why we only saw a quarter of what we were meant to see- It went out with too much of a bang. Got into the mainstream too quickly. Best way to do something like this is to start small, in the underground and by the time you get to this man element, ie when the brand is involved, that's when you're mainstream. It means less hurt to the public or the media commentators because by this stage, we're all well aware of the cleverness and ingenuity of the brand involved. And yes, i'll enjoy my hindsight from where I sit, far away from the culprits, thank you very much. It wasn't me who got burned.

Then I happen to feel that this Numbers story, that was presented as an independent study, is one of no independence. It has been conducted by a friend of someone at Naked, a friend's neighbour's doctor's brother's sister. Someone with a connection. Either way, the licentiousness reeks. Plus as a kind sir whispered in my ear, over cigarettes and candy, for the study the qualifier was men interested in fashion. What about the male fashion disasters out there? Are they any the wiser to witchery and a jacket? I therefore question the integrity of the people asked to be in the study.

These are the details I remember, the sugar cloud of candy combined with nicotine, made me light headed and fairly whimsical at this point.

So go on, I'm ready for attack. I don't mind. I've upheld my imaginary truth, revealed the sham of this outfit, which is what has been suspected repeatedly and I'm happy some order has been restored.

ohmygod. get dressed guy, it's visual abuse

No comments: