John Singleton, “The blackboard jingle,”
Advertising & Newspaper News, June 27, 1969, p. 21.

Someone once said that great advertising people are born. Not made.

He must have known about the advertising course run by the Sydney Technical College.

It runs for four years. And is apparently fully sanctioned and encouraged by the national advertising bodies.

The other night John Fuller and myself sat through a presentation made by the final year students of this course.

It took the form of a theoretical campaign for a theoretical new cosmetic product.

It purported to demonstrate, in practical form, the lessons well learned after four long years.

Instead it was an indictment of the course as it now stands.

Every bad mistake made by every bad agency in this country was made all over again.

The whole campaign was based on statistical research which told us what we know already.

CREATIVE IDEAS
It looked into the rear vision mirror and did not see what was up ahead.

It did not tell us how to persuade the consumer nor indeed who the consumer was. (“All people over 16” is hardly good enough.)

All the research told us was that the consumer needed to be persuaded. And a fat lot of good that is.

Next, and out of step, came media.

It fell into all the same old traps.

A little bit here, a little bit there. And chosen totally independent of the creative ideas. For example, the media recommended, among 1000 other things, included live Tonight shows because “the product will be presented in a family atmosphere.”

A little strange when looked at in the context of the creative exploitation of blatant sex.

With no isolated selling idea and no isolated market segment, it came as no shock to see the creative team do what most creative teams do in such circumstances: they indulged in an orgy of ideas.

Some, particularly the radio ideas, were brilliant. Some were lousy.

And almost every one was at a tangent with the other.

They were creative ideas without a sales idea behind them.

And they were typical of the advertising that we see here today in every medium.

It was a campaign based on thinking at least 10 years behind the times.

And I don’t believe the fault rests with the students.

They were individually professional and their leader, Peter Ryall, was particularly persuasive.

These were good minds led to the slaughter.

Now I don’t know who runs this course and I don’t much care, but if it is considered that such a course is necessary then something had better be done about it. Fast.

I know that if two people of apparent equal talent walked into my office now I would go for the one without the benefits of this magnificent course.

It is easier to teach someone than “un-learn” someone.