In the lore of advertising right from the era of Madmen comes a reminder to me that the Blagojevich issue may surprise us in ways we never expected. Also Caylee Anthony. Because it comes with a lesson that has as much validity in law as it does in marketing. In fact, this tale begins with a man known as Bill Bernbach. He helped create an ad agency known as Doyle Dane Berbach. They were one of the first agencies to create funny, interesting, wildly unexpected commercials and ads for companies like Volkswagen and Clorox.
They were one of the pioneers of creative advertising in America and their effects and philosophies are still felt on Madison Avenue...
Ad agencies are tense places. They are filled with egotists and opinionated people talented and otherwise. They are filled with corporate politicians and sycophants and back stabbers. They are also filled with good, smart people, just like any corporation.
Here is the lesson from Mr. Berbach:
It is said that Bill Bernbach carried a piece of paper in his pocket that had the words on it:
They might be right.
In an industry where people champion their own ideas, where people often don’t look for idea-ship, they look for authorship and glory, Bill Bernbach reminded himself that even the most loathed hack in a company might have a valid idea that needed to be properly considered.
When they picked up Volkswagen it was a huge event in US advertising. Their innovative approach would mean everything and eventually create the environment that spawned early creative advertising. Some of the old brand managers wanted to sell VWs as price and item. For a few thousand dollars you can have a reliable car. Let people know how cheap it is, not how good it is. Bernach heard others who said "You can poke a little fun at VWs and still build brand loyalty."
Bill took the proverbial paper out of his pocket and gave the risk takers a chance. They might be right. They were right.
Which in a roundabout way brings me to Blagojevich.
Now you might think that Blagojevich is absolutely hand in the cookie jar guilty.
But what if he isn’t? What if we only know the story about the recording, and the news conference by Patrick Fitzgerald? I have people around me say "He is guilty as sin," with the same conviction that Nancy Grace used to call Patsy Ramsey "a cold blooded killer" for a decade. In case you don’t know, Patsy Ramsey was an innocent woman whose daughter was murdered. The police suspected it long before they admitted forensic evidence pointed to a stranger that broke in and committed the crime. Patsy Ramsey went to her grave with cancer, and no media company ever apologized for setting up video villages outside her home and haranguing her quite literally to death.
My aunt sits all day and watches these lip-sticked/ nipped and tucked cable accusers contemplate the guilt and motives of people who have not even had a trial. After a day full of Bo Deitl and Jane Velez-Mitchell she jumps in with both feet and tells me that for example, Caylee’s mother is guilty as sin.
Does it ever occur to her that people on TV are not allowed to see the evidence? Does it ever occur to anyone that carefully orchestrated Police evidentiary leaks are marketing campaigns, pure and simple, except without TV spots, but with sound bites and evidence that is planted not inside cars or homes but inside minds. Nancy Grace is a soap opera, except she is not selling Tide. She is selling guilt. She and her expert witnesses and trial coaches and dried up defense attorneys participate in a separate trial that both sides try to win because they realize that a fair trial in this country is the last thing they want. The networks and attorneys and DAs are all in a mad frenzy for camera time, and book deals and hero status. They want a win. They want to plant enough doubts in the most minds possible so that no jury will ever be inclined to agree with the other side.
All I can say is that I used to believe, and I believed it with a deep conviction, that Patsy Ramsey had killed her own daughter. And at the end of the day, I was wrong. The possibility that they (the Ramseys) might be right never occurred to me.
The lesson I learned is that I really don’t have any idea if Blagojevich is guilty or not, despite the apparent evidence. I’ll be curious to see if he is indeed a bribe-master. I wouldn’t be surprised. Then again, I wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out that there is a lot we don’t know. I also don’t know who killed Caylee Anthony. Again, none of us do.
Those who respectfully think that media trials are travesties keep in mind: Blagojevich claims he is innocent. He might be right.