The Roseys and the Noseys take their gloves off in the Twittersphere.The 2009 Rosey Awards campaign has provoked more controversy and debate than perhaps any previous Roseys campaign. As mentioned in my post last week, having contributed copywriting to this Ant Hill Marketing production and helped continue the debate in the social media sphere, I am very proud of these results. Let me explain.
The way I see it, controversy as a mode of engagement is neither “bad” nor “good.” It just is. It’s people being people. I’m more interested in its value to the participants and in the outcomes to which it leads. By those measures, the Roseys get an A+ for provoking passionate, intelligent debate. This conflict has brought us together—an all-the-more-ironic outcome for a community that is often described as being conflict-averse.
Still, while I love this campaign, come November and the celebration of the Rosey Awards gala, this whole sturm will float down the drang. Whether you like the 2009 Roseys campaign or hate it, “either way,” as Billy Joel once sang, “it’s okay, you wake up with yourself.”
But this year there will be one vital difference.
This year’s Roseys have done more than merely piss a few people off. They have moved some people to action. Specifically, two employees of Nemo Design, Dave Ewald (aka @motorcoatdave) and Justin Spohn (aka @adognamedpants). They launched an alternative to the Roseys, dubbing it the Nosey Awards.
Although I have spoken well of the Noseys, mostly on Twitter as @joelgunz, Justin and others have somehow gotten it into their heads that I am frustrated by or otherwise resentful of its presence. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The fact is, since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, my ego should spiking through the roof. I am honored, guys, thanks. (BTW, Dave and I are getting together for happy hour on Monday to chat more about the project.)
Why do I like the Noseys so much? Because, one month ago, Portland had (to my knowledge) only one creative community awards show. Now it has two. And they naturally complement each other. We have a juried competition, the Roseys, and a people’s choice competition, the Noseys. Sweet! Such diversity can only be good for the creative community. Kudos to Dave and Justin and to their most vocal advocate, yet another Nemo employee, Dave Allen, aka @pampelmoose. Though Allen claims to have no formal connection to the Noseys, it's hard to imagine where the Noseys would be without his indefatigable support. Those three Nemo employees have done a great job of quickly getting the Noseys off the ground.
This isn’t to say, however, that their project isn’t without flaws. (Come on, guys, you knew this was coming.)
As a parody of a snarky, smack-talky campaign, the Noseys also use the language of snark in its own self-promotion. For instance, on twitter, @NoseyAwards has embraced such snarky sentiments as “Our community is better than your campaign.” Justin has tweeted: “The Noseys aren't about hating on anyone but the haters.” A basic rule of life is that in hating the haters, you become one of them. Judging by the piss and vinegar in his various blog comments, he is clearly already there.
Therein lies the rub. You cannot try to seize the moral high ground by rising above snark, yet continue communicate using snark. It’s intellectually and philosophically dishonest. If the Noseys really do want to stand for something other than the snark of the Roseys, I would suggest that they take a completely different approach, perhaps one involving buttercups and unicorns. Then again, I hope they don’t actually take this advice, because I’m enjoying the parody and the smack talk.
Perhaps the funniest response to the whole spat is this tweet via @kirstenblair: “If the #noseys are the anti #roseys then I'm making #hellnoseys - Screw contests.” Hells to the yeah!
Until then,
Long live the Roseys!
Long live the Noseys!
13 comments:
Strawman alert! Strawman alert!
If the Noseys really do want to stand for something other than the snark of the Roseys, I would suggest that they take a completely different approach, perhaps one involving buttercups and unicorns.
Though I certainly won't, don't and can't speak for Dave, Justin, Dave or any other #Noseys or #Roseys stakeholders, I think it should be clear to anyone paying attention that the #Noseys have never been about "standing for something other than the snark." No one I've talked to, nor any tweets I've read have said "I don't like the #Roseys campaign because of the snark."
What I and many others (more and better than I, for sure) have said is, basically, "I don't like the #Roseys campaign because of the focus on attitude" (or "bragging," or "trash-talking" or, as you Joel so perfectly described it, "swagger") "rather than the Work."
So no, we don't have to limit ourselves to unicorns and or buttercups. (Not that we live in such a phalo-centric, John Wayne fantasy-land that the only way to be taken seriously is to be, again, in your words, a swaggering asshole.) We can be just as snarky as you without being "intellectually and philosophically dishonest." We can snark all we want about why we think the #Roseys campaign sells the PDX creative community short and makes us the laughing stock of the entire country. Because *that* is what the #Nosesys stand for, among many other things. We not-always-so-respectfully disagree, not so much with the style of the campaign, but the substance.
In fact, by promoting a certain style ("trash-talking") over substance (letting the work do the talking), some of us feel this campaign displays *exactly* what's wrong with some aspects of the PDX creative community and much of the industry world-wide. How many clients are half-way through a pitch or a review and think to themselves, "Stop telling me how fucking cool you are and start showing me why this is going to have the desired effect with my customers."
Or, to paraphrase Katherine Durham of HP, an awesome marketer and speaker at the upcoming Internet Strategy Forum Summit, "I don't care if you like it. I care if it is going to create the results we want with our customers."
Snark away!
M/B I just need my morning coffee, but does anyone in this mix read their copy before publishing? bleh bleh bleh blah blah Me Me Me... Oh, PLS!
Now for the chorus, everyone in a PDX agency join in: bleh bleh bleh... etc.
What an echo chamber.
Don't know what it's called in the trade, but I bet there's a name for such goings on. And it's not cr8v.
In my mind, the Roseys vs the Noseys Awards will probably be a wonderful social web case study. Now the PDX creative community has 100% more chance of winning an award...
CORRECTION:
Jay, you wrote about an assumption that "...the only way to be taken seriously is to be, again, in your words, a swaggering asshole."
Please do not misquote me.
What I DID write in my June 23 post is this: "When you swagger, people are going to call you an asshole."
Big difference.
While I'll add more later, it seemed important to correct your error immediately and avoid further confusion.
Joel "The Strawman" Gunz
Joel, you're editing yourself. What you said was:
When you swagger, people are going to call you an asshole. They are also going to respect you and give you money in exchange for your ideas. I think that’s a very fair trade-off.
So, I stand by my "mis-"quote which I would consider more of a paraphrase, since I didn't use quotation marks (and because the original was there for all to see):
the only way to be taken seriously is to be, again, in your words, a swaggering asshole.
I'm honestly not sure what your quarrel is with my paraphrase. Should I instead have said, "the only way to be taken seriously is to be, again, in your words, *perceived by some people as* a swaggering asshole"?? 'Cause as anyone (such as yourself) practiced in Online Reputation Management can tell you, 'taint much of a difference there. And I think "taken seriously" and "respect" might even be in Roget's, but I'll let you look it up if that's your beef.
I do think your original quote is very telling. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you think that people will respect a creative professional if they swagger, even if some people also consider that person an asshole for the same reason. And that respect will translate into being hired (presumably to swagger on behalf of the person doing the hiring) and you're perfectly happy with being hired for that reason. And that's ground-zero for why some of us don't think the Roseys campaign represents us, because that attitude isn't our attitude.
I won't speak for others, but for me, I don't want others to respect me for the type of swagger that leads others to think I'm an asshole. I know I don't respect others based on that type of swagger. I may be willing to overlook it, but to me it's a barrier to respect, not an incentive.
I want others to respect me because of the results that my work generates, for the craft and skill involved in creating it, for the values and ideas expressed in it, for the originality of the ideas and tactics used in it, and because they genuinely like working with me as a down-to-earth, we're-all-in-this-together, let's-do-awesome-work-but-not-take-ourselves-too-seriously, smart, authentic, 3D, honest kind of person.
Of course, this is ultimately about an awards show, so a lot of the things that make people want to work with someone aren't really considered. In fact, that's something I've never liked about most awards--just what the heck are the criteria, anyway? When a project I worked on once won an award, the criteria were very clear, and I always try and include them when I tout the award, so people know what it was for.
Interestingly, I just checked http://www.roseyawards.com and all I could find was this:
Judging procedures will be determined at the discretion of the Portland Advertising Federation and in collaboration with members of the advertising community. A panel of nationally respected professionals will perform the judging. Each individual judge will be responsible for selecting their own winners based on criteria established by the judging panel and the PAF.
Other awards have very clear criteria, specified in advance, so everyone knows. Is this an award for... Effectiveness? Innovation? Visual style? Coolness? Edginess?
Of course, everyone at the PAF is a volunteer, and if I don't like the criteria (or lack thereof, or lack of transparency regarding, or whatever...), then I can volunteer to lend a hand or shut the fuck up. I get that. And that's fine.
But again, if you're going to speak, in general terms, on behalf of something to which I belong (aka "The Portland Creative Community"), then I'm gonna have something to say about it if I think it mis-represents me.
Jay "Miss Corrected" Cosnett
Jay, when you refer to the term "swaggering asshole" as my words, it is untruthful and thus unhelpful to the dialogue.
We each hold an opposing viewpoint, which is good. Debate (even snarkily expressed) can lead to real progress. Mischaracterizing my statements militates against that.
As we go forward and engage with passion and conviction, I would ask that you add honesty to the mix.
PAF - get some criteria or forget the "professional" self-designation of the group and the award. HAHAHA PLOP! UR such a joke til then.
Moose in Pampers (or what ever the hell ur over-long-winded name is that u expect everyone to know or face the noise of incrimination as uncool says U) - "Now the PDX creative community has 100% more chance of winning an award..." What.... what....? Is this the "Special Olympics" of cr8v awards? Light up or leave me alone. (Joe Walsh - or thereabouts)
Jay and Joel - Did I read correctly? Two of you have *not* met... or was that in the Rosey blog...hell, I sit next to both ur mothers in church.... u both have caught a cold from kids going to the same school... even *I* know both of you...
And everybody knows that the vast VAST *VAST* majority of cr8vs in this berg portray themselves as blowhards. U gotta be willing to knock some chips off shoulders in order to get the time of day, and then be willing to own being snide and cynical UR ownself..
Welcome to Club Damned
M/B that's part of the reason why PDX is considered a trailer park hillbilly cousin in the ad world at large. And the way this year's awards are shaping up, the reason for the Rosey's existence, it would seem.
Rosey's 2009 - a pissing contest at it's best.
Is that what ur gunnin' for...? Cause that's the map and that's the terrain.
Jay, when you refer to the term "swaggering asshole" as my words, it is untruthful and thus unhelpful to the dialogue.
Joel, when you neglect to explain the difference between my paraphrase ("swaggering asshole") and your word-for-word ("When you swagger, people are going to call you an asshole."), especially when I have asked you directly to point out where, exactly, my paraphrase mis-stated your meaning, it clarifies nothing, making it also "thus unhelpful to the dialogue."
And when you claim, in your tweet announcing your comment, that "@jaycosnett is helped to see the difference between his clumsy paraphrase and my actual words" all I can say is, uh, no, you didn't. Help. Anyone, to understand. Anything.
Perhaps you think that by simply stating something (paraphrase = wrong) you make it so. Or perhaps that tweeting something (I helped Jay see why he was wrong) you also make it so, or close enough (at least for those among your followers who won't bother to check for themselves).
But for someone asking me to "add honesty to the mix" to claim they've done something they didn't do?
Maybe that's what you meant by "swagger."
Jay "I Stand Un-Corrected" Cosnett
Jay, one thing we can agree on is this: you do, indeed, stand uncorrected.
the bard's paramour - at least I post openly and under my real name.. I note that I haven't mentioned my username for Twitter @pampelmoose anywhere in my comments..I also don't see that pampelmoose is any more over-long-winded than the bard's paramour..
Joel,
I see that you're on the PAF board or is that an old Blogger profile? - " I serve on the Board of Directors for the Portland Advertising Federation and edit its monthly publication, Vox."
RE: Moose in Diapers referring to the Rosey blog for moniker... but u would have to read the following graph to pick up on that was where I saw the moniker for you... which kinda supports my bleh, bleh..... Me, ME premise.
And I am stuck with this old saw here because of how I registered for this site a Bozellion years ago.
All ya all take all ya all selves *way* to #seriously. Leads me to think that ur holding urselves back from the heights ur capable of when comes to concepting | vision | creativity. #sad.
Life is short. Play hard means use ur hands to create, not slap down. Reach back and pull the guy behind u up. Reach forward and offer a hand to the guy in front of u to sling him to greater heights. Simple. Unexpected. Freeing.
Dave,
That is an old profile. I left the PAF board in 2008 and subsequently handed VOX off to my successor. Thanks for catching that, my profile is now updated.
Post a Comment