Striking: The New York Times exemplifies what Boris Becker has lost.
Noteworthy: The New York Times exemplifies what Boris Becker has lost: the ability to convey true, enduring values—values that people, especially in such fast-paced times, would like to believe in. At least as far as that goes, time and again
Chandra Kurt
Column
True or false?
From Anna Esposito
Correction: The news magazine *Facts* apologizes to the entire advertising industry for last week’s blunder. As a precaution for next year, it is asking all advertising professionals to send their résumés and a list of their awards and honors to hannes.britsch@[email protected]. This way, by the time the editorial deadline for WerbeWoche rolls around on Tuesday evening in January 2002, a complete list of names can be published that will, with 100 percent certainty, include the winner of the following Thursday’s competition.
This year’s communication mishap and the resulting message to the outside world regarding the “Advertiser of the Year” award have, aside from the humor, inadvertently revealed a grain of truth: Often, two (or more) advertisers are behind a single idea. So this “scoop prevention” measure will also have a nice side effect: it brings back into all of our consciousness the fact that advertising, despite the rampant cult of the winner, does—at the very least—have something to do with teamwork. It’s crystal clear that the creative team shares the credit for strokes of genius—there’s no disputing that. But every now and then, the realization hits you internally that the flash of inspiration (Eureka!) was born out of all sorts of frills (keywords: analysis, briefing, discussions, exploiting junior copywriters). And that its execution also cost us a thing or two (see media planning, production, and lunches with the press).
The great thing about all the advertisers gathering on stage next year, bathed in the spotlight of the reigning Miss Switzerland, is that the envy that poisons everything will fade away, and we can confidently knock back a beer together. That’s always been the open secret to success for advertisers throughout the year.
Language Observer
A Hundred Questions for the New Year (51–75)
51. Would you rather have a different name? What would it be?
52. Does your life have meaning? And what about the lives of those around you?
53. Do you think the Internet makes the world a better place?
54. Do you take care of your body?
55. Do you think with your head, your gut, or your hands?
56. Do you never want to see your ex again, or would you like to stay friends?
57. Do you lie from time to time? How does that make you feel?
58. Have you ever been arrested?
59. Have you ever killed anyone?
60. Would you be happy if certain people were killed? How many would that be, roughly?
61. Do you think before you answer?
62. Do you remember the most embarrassing moment of your life?
63. Do you ever find yourself amazed by yourself?
64. What do people compliment you on? What would you like to be complimented on?
65. Can two people stay together for the rest of their lives?
66. What do you think of a married couple who call each other “Mom” and “Dad”?
67. Did your parents want you, breastfeed you, love you, and hold you?
68. If you could save only one thing from your burning house, what would it be?
69. How far ahead do you plan?
70. Would you like to be able to see into the future? Would you do it?
71. Does being alone make you strong or weak?
72. Are you strong? What for?
73. Do you like a lively atmosphere, or do you prefer some peace and quiet?
74. How should one live?
75. What voice do you hear when you read these questions?
Beat Gloor, www.textcontrol.ch
