News

Congratulations AKQA! Interactive agency of the Year?

by Kaza Razat
Sunday, January 8, 2006. 10:20AM
1,260 Views 2 Comments

Among their great achievements last year AKQA is famous for two things. They have an outrageously international and extremely talented creative core and they designed the interface for the Xbox 360º. We’re not talking banner ads here people. We’re talking about an agency having such technical and design muscle that their client Microsoft, let them design the interface for what is arguably their most important and relevant product. If that’s not the future of an agency then what is? Oh yeah did I mention that AKQA has consistently created amazing and innovative digital communications, virals and sites also.

People inexplicably wait on ridiculously long lines to shell out hundreds of bucks for the newest digital gadget. The agencies marketing to these fanatics have to be equally as fanatical and technically adept at speaking their language creatively. You can’t hire an agency with a fifty something year old ECD who listens to Barry Manilow to run your ad campaign. You need youth, talent, design chops and a culture at your agency that allows the work and ideas to flourish.

Last year at my interview at AKQA’s NY office I listened to their run down of clients and it was all I could do to stop my jaw from dropping. I had already envisioned my reel, ah online portfolio and could feel the cold, metallic awards in my hand. But it was not to be. My mispronunciation of their name as a bluish-green color (AQUA) or my rather dark, medical instruments micro site demo all but spelled out my eventual (but never official) rejection. They’re a young agency, too young and naive to see the glass ceiling. They have no right blowing offline agencies out the box in presentations, showdowns and battles for new business. They have some nerve to have a name like that with no obvious acronyms nor egotistical partner sir names.

Though I’m a fan of their work I’m fairly disgusted that digital agencies are labeled “interactive” or “direct marketing” shops. In all honesty to date, Crispin Porter + Bogusky has arguably done better digital and integrated work than most of the dedicated digital shops. They should have been agency of the year (which they were) and interactive agency of the year based on their work but that’s a debate for another day or podcast (hint, hint).

We all know that eventually advertising will start and end interactively. And it will all be digital. When that day comes the distinction of “interactive or digital” will be ubiquitous. I can feel an I told you so coming on. Has anyone seen these new numbers? Click to Open Web Page Take them with a grain of salt if you want but do you see those print and radio numbers? That’s hilarious! I actually choose to believe that the population of older Americans skew the numbers television pulls in. Suffice to say we all know that television is losing its ability to attract and fascinate the sexy, young and hip demographics. Who the hell do you think is watching “Dancing with the Stars” ? Not Xbox 360º players, I can assure you of that. Not unless it’s a mash-up with an MF Doom track underneath and all of the dancers die in the re-edited, interactive ending complete with pirated Hollywood studio stock footage, ultimately burned onto a HD-DVD that works in next year’s Xbox 720º.

(login to vote or comment.)
Monday, January 9, 2006. 06:37PM by Kaza Razat
Well said Bill. I was remiss in mentioning that it was Creativity Magazine that voted them interactive agency of the year. With Adweek not being worth the paper it's printed on I find Creativity to be leading rag of our Industry.
Sunday, January 8, 2006. 10:55PM by Bill Green
Interesting takes Kaza... As far as "You need youth, talent, design chops and a culture at your agency that allows the work and ideas to flourish", I gotta add one thing: you also need clients with the guts to want and ask for that kind of next-level creative too... I also sense a 'print is dead' moment coming on, lol. As an AD, I'm as much old-school as I am new, and to me, the world is either CMYK or RGB. I think people to a large degree will still want something tangible they can touch and feel, like a magazine. Me too, even though I get the majority of my content online, be it blogs like here and adrants, or Drudge and his 50,000 news links... As far as the old-school creatives, from what I've seen, the biggest objection to going interactive is quite simply the learning curve they perceive the transition to be... Why should they want to spend six months learning Flash when they can hire and art direct a freelance coder to do it for them. A lot of the CD's I deal with have so much work on their plates – they just want to get 'er done, not learn new programs... I can see their point there, but hey, ya' gotta at least try. Otherwise, it sure would be a waste to not be able to apply their experience in new ways... Some of the viral stuff out now is as cool if not moreso than some of the best print I've seen. And as you know, viral offers creatives the chance to incoporate ALL aspects of the process, not just interactive. That's where I'm headed at least with my work... But to convince the old-school? I'd try saying that going interactive, or at least making the effort, at the very least educates them on the process so they know what they're talking about and can design interactive projects more realistically... And it's not just interactive, it's video too. I know a lot of creatives that blow budgets because they don't know what they're doing when it comes to post-production for video – then they go outside and overpay. ...later