Letting the account go

One thing you can say for ad agencies is they're not quitters. Especially when their largest account goes into review. If they're invited to pitch it - again – there’s no doubt they'll give it everything they've got.

Even when they shouldn't.

We've all been there. First come the rumors of trouble. Then the hushed closed door management meetings. Sometimes, an email goes out letting people who work on the business know. But as a rule, they find out on their own from somewhere else. Like Adweek. Or a friend at another agency pitching the business.

When a sizable account goes into review, agencies predictably knee-jerk into "we can't just let $200 million walk out the door mode."

But sometimes they should.

I understand the economics and the responsibility to try and keep everyone employed. But there comes a time when done is done. The fat lady is singing.

The problem is most agencies don't hear her.

The rank and file, people working on an account day in and day out, have a much finer honed ability to take the client's temperature than management. They know when the ground shifts and something doesn't feel right. They've seen it coming weeks if not months before management. Sometimes they've even sounded a warning.

But when it comes to management hearing about the possibility of losing business, denial ain't just a river.

From a new VP of Marketing to the client's wife not liking the work, there are a million reasons accounts go into review. Agencies always feel if they can just give it one more go, they can really understand the problem and come up with a solution.

And granted, on rare occasions, they can.

But sometimes what the client is looking for most from the agency is to be taken at their word.

Even if that word is goodbye.

Clients, like dogs, smell fear and desperation. And the scent is never stronger than an incumbent agency fighting for business, or begging for the chance to fight for business, at all costs - including its dignity, reputation and morale of its employees.

You know what's worse than losing a piece of business? Trying to rally the troops with false and tired arguments like "it's a level playing field", or "our client is working for us on the inside", then grinding everyone for weeks or months with them knowing full well it's gone regardless of what they do.

I suppose there's an argument to be made it's a few more weeks of work before the first round of layoffs. But like I said, the people bound to be most effected have already seen it coming. They're usually ahead of the curve on calls to headhunters and other agencies (especially ones pitching the business) .

Advertising is a business that rewards imaginative thinking, and punishes realistic thinking when it’s needed most. Pride before a fall.

What agencies should do, especially when business is good and clients are satisfied, is have an ongoing open and transparent new business directive everyone can take ownership in. After all, management isn't the only one in the agency capable of cultivating connections beyond the agency's doors. Leads can come from any department.

And if the lead pans out, you get coffee. Because coffee is for closers.

Wouldn't it be better to spend all the money they'll inevitably pour into a review on new business pursuits throughout the year, so when one account finally does decide to leave the agency isn't crippled by it. Better to have ten $2 million dollar accounts than one $20 million dollar one.

Of course, when an agency does have to fight for a piece of business, it usually brings in a ton of freelancers for a fresh perspective. It's always a good gig, and keeps their bank balance happy for quite a while.

On second thought, just disregard this post.

Rick Santorum probably didn't date much

I'm not sure, but I think I may have stumbled onto the reason Rick Santorum hates women so much.

He probably wasn't very popular with them. Exhibit A: the picture you see here.

In case you're not familiar with primitive points of view about women's rights or roles in society, all you have to do is take a look at any of Santorum's white papers on them.

He thinks pre-natal care shouldn't be covered by insurance, because really, "more often than not" all those amnios do is cause abortions - a fact supported absolutely nowhere. (While it's true there is a slight risk of miscarriage after amnio, it's between 0.5 and 1% of all second trimester amnios - which is the normal risk during that trimester even without amnios, so there's no accurate way to distinguish between the causes).

That's going to come as quite a shock to the majority of women who've had them and now have happy, healthy babies. And who had less stressful pregnancies because of the conditions, including Down's Syndrome, that an amnio positively rules out.

Santorum talks often about "the dignity of human life." Apparently that doesn't apply to rape victims. Santorum believes even if a woman is raped, she should be forced to carry the baby to term and then give it up for adoption. His wife shares this point of view as well, which is ironic since she used to live with an abortion provider 40 years older than her. In fact, he was the OB who delivered her.

As far as working women go, according to Santorum they shouldn't be allowed to go far at all given the havoc he alleges they wreak on their families. Here's his point of view on it from an article in the Washington Post:

His 2005 book, “It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good,” suggests parents in two-income families aren’t doing what’s best for the kids. Too often, he writes, both parents work when the family could get by on one salary: “For some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home.” He described it as a sad situation created by “radical feminists” who undermined the traditional family by “convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness.”

As someone married to a working, professional woman, and the best mother my children could ever hope for, I find this point of view particularly offensive. But I imagine not nearly as much as every working woman does, with the possible exception of the women working to get this neanderthal elected.

It all sounds like something from a Saturday Night Live sketch. And points of view as outdated and irrational as these would be funny if this clown wasn't, for the moment, the Republican frontrunner.

If you go to Santorum's website, there's a tab at the top labeled "Why Rick".

My sentiments exactly.

Stroller derby

Seems like yesterday my wife and I were taking our baby boy out for a stroll in his awesome Peg Perego stroller - the Rolls Royce of strollers at the time.

Since we lived in Santa Monica at the time (100 yards from the beach in a rent-controlled apartment on the top floor of a 17-story building - don't get me started), we'd take our son for daily stroller walks on Main Street and the Third Street Promenade. The Promenade was a wide expanse of walkway, with plenty of room for us even when it was crowded. And when we were on Main Street, we made a point of staying to one side of the sidewalk so people coming and going could get around us easily.

More than rules of the road, it was just common courtesy. Seems like such a quaint notion from a gentler time doesn't it.

Fast forward to this evening as we're trying to get around these sidewalk hoggin', cell-phone talkin', baby ignorin', stroller pushin' mamas blocking 2nd Street in Belmont Shore with a Mitt Romney sense of entitlement to the sidewalk.

It'd be one thing if they were going slow to carefully navigate the walking throngs so their babies wouldn't get bumped or jostled.

But no,these mamas were in their plastic bubble, oblivious to everyone else on the sidewalk because they were so caught up in their own fabulousness. They didn't care one whit about anyone in front or behind them.

I suppose the good news is we were behind them. With a clear view of their rear bumpers (yes, that is what I meant), we could see the faces of the oncoming crowd as they had to quickly engage in avoidance tactics so as not to get run over by the clueless moms.

I know you can't make people more considerate. Believe me, I've tried. Maybe strollers need to be reclassified as moving vehicles, and parents operating them would be required to take a driving test to get licensed.

The other question that went through my mind is why do they have these babies out so late on a cold February night, with all the germy strangers passing them by anyway.

Oh that's right. You don't need a license to be a parent either.

Another post about juice

See what I did there? (see title of post before this one).

Sometimes you know what you know. And if you're lucky, you know what you don't know. But every once in awhile something you thought you knew turns out to be something you didn't.

Ever since I can remember, lemons and/or lemon juice have always been one of the main ingredients in lemonade.

Hence the name lemonade.

Imagine my shock and awe when I went to make my Arnold Palmer (to the uninitiated that's half lemonade/half ice tea) and saw this little notice carefully concealed in the small white type on the fountainhead.

Now I'm not naive enough to think a soda fountain at 5 Guys should be dispensing anything as healthy as wheatgrass or carrot juice (gagging a little at the thought). But is it too much to expect the lemonade to contain a little real lemon juice?

Apparently it is.

The part that throws me - and if you know anything about me you know I'm easily thrown - is that the supplier is Minute Maid. And what is Minute Maid best known for?

Say it with me: juice.

In fact, on the Minute Maid web site, here's how they describe the contents of their ginormous 128 fl.oz. container of lemonade:

LEMONADE Classics never go out of style. Made with the goodness of real lemons, Minute Maid Lemonade is the quintessential refreshing beverage with the great taste of a simpler time.

See? Their big barrel o' lemonade is made with the goodness of real lemons. Apparently that's the "simpler time" they're referring to.

As if there's not enough to feel bad about eating at 5 Guys, now I know I don't even stand a chance of taking the edge off by having something even the slightest bit healthy to drink.

Next time life hands me lemons, I'm making a lemon Coke.

Jew see what I did there?

Much to my great pleasure, and apparently great dismay of some of our more traditional friends, my wife isn't Jewish. Far from it.

She happens to be a committed Christian.

For some reason, that seems to cause some people great amounts of - what's the word I'm looking for - tsuris.

The fact we fell in love, got married, then stayed married in our unholy interfaith union seems to be a difficult thing for many people to understand. Apparently none of these people ever dated a Jewish girl. BAM!

Before you start all the mishegas with hateful emails and comments, know this: I have plenty Jewish women friends and colleagues that I love and respect (nothing but love for Mama G. and the breakfast club girls). But this is about me, and facts are facts: I dated Ann Siegel, Sandy Izakowitz and went to Fairfax High. Trust me. It's an argument you can't win.

Anyway, the question inevitably comes up about how this works with the children. While technically it's true they're half Christian and half Jewish, or as I prefer to say, Chewish, they're being raised in the Christian faith.

It doesn't bother me. Because I'm pretty much the worst Jew you know - in the practicing the religion sense, not in the as a human being sense - it's just not that important to me the kids be raised Jewish. Given how little I practice it, it'd be straight up hypocritical if it was.

I don't care if my daughter is bat mitzvah'd or my son is bar mitzvah'd. As I recall, my bar mitzvah was mostly a big party for my parent's friends. I'm still looking for the envelope with all the checks in it.

It is however important to my wife that they're raised as Christians. Fine by me.

For starters, they're going to an exceptional private Christian school where they're excelling at the first-rate education they're getting. I also have no problem with the overall values and principals they're learning.

If I'm being truthful, which always seems to get me in trouble but, you know, onward, I'll admit sometimes it's hard having the kids come home and hearing all the Jesus stories. But whenever I feel that twinge, I just remind them Jesus was part of the tribe - one of our boys.

The funny part is that my wife is much more insistent they learn about their Jewish heritage. She's the one who makes sure at Hanukah we light the candles in the menorah, although not too close to the Christmas tree.

Still, there are so many shmendriks who like to kvetsch about us not being the same religion. Which I always like to answer with this non-denominational question: what the f#@& business is it of yours?

I think there's so much about the Christian agenda in the news it just raises curiosity about our situation. Narrow-minded people like to paint in broad strokes (you know, like I do about Jewish girls), and make the assumption all Christians are on that extreme fringe. I can tell you from experience they're not, although granted my support of gay marriage isn't exactly met with open arms on Sunday mornings.

I'm also a bit surprised and upset how effortlessly some friends bash the Christian faith, painting all Christians in a way they'd never tolerate people of their own religion being portrayed if the sandal were on the other foot.

What chutzpah.

Don't you worry your pretty little heads - I still know which side my matzoh is buttered on. I'm proud of being a Jew, even if I'm not a practicing one. I'm proud my kids will grow up, thanks to their mother, with an understanding of both sides of their heritage. And I love a good "rabbi and a priest walk into a bar..." joke more than you can possibly know.

Maybe the people who make it a point of pride and claim to be so accepting will find a way to show it when it comes to respecting not only the two of us, but both our faiths.

God willing.

Breaking news: we have a break-up song winner

It wasn't easy. But then love never is.

Just to refresh your memory, last week I put up a post bringing back my breakup song contest. The first time I barely got three suggestions. This time, it was an avalanche. Apparently a lot of bad memories have come flooding back to all of you since the first effort.

And as we now know, broken hearts make for mighty good song suggestions.

For the last week the Rotation and Balance team of psychologists, relationship gurus, heartbreak counselors, romance novel authors, luv brokers and interns working for no pay have listened to all the outstanding entries and, difficult as it was, chosen a winner.

I won't keep you in suspense any longer. For the song we believe best sums up the emotional devastation left in the aftermath of a failed relationship - all to a good beat - the winner is (drumroll please) Carrie Talick.

Her winning entry? Love Stinks.

Not only does Carrie get her winning song from iTunes (right after she sends me her email), she also gets these six runner-ups. It was originally only going to be four, but the judges decided they were just too good and had to expand the prize.

Congratulations Carrie.

Presented here in no particular order:

Why yes, that is a new tagline

Years ago, Volvo decided to take the bold step of not having a tagline in their ads. At the time it was considered revolutionary by most, and heresy by some, including their agency who didn't get to charge development time against new taglines.

And yet, Volvo continued to do just fine.

The print ads were cleaner and more focused. The TV and radio spots were less "addy." And despite the fact they didn't try to sum up everything they stood for in a few words, people somehow managed to either remember or glean from them that Volvo was synonymous with safety.

You may have noticed by the plethora of lousy taglines out there that coming up with the perfect one is a challenging thing to do (this isn't the first time I've posted about this).

Especially if you're trying to come up with one for a blog. I've often thought of following Volvo's example and just not having one, which would be fine if anyone including me already knew what this blog stood for.

I've had two taglines since I started it. The first was "No meaning. From a tire store sign. Stop trying."

Rolls right off the tongue doesn't it? That was one problem. The other was it spoke more to the blog title than the actual content.

The second one I used for a short while, without any fanfare or any notice was "With a great blog comes great responsibility. Or so I hear."

I liked it, but as a friend told me, I'm not Spiderman.

I keep forgetting.

Although you'd think falling off the sides of buildings all the time would be a good reminder.

So it was time for a new tagline. This time I decided to go with something more descriptive of posts that appear here. Hence the new line:

We didn't invent random. We just perfected it.

It works because random is the central theme of this blog. I almost went with "Mindless ramblings whenever I God damn feel like it."

But for some reason the random thing seems friendlier.