DIARY: Rant

<p>Agencies that condone 'copy cat' ads should be ostracised in the </p><p>same way as those which condone scam work. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>Take these two beauties, for example. As can plainly be seen, one is a </p><p>shady photocopy of the other. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>I won't say which ad was produced first or which agency was responsible </p><p>for which execution, for fear of upsetting fragile egos. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>But I will say this: I have heard many creative directors say that </p><p>copying ideas is fine because every idea that could have been thought of </p><p>has already been thought of. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>There's nothing left, they argue. Hence, you get two ads maybe three or </p><p>more that look alike. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>Of course, this is the lazy way out. People who copy don't have a </p><p>creative bone in their body save for a huge ego. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>But that's not the important point. The important point is that if the </p><p>client finds out that his agency has copied the idea from someone else, </p><p>he'll probably ask why he hasn't yet fired his agency. Why should he pay </p><p>someone for copying campaigns? It really doesn't make sense. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>Whoever you are, and whatever you want to get off your chest, send your </p><p>rants to rant@media.com.hk, and we'll print them anonymously. </p><p><BR><BR> </p>