Let me elaborate.

I am of the belief that today’s most purposeful marketing (that which satisfies the near-or-long term “bottom line”) is that finds unique ways/methods to embrace/reference/dance around culture. In a landscape ridden by unorganized noise where it’s always rush hour, paired with unlimited interpretations of pounds and pounds of data, it’s often difficult to navigate where to push, where to pull, and quite frankly, where the hell to rest your hat (this is especially true of national/global brands).

Fear not. (And keep reading after the jump.)

To add some perspective to my earlier comparison, I cringe whenever I hear the term “they won’t get it” when discussing campaign/project creative that is perceived to fall short with the “masses” (as if we’re talking to one, singularly-conscious general market). Not so much because it isn’t true, but because it implies that it’s a bad thing (it isn’t). In fact, the moment the argument is even entertained, I’d argue the authoritative tendency of said brand erodes, even if immediately unnoticeable.

Your product or service isn’t going anywhere (at least I hope not), and neither is its fundamental raison d’être. However, keep in mind that culture is the most ethereal variable in your quest for supremacy. No matter how much we as brand stewards think we do, we don’t “own” culture- no one does. Culture is a free-flowing, evolving/devolving phenomenon that we can, at best, permeate or predict-  never fully control.

In my opinion, not making a point is of greater consequence than one’s audience/community/tribe not “getting it”. Because if you’re truly positioned the right way and equipped with an unwavering sense of self (that whole meme of “brands having personalities”), your audience is guaranteed to eventually get “it” because you (and your narrative/creative) will shepherd them there. People know when their intelligence is put on trial. There is nothing more boring or of less impact than a prefabricated, fly-by-night attempt at attention in this era where differentiation is the holy grail. Difficult takes a day, impossible takes a week, and engagement takes a leap of faith in looking passed the LCD (lowest common denominator) to achieve true suspension of disbelief.

suits suck!

(DISCLAIMER: This post contains the thoughts of the individual author, and in no way reflects the opinions of his employer or its affiliates.)

We believe that, at its core, culture always wants to change- especially pop culture. In fact, change it its whole job. Cultural change is imminent, waiting for random events, either large or small, that will push it over the edge.

In the end, cultural change is the product of an alchemy of events and individual influence. As the cultural conditions change, the change is expressed in particular events; influencers become early detectors of this change and communicate it to the rest of the community.

-Alex Bogusky, “Baked In”

Welcome back, smart hip-hop promotional marketing. And have a nice weekend.

KEAPHOPE INTRO

It’s funny how times have changed. As music has gone to a mostly digital world we’ve lost a lot of the importance of cover art and overall branding that used to go into making a project stand out. We’ve seen some recent examples of good work here and there, and its those exceptions that inspired this conversation to start. While distracting myself on twitter from the growing mountain of work for the day job I checked the homie Richie Cruz’s twitter update talking about a release with something special, Curren$y’s upcoming, Pilot Talk. Richie was praising the originality of the artwork, and reading his statement, I found myself nodding in agreement and immediately emailed Richie to talk about getting this conversation going. After a quick lunch, we found ourselves on the same page with music art. We will be sharing these musing both here on KeapHope and on Richie’s personal blog,Suits Is Watching.

Over the coming weeks Richie and I will take some time to present one upcoming project a week and dig into the details that round out these releases creatively, beyond the music, to make them standout among the seemingly thousands of free downloads, mixtape, torrent searches and classic releases that fill our itunes daily. We begin with the project that launched the discussion, Curren$y’s, Pilot Talk.

After the jump, intro thoughts from Suits Is Watching and our conversation on Pilot Talk

SUITS IS WATCHING INTRO

Honestly, album art and inserts are (were) the reason I’m such a hip-hop snob. The thing about hip-hop is that we don’t always require the most incredible, thought-provoking Canibusesque rhymes or photoshoots with million dollar budgets- those things are great at surface value, but usually don’t pay dividends in the grand scheme of things. All I ask for is honesty and some type of artistic integrity (sounds like a pipe dream, but I have faith that it exists somewhere…) Ultimately, the demise of the CD has led to something interesting… and great. Music is everywhere. Google a song name, it pops up in mp3 format with the associated artwork transfixed neatly next to it. The problem is that its about 5 pixels tall by 5 pixels wide.

Ok, that’s an exaggeration, but you get my point.

More music being downloaded means more artwork needs to be produced. Standards need to be established for digital single/mixtape/album art…so they can be broken and surpassed by another. The amazing thing is that we’re living in a time where access to tools like Photoshop enable everyone to create. The problem is, every one shouldn’t (even if they can). Hopefully through the subsequent posts, Jamie and I can figure out what the hell is going on, and make sense to what should be applauded and frowned upon as artwork battles for the blog, the iTunes corner, and most importantly, the iPhone screen.

THE CONVERSATION

KEAPHOPE:

Before we even get too deep into this project, I just wanted to comment on your email notes for the project. You made a great point on the size relationship to music, with all of our current relationship to music art being limited to the lower corner of itunes and maybe the screen on an iphone/ipod. How much do you think this is changing the work? Is it becoming something that requires readability at a super small scale? Talk about a big change from the 12×12 world of vinyl covers.

I remember reading something about Kanye’s cover art for 808’s, about how its simplicity translated in the modern space. Clean lines, no photo, just text. It worked great for the mood of the album but more importantly was a strong visual cue to what was actually being listened to. Lets start with this point as jump off point for the Curren$y project. First off what makes this work great? For me it starts simply with getting away from the played out BIG ASS HEADSHOT cover that so many new artists use. Here we have illustration, down to the text.

How readable is it small? Well, maybe not super readable but it think its clearly Spitta. The color alone is a cue that Curren$y has embraced, from his love of herb to his JETS logo use. That alone give a nice visual reference to the listener when glancing down at that ipod.

Illustration. How great is this? DD172 has done a couple pieces in this style, and there is a good crew poster with headshots of all of the memebers in this similar free flowing look. To me it evokes the clouds of smoke you think of when picturing a Curren$y show and you’ve got to love the New York to New Orleans elements from the skyline to the Super Dome.

SUITS IS WATCHING:

Well, as someone who appreciates depth, dualities, and metaphors, it was fresh to see a contemporary rapper incorporate a “look beneath the surface” approach to illustration while maintaining some universal elements that won’t box out the masses that refuse to think. I’m not a creative director by any stretch of the imagination, but I work with the best of ‘em (ha!), and I’m pretty sure that they’d appreciate the boldness (not to mention the symbolic significance) implied with the heavy use of green. It immediately reminds me of how purple was used as the dominant color in Big Boi’s first installment of “Got Purp?” (ironic how weed references define the hues…)

Another interesting thing worth noting is the absence of Curren$y’s likeness in the cover. The classically-trained marketer in me is screaming, “It’s his debut album! People need to see him!”, but the culturally-aware marketer in me feels the opposite and recognizes that this is actually a blessing in disguise. The artwork for “King Kong” and “The Hangover” are consistent in aesthetic, setting up this final “big reveal”. Also, as self-assured and cocky as his rhymes are, he isn’t arrogant or narcissistic- his rhymes are his identity, and he chooses to define himself through his words- which, in the attention-starved landscape, is admirable.

All in all, I think your man is onto something. In linking with an “art collective” in DD172, he’s engineering both mystique and artistic credibility at the same time, setting a foundation for himself while setting himself apart from the status quo.

Regardless of performance, he’s already won a victory in my book.

KEAPHOPE:

You make some great points. Is the weed thing too much sometimes? Maybe, but this dude is playing perfectly into his audience. He knows who is buying his music and why. The kids need something to ride to and from what I’ve heard, this won’t dissapoint. I can easily picture this cover up front in a video with Curren$y and Wiz Khalifa breaking up bud on the top of the jewel case. It has a bit of a timelessness to it that I think you may have hit on with the no photo setup. There is a tactic we don’t see much. It seems way to easy to go ahead and throw an artists mug on the front a CD with some of-the-moment type treatment and call it a day. This steps enough away from that system to really make its mark.

I like that you brought up the single cover art for “King Kong” and “The Hangover.” Here we have three different treatments, each with their own style that make them standout on their own, but we have some similarities through out. First on “King Kong” we actually get a glimpse of a Spitta character, still illustrated, but perched over the destruction below. All black/white/grey and looking like a foot in the door, “I’m here now pay attention” message to the hip-hop community. This is a dude who has been aligned with No Limit, Cash Money and now sort-of-Roc-a-fella, but def Dame Dash and this is him being presented like his first true release. While most will sort of snicker at the idea of a dude with a near thousand+ song catalog calling this his debut, I agree with Richie on this being an introduction to the masses. Fitting for the cover art on “King Kong,” the firs single for the project.

Next we look at the Mikey Rocks assisted cut, “The Hangover.” Again illustrated ties to the other content, though this time with a slightly more colorful setting. Funny if you were too consider this the results of a night full of, Pilot Talk, infused fun. I like the almost Art Deco inspired treatment to Curren$y’s name on the “King Kong” cover that seems to be revisited here in the color palette and comic’d treatment to this cover. At first glance one might not see that the pool scene is completely trashed from a night of debauchery, but to me that ties in perfectly with the idea of a hangover, like the movie, its not always clear till you start piecing together the details. The type treatment here ties in well being almost an after thought, scrawled in to the cover like a name and number on a napkin. To me this looks like a sample sketch that was refined and left a bit loose and compliments the more detailed refinement we see on the albums true cover.

I think its important we at least mention the artist involved in the illustration of the cover. Pilot Talk, was illustrated by David Barnett, the Creative Director for DD172. I haven’t been able to find out too much information on the artist, but lets hope his work continues to influence the direction of the DD172 collective and rings out among other new projects from the rest of the hip-hop community. Mr Barnett, if you ever want to get down on the next conversation be sure to drop me a line.

Till the next Covered Conversation go out and cop, Pilot Talk, in store today.

The other day I was listening to “Beamer, Benz, or Bentley”, the awe-inspiring yet thematically out-of-place-with-the-times opus by Lloyd Bank$ & Juelz Santanta, when it occurred to me that there was an astounding 8 or 9 playful imitations iterations simultaneously being discussed on various blogs, web magazines, and mechanism for self-promotion on Twitter, etc. If I didn’t know any better, I might not know who’s song was the original.

Do we even know who produced the joint? Theoretically, if ‘Elz and Banks propagated it into our consciousness, they’re more promoters of the beat than they are owners of it- something that is alarming in this era where the life cycle of a “single” is comparable to that of a palm tree growing in Canada.

How did we get here?

Pardon me if I’m overstating the obvious, but this dynamic exists in part as a result of a lack of quality filters. And the truth is, current standards don’t call for one in these rabid days of UGC and digital entitlement. There’s no respect or “content etiquette”- ideologically, everything has become one big, flat (and boring) plateau. The dominance that the blogosphere (and I’m referring to those who are more glorified citizen reporters than journalists) has attained by promoting and encouraging a cacophony of unauthorized- and often uninspiring- “remixes” immediately after a joint has come out has withered our appetite for flava flavor. We’re being fed content so rapidly, our tastes have dissolved, and as a byproduct, our standards have devolved.

How have we become desensitized to hot sh*t?

I don’t consider myself an old head to be reminiscing on days past, but I do consider myself someone of discerning taste and understanding of the role that different events played within the musical environment. If you jumped on another beat unauthorized, it was a beat jack, and in the case that it was done tastefully, it was reserved for late-night Flex, or a Clue? tape. Period. Additionally, your rendition was never called the “remix”- it was rightfully called “part 2”, or some alternate version (See: “Money, Cash, Hoes”. And it’s baby brother, the marvelous Money, Cash, Hoes (Part II)”).

I remember hearing the clever, breakthrough social satire genius that was Sporty Thievez’s “No Pigeons” in ’98 and thinking to myself in simultaneous perplexity and awe, “That isn’t their beat! How can they be on the radio going at TLC on their own joint?” Ownership was implied. It was revered. Today? Not so much.

To be fair, this dynamic of transparent entitlement has paid dividends within the career of certain artists: arguably, Kid Cudi wouldn’t have eventually attained critical mass if the abstract “Day N’ Nite” never made it across Jim Jones’s and Pitbull’s respective radars (ironic how in this case the large rappers act as early adopters. Who knew?). However, it opened up the floodgates for everyone to have a “Day N’ Nite”. Fast forward a year and a half, and everyone wants you to hear their “Exhibit C”, or their “Over” (which hasn’t been out more than two weeks!)… Ugh.

IF IT’S EVERYONE’S JOINT, WAS IT EVER ANYONE’S JOINT?

I say that to say this:

If hip-hop music is organically transitioning into a “riddim” culture, where artists are culturally inclined to be competitive on a dedicated beat, I think that’s pretty fresh, and certainly good for producers. But we need to ensure that this tipping of the scales is more pronounced, and allow new norms to be well, norms- giving the masses a defined culture to indulge in and guidelines to adhere to. Otherwise, the “I’m jumping on this because I got the instrumental, and I’m shooting a video because I can” attitude will continue to stain the game that is dying for some creativity. Literally.

Hip-hop was always more fun when there were rules.

Advertising Age debuted an exposé today (in their “Digital A-List 2010″ section) about Lady Gaga and her unfathomable, drought-defeating anomalous rise to acclaim in which they attribute her success to social media. While I don’t completely disagree, I’m not sure if Gaga’s time in the spotlight has been a landscape-definining case study for social media marketing.

I’ll elaborate….

While the numbers suggest her to be a social media rock star by Web media standards (a combined 8 million fans on Facebook & Twitter, and a disgusting amount of cross-channel views & impressions *Cam face*), her campaign to the top hasn’t exemplified any market-defining activity or out of the ordinary use of the space- she’s a champion of the old model ruling with an iron fist in the new media environment.

But for how long, and to what extent?

Using Twitter as an example- at 2.8 million Twitter followers with only 255 tweets, Lady Gaga hasn’t exhibited the “socially engaged”  behavior that us marketers advise our (non-human) clients to exemplify. Her machine (Akon), her brand associations (Polaroid, Beats by Dre, Mac, Virgin Mobile), and her alliances with various areas of lifestyle have largely defined what we’d consider to be her brand ethos, and have had a balloon-like effect on her perceived status. Not to mention her timing- 2008 witnessed a renewed general interest in electronic “pop” music, as evidenced by the domestic popularity of Daft Punk, Justice, etc.

The argument here is that the digital landscape has simply provided a means for her story and persona to proliferate amongst people who were genuinely affected through a traditional media onslaught – and that she’s done right by it by virtue of her embracing it, even in the limited extent that she has. We live in a world where music sales are diminishing, yet consumption is at an all-time high. That simply means that to affect the bottom line (in this case music sales), popularity within the digital space is a metric that, when combined with great PR and key integrated marketing approaches, can move the needle. Mashable’s Alex Mann asked the right question in his piece on Gaga’s social media explosion: “if there was an absence of free channels to hear Gaga, would her album sales be higher? Or, does the social media universe only perpetuate and support her existing successful career?”

I truly don’t know. However, if anyone is in the right to set digital precedents to use culture to push product, she’d definitely be the most fitting.

Stay tuned.

SUITS!

from New York Magazine:

V magazine has released a preview of the issue “Page Six” had reported would be devoted to plus-size models. Turns out that the “Size Issue,” as they’re calling it, doesn’t only include plus ladies. In the “One Size Fits All” spread shot by Terry Richardson, Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski pose side by side in the same looks and similar poses, “creating quite a sizeable comparison,” according to the press release. The point is to prove that “fashion can flatter any figure.