Magazine article Marketing

Rubegg off, Fcuk: Your Ads Are Blloocks That Just Peddle Smut. (Opinion)

Magazine article Marketing

Rubegg off, Fcuk: Your Ads Are Blloocks That Just Peddle Smut. (Opinion)

Article excerpt

The news that French Connection hopes to penetrate the spirits market has not made my festive spirits throb.

I recently found myself debating the scurrilous 'fcuk' advertising with TBWA\London chief executive Garry Lace, whose agency was responsible for the campaign. Garry mounted an agile three-legged defence.

First, fcuk has been humungously successful, which proves that most people find its ads seductive. Second, compared with the hard stuff in the media, the campaign is soft, not to say flaccid, and cannot possibly cause serious widespread offence. Third -- this was Garry's climax - from Mozart to Van Gogh and on to James Joyce, groundbreaking creativity has often caused trouble at first, but troublemakers, he panted, set the agenda for the future.

Starting at the bottom, are the fcuk ads creatively ground-breaking? Will they set the agenda for future creativity? Never mind the risible comparisons with some of the world's great artists, is the fcuk campaign creatively outstanding in the little world of advertising?

'Fraid not. Advertisers have been jumbling up letters to draw attention to their brand names since time immemorial. Maybe nobody has done it before with letters that can make a rude word, but taking an old trick and using it naughtily hardly constitutes ground-breaking creativity. As for setting the agenda for the future, are we now to be bombarded with pirck, blloocks and rubeggy campaigns? Dog almighty!

But fcuk is quite limp in comparison with the welter of stiff porn in the media, isn't it? How can it give serious widespread offence? …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.