By Diego Vasquez

Last month online video sites held their own version of the upfront, where they gave elaborate presentations to media buyers and advertisers aimed at convincing them that they should allocate more of their budgets to online video. It was the first time these sites had laid out their visions for original and re-packaged video content for an entire year, instead of simply rolling out new programs throughout the year. The aim was to draw attention to new media at a time when buyers and planners are making up their TV budgets. Though online isn’t expected to steal much of the networks’ share this year, media people predict that over the next few years that will change. Already sites are offering “ratings” guarantees similar to those found on broadcast, and a large chunk of the estimated $3 billion to be spent on digital video this year will come from newfront commitments. All this is to say that the newfront should be around for years to come. Steve Kerho, senior vice president of strategy, media and analytics at the San Francisco agency Organic, talks to Media Life about the newfront’s prospects for stealing TV money, how many dollars will be committed, and which sites have the most impressive plans for the coming year.

Why is online video so hot with advertisers?

I think there’s a couple things. One is we live in this world of media fragmentation. That’s making it more difficult to get in front of a large-scale audience. I think the ratings for the top 10 primetime TV shows are about a third of what they were 10 years ago.

And of the total internet population, about 60 percent of that will watch a TV show online. It’s reached a tipping point and it’s been empowered by iPads selling like hot cakes. With tablets we genuinely have a third screen in the home right now.

So it’s fragmentation and increased penetration of video-friendly devices.

How does presenting the major online video players’ coming attractions all together in one event help strengthen their case to media people?

You’ve got this great confluence of all the decision makers being there. The clients are there, the agencies for the clients are there, they’re figuring out how they’re going to allocate their dollars, so it makes sense to try and plan the media at the same time.

Even if you don’t buy it at the same time, at least you’re planning for it.

It was always a challenge going to the TV upfront and then planning print buys, and then online was spread throughout the rest of the year. When online was 2 or 4 percent of the budget that’s one thing, but some clients are now spending 20, 25 or even 30 percent, so that number’s big enough where it has to be planned more.

For the YouTubes, AOLs, and Hulus of the world, they want to get in the minds of the brands at the same time they’re planning the rest of the media. And more of the content they deliver now is broadcast content repackaged to be on this other device. So in some cases it’s just repackaging it, and so that also makes sense to plan it all together.

And as more and more custom content comes out, they want to make sure they have share of mind with their advertisers at the same time they’re looking at new content on broadcast and cable.

Do you think they would have gotten as much attention if they’d done their presentations individually rather than as a group?

They definitely got more attention. I think it was a really smart move by the industry to help get more attention.

The broadcast networks will always lock down dates for their presentations. And the past few years you’ve seen some cable networks wedge their way into the broadcast week. So it’s not really surprising that the digital companies entered the field this year.

It was a concerted effort by Hulu, Google, Yahoo, AOL and Microsoft. They all had their own upfront-like presentations and they were all showcasing video content.

How much money do you think will be committed to digital video as part of the newfront?

I have some idea of what we’ll end up spending for 2012. The current estimates that we see between our clients and some third-party reporting is around $3 billion for online video for 2012. That’s the whole year. So what percentage of that will come out of the newfront? That’s hard to say.

I’ll put a stake in the ground and say a quarter to a third, so a meaningful amount.

Did it help the “newfront” that media people were familiar with the format because of the tradition of the upfront?

It did.

Online media compared to broadcast, it’s sort of the stepchild who doesn’t get a lot of attention. This helps validate and justify its importance. Its Thanksgiving and we’re not at the kids table anymore.

And the growth forecasts are really incredible. Some numbers take that $3 billion for this year and by 2015 it could be $7 billion. So more than double, it’s really significant growth. And up until now and going into next year we see a lot of that spending coming from search and display media [budgets], but there will be a point where it comes more from the broadcast budgets.

Will digital video steal dollars away from this year’s cable and broadcast upfront? Why or why not?

I don’t think it will this year.

We’re still living in the world, despite the fragmentation, where broadcast has incredible reach. It’s the fastest way to reach a large audience in a short period of time. But we’re nearing a tipping point, and there’re a lot of shows that will need online video to show growth and meet their numbers.

But some of the things that need to happen to see significant dollars move is there’s a lot of advantages to buying broadcast in the upfront. The biggest is you get an audience guarantee. If it’s a new show on ABC and I’ve got a guaranteed number for an audience share, if those numbers aren’t reached then they have to make that up.

So we’re seeing those types of guarantees making their way to digital video. And as more of that happens you will see a significant shift in dollars.

Also, the broadcast world is about gross and total ratings points [GRPs and TRPs], that’s how you build out a media plan. In online it grew up with a different set of metrics. It was more about impressions, view-throughs, I had so my people complete the video–it was completely different and it’s hard to compare the two.

There’s been a lot of back-and-forth in the industry, and Nielsen just launched this online GRP ratings system [which promises comparable ratings for online and TV viewing]. It needs to be proven out and people need to get used to it and get confidence with it, but if it happens it will make the content providers able to take similar metrics to broadcast and apply them and give you similar guarantees online.

Which sites’ presentations impressed you and why?

Some of the things that were interesting is a lot of these players are coming up with their own content–it’s not just about broadcast content and distributing it. Hulu is creating a market for independent TV, that’s pretty cool.

Google’s YouTube is pouring $100 million into 96 original channels. Hulu has rolled out four shows. ABC News and Katie Couric are joining forces with Yahoo for a weekly show. Oh, and Jeff Goldblum has a project with Amazon Studios.

The thing with something like YouTube is you’re not limited to the number of networks the FCC says can broadcast, so there are endless opportunities. But it of course has to be balanced, you have to have the content to fill them up.

Which sites have the most innovative deals and packages and why?

AOL said they would offer TV-style guarantees where audience delivery is based on demographics, not just clicks or impressions. Hulu has promised some advertisers that they only have to pay if their ads are viewed in full. And I guess Microsoft signed new partners including CBS Interactive and ESPN to accept TV spots within apps on Xbox.

An interesting point is how these things are all starting to blend together. These distinctions we had are falling apart with people wanting their content anywhere, anytime and on any device.

As a writer and speaker on mobile, there are a few questions I get over and over again. For instance, “Is the iPad a mobile device?” and, “Can’t I just send tablet users to my desktop site?”

Most of these questions are topics of intense debate and few have an easy answer. When it comes to mobile, there is a lot of grey and very little black and white.

But there’s one question I get frequently that does have a clear answer, at least in my opinion, and that is, “Does a digital marketing agency really need a Mobile Lead?”

Consumers Are Mobile, We Should Be, Too

I actually enjoy this one quite a bit since it gives me the chance to explain — and justify — my job. Let me just preface this by saying that in a perfect world, we wouldn’t need a “Mobile Lead” or a “Social Media Lead” for that matter. Consumer behavior is inherently mobile – and social – and so our efforts as marketers clearly should be as well.

But the reality is that with so many brands playing catch-up and the rate of innovation increasing so rapidly, having someone to shepherd your agency’s efforts in mobile is essential — which is lucky for me, since I happen to think it’s one of the most interesting positions in marketing.

For one thing, a big part of your job description is keeping up with every cool new gadget, trend, and vendor (though that is probably true for almost everyone in digital these days). What’s more rewarding is the fact that it forces you to learn a good amount about every single thing your agency does.

There’s a mobile component to everything a brand can do to connect with consumers, both online and off – from digital out of home to search marketing. So it stands to reason that there’s a digital aspect to everything your agency does as well. If your charge is to help your clients use mobile to full advantage, you need to have a solid understanding of it all.

Be Well-Versed in Development and Campaign Management

For example, you don’t need to know how to design and code a cross-platform website single-handedly, but you do need an above-average understanding of the tools and technologies involved before you can strategize what the end result should be.

Likewise, you don’t need to know how to effortlessly manage a paid media campaign, but you have to know way more than the average digital strategist to understand how a campaign should work for mobile. It’s a role that offers a level of exposure, growth, and hands-on learning like no other.

Now, I think of the Mobile Lead role as being a kind of strategist because that’s how I think of myself — as primarily a writer and a strategist. I do think that it’s probably the best term to use if you’re trying to hire a Mobile Lead — or become one. This doesn’t, however, explain what the job entails, which is really what you need to know.

Since the nature of the work crosses various disciplines and touches almost all of them, it’s highly strategic in nature. Of course, you also have to understand tactics as well — a lot of them. The best way I can think of to explain the nature of the work is to break down what I do on any given day into a few high level buckets.

Business Development

Nearly every RFP that comes along these days includes mobile in some way and many are now specifically mobile in nature. On any given day I’m working with the BD and Client Services teams to:

• Respond to RFPs.
• Write proposals.
• Refine and expand our repository of case study materials.
• Build and strengthen BD and Client Services’ understanding of mobile so that we can better work together and discover new opportunities to do great work.
• Evangelize to clients and help them better understand what their mobile opportunities are.

Strategy

Here’s where it gets really interesting. A Mobile Lead acts as a true strategist in two key ways:

• Project Strategy: This is the real hands-on strategy. If the project is fully mobile — say, development of an iPad app or a mobile web site — I’ll often find myself taking on the role of strategy lead, doing intensive, billable work from start to finish. If mobile is only a component of the overall project, the role becomes more of an executive sponsor type of responsibility, seeing to it that the project stays on track and develops according the original strategic vision.

• Corporate Strategy: This is where you act as your brand’s own strategist. A big part of the job is defining how mobile affects your business — how mobile ties into your brand story, what you do, and how you do it. This includes determining when to buy, build, or partner for mobile execution as well as how you present your POV on mobile to the outside world — i.e. customers and the industry at large.

Infrastructure

While many agencies now have a distinct mobile practice, it’s important to keep in mind that mobile touches every aspect of your business. Having mobile expertise consigned to a silo is a recipe for failure. The agencies most successful with mobile continually connect their Mobile Leads with all other teams to collaborate and share knowledge. In my own day to day work life I’m continually synching up with point people in:

• SEO: to continually refine our POV on organic search optimization for mobile platforms.
• Media: to develop best practices for mobile SEM and Display campaign content and management and to vet new mobile ad networks and mobile ad service providers.
• QA & Usability Testing: to maintain our mobile test plans and best practices and build our library of test hardware.
• Design: to explore new innovations in user experience design and discuss the impact of new devices, browsers, and technologies.
• Technology: to discuss ongoing best practices for development of mobile sites and apps and keep track of new opportunities afforded by industry innovation.
• Strategy: this is the team I spend the bulk of my time interacting with — supplying them with industry insights and keeping them up to date on new mobile tactics and opportunities.

Thought Leadership

This is the aspect of the job that I personally enjoy the most. Blogging, writing white papers, and POVs, speaking at conferences – putting original thinking and opinions out there in the marketplace has a two-fold benefit. It builds your agency’s reputation as a place that keeps pace with changes in the industry — and perhaps more important, as a place that cultivates intellectual capital.

However, you’ll also find that it’s the best possible business development you can do – every speaking engagement, however small, builds your reputation with current and potential clients in the audience and increases the likelihood of new business coming your way.

Believe it or not, there are about 100 other little things that come along in the course of a day, but these are the high-level basics. Every agency is different so this won’t be a cookie cutter example of how it all comes together but I think it’s a pretty good blueprint.

It’s a role that’s increasingly in demand as the need for mobile strategy and execution increases on the client side so hopefully this sheds light on what to look for if you’re hiring and what skillsets to build if you’re looking for a job.

It’s not a role that will last forever — as mobile becomes status quo, the need for someone to pull all the disparate threads together will dissipate, but expect to see this become a very common job description over the next few years. What it will evolve into is hard to say – these days, the only constant in our business is change.

This article was originally published on MarketingLand found here.

Rachel Pasqua is Executive Director, Mobile Strategy at Organic

I stumbled upon reference to this book when looking at requirements listed around a User Experience Designer position on Craigslist (not for me – a colleague’s posting, I swear). The posting required any potential applicant to have read the book, and have an opinion on its merits. It struck me that if a complete stranger, or potential employer in this case, was so adamant about such a publication – perhaps it was worth a read. After all, it helped build a baseball stadium.

What Worked

The most important component of this book for me was discussing the context for which technology was best used, and more importantly, how it affects our ability to think or create. In a few instances, there exists slight condescension when the author makes reference towards overeager bosses and engineers, but this manifestation of snarky-ness is done in a productive stance when referring to all of one’s “unimportant emails that need addressing right-away”. Email should be turned off, or at least down during sessions of productivity.

Dan Saffer coined the term, “Topless Meeting“, to describe a mandated no-laptop policy for technology meetings and business cultures. Sit down, look someone in the eye and give them undivided attention. In my work environment, we’re light years away from this, and at times suffer because of this. Distraction of one’s phone / email / laptop pulls them out of focus and into an alternative path of a meeting where nuances are lost, details skipped and, in my case, feelings are hurt. At times, it borders on narcissism, perceiving ourselves as being too important to even be present for the job we’re being paid to do.

Another solid takeaway from Bit Literacy is around the protection of one’s attention span – turning off all sources of distraction when trying to be creative and embed oneself in the challenge. I’ve found that even the computer is a distraction for the creative process. Stripping down to a pen and an oversize tab of paper can suffice in vetting ideas much better than a distracted pushing of pixels. It is more collaborative, people can discuss examples hanging on the wall and can discuss much better than if encased within an email attachment. Finding this sweet spot of focus and concentration, while still being able to supplement with referenced information (things that computers are good at doing) is a hard thing to accomplish. It is all too easy to be thrown off into a rabbit hole by even the slightest notion of wonder.

What Didn’t Work

I’ll start by framing this criticism by saying that this book was written in 2007. Our ability to manage data was still primarily on the desktop, and certainly hadn’t seen full realization of productivity either through mobile or using the cloud devices. Perhaps a bit of product placement (and subsequent marketing opportunities for Google) but when Larry Page was asked when he deletes messages from his inbox – he curtly replied, ‘never‘ – lest the attorneys be damned. Yet despite the callousness, I agree – the concept of a zero inbox is overblown. Many of the fears around inbox management and Outlook crashes due to large archives are now obsolete. Using web-based solutions alleviate the local hardware constraints the book’s arguments are centered around. Perhaps today’s version of Bit Literacy would offer similar principles to be applied making sure data redundancy is in-place if the cloud someday dissipates, a thought that genuinely terrifies me.

A similar argument can be said about file formats and versioning, chapters that are now somewhat redundant with today’s technology allowing us to work collaboratively and a reduced need for version control and files located on the desktop. With such a huge amount of data that the technorati has to process on a daily basis, the bookmarking, tagging and referencing of these resources presents a much more taxing dilemma than the single stream of an email inbox or file folder. Prioritization of multiple professional and personal social components (which hadn’t spread widely by 2007), the filtration of key influences against the static noise surely has a place in the next generation of Bit Literacy’s hyper-organization manifesto.

I also hold a different opinion against Bit Literacy’s described methods around task completion and organization. The section on to-do lists, for example, take the stance that paper is this slow, clumsy, disorganized, meta-less experience. That there is no indexing, categorization or other advantages found within a digital experience. For this task master, paper is my point of contact – as it features all the tangibility and tactical feedback I need to feel as if I made a mark. I feel more of a emotive experience to filling in a drawn checkbox and crossing off a list than clicking a virtual box and watching a pixelated line of text disappear. This should tailor into the author’s thesis of technology being a distracting element – that we need to reserve our usage for only tasks that require digital completion. The same principles exist – group by importance, category, delegated / non-delegated task or accomplishment date.

Worth Your Valuable Time?

Absolutely. Bit Literacy is a quick read, one that you can consume on public transit over the course of a single week. It helps understand habits that we fall into as our desire to clutch bright, shiny, connected objects grows greater and greater. I had a moment of reflection when seeing my infant son consistently try to grab my phone out of my hand. This is likely because the device lights up and makes noise – an instinctual attention-grabber, but I can also see that my wife and I are constantly fiddling around with our phones, especially while he’s playing around on the floor. Look at this microcosm of time as it relates to our career, as it parallels the small child playing on the floor – gone in an instant, and shouldn’t be experienced without giving our full attention.

Nick Cawthon is Director of Experience Architecture at Organic

Silos Brimming with Data

Since the dawning of the information age, Brand Managers have been inundated with reporting from a myriad of different agencies and independent data vendors.  Intuitively, one might think an organization with more data (or more raw materials) is inherently better off than an organization with less.  But the best marketers know it makes no difference if their silos are brimming with data or with grain – the success of any enterprise depends on its ability to efficiently process materials and distribute a salient product.

Data, much like grain, cannot be consumed from inside a silo.  So in the case of the Brand Manager, it begs the question how can a company’s data supply be intelligently synthesized and made actionable in a business context?

The Connection Index

The Marketing Intelligence practice at Organic found the answer to the dilemma of the data-inundated Brand Manager…but it wasn’t simple.  The solution – known as the “Connection Index” – is a proprietary application of tried and true advanced mathematical tools (like statistical data reduction, multi-variate factor analysis, and other quantitative voodoo) in the digital space.  In essence, it’s a custom-modeled encapsulation of several KPIs baked into a singular measure of significance.

At its most basic level, the algorithm evaluates interactions between a vast set of fast-moving digital data sources, and determines which channels drive the most intense consumer connection with the brand.  Ultimately, the algorithm produces an easily-tracked score that can be used to map connection to a brand throughout marketing campaign cycles.

The Proof is in The Pudding

Although the product was never positioned as a full-blown forecasting tool or marketing mix model, clients wanted to understand how it could be used to inform budget allocation decisions and future optimization initiatives.  At first, the team looked for correlations between brand sales and digital engagement.  But it didn’t stop there.  Organics’s Advanced Analytics team decided to undertake a Granger Causality study, and were able to demonstrate a causal relationship between the Connection Index and fluctuations in future brand sales.

This causal relationships now serves as the foundation for the CI’s forecasting capabilities, something the team plans to continually recalibrate over time.

The Holy Grail of Digital Marketing

In the words of a Senior Brand Manager for a $20B CPG company that recently purchased the product, “this is the Holy Grail”.  For the first time, the company had been able to directly attribute the impact of its online marketing initiatives upon offline sales.  Additionally, the brand team was able to leverage the model outside the digital realm to inform its CRM strategy and reprioritize consumer segmentations for outbound email campaigns.

Looking ahead, as brands invest more and more resources in diversifying their digital ecosystems, they’ll have increased demand for tools that help make sense of the millions of interactions occurring between paid/earned/owned channels.  And in turn, solutions like the Connection Index will continue to gain traction due to their real-time predictive properties and consumer insight.

For more information and a detailed analysis of the Connection Index, please visit Organic SVP of Strategy, Media & Analytics Steve Kerho’s Fast Company column here.

Ben Kaufman is an Analytics Manager at Organic

This past weekend saw a great turnout for the Interaction Designers Association REDUX – a recap of talks originally presented in Dublin, Ireland in early February. The San Francisco chapter of the IxDA gathered at Adobe in China Basin on a glorious spring day. Still weary from a winter full of rain, we were all eager to let some light into our perspectives on the trends and topics of the industry, as well as soak up the eclectic line-up of talks throughout the afternoon.

I was lucky enough to be asked to arrange attendance of the speakers and host the event – giving me a front-row seat for what my peers had to fly halfway around the world to see. Much to my surprise, and without exception, each and every speaker jumped at the chance to come and present their work again. The most difficult part of the event, from my view, was trying to conceive of questions that matched the intelligence of the speakers and their presentations.

GUI, NUI and wait, what.. now OUI?

Both Rachel Hinman and August De Los Reyes presented different dimensions around the use of Natural User Interfaces (NUI) and the trending of mobile devices to reduce the explicit impact of technology. We’ve gone beyond figuring out how to get content on mobile devices – this hurdle has been overcome, successfully hurdled past the tipping point and phones being solely used for telecommunication. Our challenge today is how to insert technology ubiquitously (either physically or virtually) to the point where our phones can stay in our pockets and the capabilities of technology will remain. The emphasis on an elegant GUI is certainly not gone, but the emphasis has instead shifted from computer generated display to the positioning and context in which the technology is present in.

August De Los Reyes, who is currently working on a “top secret project” for Samsung, had previously come from the Microsoft Surface team – an early, widely-known example of the NUI. Instead of forcing a user to scan, upload or type information through a keyboard or touchscreen, the recognition of simply placing the object on a table presents a clear case of a NUI. One can see a similar implementation from Microsoft, in their success with the Kinect Gaming system – take away the controllers and let the body gestures dictate the experience. With Kinect – the hardware no longer needs to be visible as it did with Surface, an interactive experience can take place using hidden cameras and providing feedback with audible cues. Comparing these two examples from Microsoft shows how Natural UI can progress towards a more Organic UI.

Organic UI today, but Passé Tomorrow?

Talks at the TEI 2011 Workshop in Portugal centered around the discussion of what constitutes an Organic vs. Natural experience. In their initial definitions, the term “organic” refers only to a subjective of the experience. Organic qualities, as it relates to a UI, is perceived through breaking down the plastic and glass encasement of hardware – or standard feature components of software design. A paper-based computer is an obvious incarnation – we don’t expect computers to bend, or be cordless or have a tactical sense of touch.

Presentation of natural components in place of where an interface commonly located – to “trigger a suspension of disbelief and become emotionally involved in a narrative”. Today, one can easily see the novelty of innovations such as a flexible, paper-like display or the optical recognition of Kinect. But when do we cease to become emotionally involved? This suggests that we become jaded with our computer interactions, and novel methods need to be continually applied in order to suspend our disbelief. Take an interaction method as widely accepted as the multi-touch trackpad and present this to a user who has never seen a laptop before, and even this method of interaction will seem both natural and organic.

As we type with our fingers, or draw back our lungs to breathe, we are operating a machine – the external hardware that tracks the subtleties of our physical interaction. Siri on the iPhone (Apple’s implementation of voice-controlled interaction) is a good example of an Organic User Interface. Visually, it is a glowing microphone that pulses when thinking, and displays a narrative on a question and answer. M. Fauscette provides an interesting write-up on the role of voice commands in the past and how far they’ve advanced in the 30 years since introduction. It has only been in the last two or three years has this become a Natural act – where we can speak to our cars or our phones and expect a functional response.

Barriers to Progress

What could be some boundaries as we seek to present technology ubiquitously everywhere and anywhere? Centuries of text-based communication do not ‘unwrite’ themselves very easily and new interface methods will certainly present a new learning curve. The less standard our delivery methods – and initially they should lack a standard to continue this subjective novelty, the steeper that curve may be.

There may also exist a constraint on the different experiences available within the interaction itself. An extremely tailored experience in implementation presents challenges in delivering variety around the content itself. A single, Organic method of human computer interaction (dancing in front of a Kinect or recalling a phone number through Siri) may currently be perceived as elegant and efficient – but reversing the tasks for each would render each incompatible. Will walling off the ability for one size to fit all result in a loss of adoption, or is Organic UI a term and a mindset appropriated only for specialized devices?

From SXSW Interactive -

After the torrential rain finally cleared up in Austin, I decided to venture across the street from the convention center towards Google Village and take in a few talks on what’s new from the “Big G”. To my surprise, the village is literally a full residential block with houses devoted to Google products — from hearing about the latest from Google Maps to hacking Android devices.

I made my way over to the “Discovery” House featuring Google’s Project Re: Brief (http://www.projectrebrief.com/coke) experiment, which is an attempt to refresh some of the most iconic ad platforms known to mankind. By adding all the bells & whistles of what digital provides, these classic marketing platforms become new again. Yet, the real litmus test is whether the addition of digital really enhances or weakens the impact of the original campaign.

Case-in-point is Coca-Cola’s “Hilltop” spot from 1971, featuring a chorus of young people from around the world singing, “I’d like to buy the world a Coke”. Keep in mind that this is during the time of the Vietnam War and the growing peace movement pervading the younger generations. Needless to say, it was an enormously successful and memorable campaign. Will it resonate with today’s connected generation? Does the notion of “buying the world a Coke” actually deliver the same gesture of bringing the world closer today?

Well, Google met up with Harvey Gabor, the original art-director that created the spot, and brainstormed ways to bring the idea of buying a complete stranger a Coke a reality. While keeping the original soundtrack of the chorus intact, the song transforms into a call-to-action to invite the viewer to send a personal message to any connected Coca-Cola vending machine across the earth. On the other end, a person receives the message and gets a free Coke. Voilà!

I admit, I love seeing interesting ways to connect the digital with the physical world. Yet from a marketing sense, this execution quickly becomes a shiny object that falls flat because it allows technology to overshadow the emotional impact of the original message. Consider the gravitas of the 1971 campaign, one that delivered a message of hope and peace in a time of war. The 2012 edition simply shoots out a can of Coke to a stranger on the other side of the world and says, “Enjoy!”

If “buying the world a Coke” were tied to addressing a relevant issue happening in context of today, then perhaps the message would have become more balanced and delivered real impact. I do commend Google on taking on these challenges with Project Re: Brief – one that is quite daunting since these campaigns sit of the top of the heap of advertising history. Yet the attempt at making Coca-Cola’s “Hilltop” concept contemporary sadly does not outshine the original.

Derek Scott, Group Creative Director