Latest Posts

RSS

THE GREAT LEAP BACKWARDS

In 1957, a billion Chinese were going hungry.

Mao Zedong couldn’t admit this was because of the failings of his communist agricultural policies.

The reason must be something else.

He heard that sparrows were eating lots of grain.

That must be the reason.

So began ‘The Great Sparrow Campaign’.

The people must do whatever was necessary to rid China of sparrows.

That way the people would have plenty to eat.

It became everyone’s responsibility to help wipe out sparrows.

Masses of schoolchildren were taken on outings to destroy nests, to smash eggs, to kill chicks.

Everyone with any kind of gun was told to shoot sparrows wherever they saw them.

Poison was put wherever sparrows lived.

The Chinese organised in thousands to visit the areas where the sparrows gathered.

They did anything to stop them landing in the trees.

They made vast amounts of noise: sounding horns, thumping drums, even banging old pots and pans.

Propaganda films of the period show entire villages participating right across China.

They wouldn’t let the sparrows land and eventually the sparrows exhausted themselves and dropped to earth dead.

All over China, towns and villages were given recognition for the amount of sparrows they killed.

One day alone, in Shanghai, they killed 198,000.

Eventually, sparrows in China were eradicated, around two billion birds.

So that was the end of the problem, now food would be plentiful.

Well not quite.

What Mao Zedong hadn’t allowed for was what else the sparrows ate, besides grain.

They ate locusts.

Without the sparrows, the locusts had nothing to stop them.

They multiplied on a massive scale.

And locusts were many times more destructive than sparrows.

Plagues of locusts took over huge areas of Chinese farmland.

Each swarm covering hundreds of square miles made up of trillions of locusts.

It resulted in the Great Famine.

Which resulted in thirty million people dead from starvation.

Which created a new problem: what could be done to control the locusts?

The only solution was for China to import millions of sparrows from Communist Russia.

To try to put everything back the way it had been.

Because the solution had been worse than the problem.

Which is pretty much what’s happened to advertising.

Advertising was good, but we were looking for a way to make it better.

So we had to replace intuition and normal common-sense.

We had to make everything rational and verifiable, measurable and accountable, sensible and scientific.

And what happened?

We killed off the intuitive, the common-sense, the fun.

Advertising became formulaic, dull, invisible and predictable.

We killed off the sparrows and the locusts were worse.

THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL

Lindsey Stone had a joke going with a friend on Facebook.

They used to post cheeky, irreverent photos of themselves challenging authority.

If they saw a NO SMOKING sign they’d take a picture standing next to it with a cigarette.

If they saw KEEP OFF THE GRASS they’d take a photo on the grass in front of it.

At the supermarket in the BASKETS ONLY line, they’d take a photo with a fully loaded trolley.

Not hysterically funny maybe, but relatively harmless.

Then one day Lindsey saw a sign that said SILENCE AND RESPECT.

She took a photo of herself screaming at the word SILENCE and giving the finger to the word RESPECT.

Again just a harmless bit of fun.

Only this time it wasn’t a harmless bit of fun.

Because she hadn’t noticed what else it said on the sign.

It said ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY.

Arlington Cemetery is where the USA’s war dead are buried.

Soldiers who’ve been killed fighting for their country.

And the photo didn’t look like a cheeky little dig at authority.

It looked like Lindsey was abusing the memory of all the people that had died defending America.

On Arlington’s website it says it the cemetery “serves as a tribute to the service and sacrifice of every individual laid to rest within these hallowed grounds”.

And Lindsey Stone was giving the finger to all those brave men and women.

Except of course she wasn’t.

All she saw was the words SILENCE AND RESPECT, an opportunity for a joke.

But all everyone else saw was the words ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY.

And two sets of people interpreted her photo completely differently.

Lindsey thought it was a bit of fun, and sent it to her friend’s Facebook page.

Which didn’t have any privacy settings.

So a lot of people saw it who weren’t in on Lindsey’s joke.

They were disgusted and they shared their disgust all over the Internet.

Because no one else was in on Lindsey’s joke the photo went viral and she became a national hate figure.

One response was a ‘Fire Lindsey Stone’ page set up on Facebook, it immediately got 12,000 likes.

Among the milder responses were “Lindsey Stone needs to be fired, she isn’t American” and “Send the dumb feminist to prison” and “Fuck you whore, I hope you die a slow and painful death”.

For a year Lindsey wasn’t even able to leave her house.

She was eventually fired from her job.

Which is ironic, because her job was caring for adults with learning and intellectual disabilities, and Lindsey was apparently very good at it.

In fact on that particular day she was taking twenty patients on a trip to visit Arlington Cemetery to show them where heroes are buried.

Lindsey Stone is a valuable lesson for all of us.

With any media: communication is everything.

And in all communication it’s not enough to take responsibility for speaking correctly.

We have to take responsibility for being heard correctly.

MAKE FEAR YOUR FRIEND

In 2006 Apple’s revenues were $19 billion.

The iPod alone was $7.7 billion of that, it had 90% of the personal music-player market.

Things were looking good.

So why did Steve Jobs wake up in a sweat?

Why did he start writing numbers down, making phone calls, rushing into work the next day arranging meetings and cancelling projects?

Why did Steve Jobs think he had to avert a crisis?

Well precisely because things were looking good.

The previous day, Steve Jobs had seen the new Nokia mobile phone.

No big deal, just another mobile phone: It had the usual range of trivial features.

One of the gimmicks was you could download six tunes onto it.

Not very useful, no one cared.

But something at the back of Steve’s mind nagged away at him.

And he woke up in the middle of the night thinking “If they can download six tunes what happens if they can download sixty tunes? Or six hundred tunes? That’s the end of the iPod – that’s fifty percent of our business gone – It’ll be too late to worry then, we won’t have a company.”

And he started writing down numbers, doing calculations, and as far as he could see there was only one answer.

So he started making phone calls, organising meetings and cancelling projects.

The next morning he got his people together and he said “We’re getting into the phone business”.

Naturally they thought he was crazy, he was being paranoid.

But he explained they had no choice.

Either they ate Nokia’s lunch, or Nokia would eat theirs.

So in 2007 Apple launched the iPhone.

By 2009 the iPod still made up $8 billion of their revenue, but the iPhone was nearly $7 billion.

By 2013 the iPod had dropped to $2.3 billion of revenue, but the iPhone had grown to $91 billion.

Apple is now the world’s largest smart phone manufacturer.

Nokia, who Steve Jobs was scared stiff of, barely exists anymore.

Mainly because he was frightened and they weren’t.

He knew that fear is the most valuable tool an entrepreneur can have.

Fear will give you an edge on the competition.

Recently I was reading that fear is one of the great strengths of species that evolve.

Suppose you can’t tell the shape of a bear from a rock.

If you always assume the shape is a rock most times you will be right, and you’ll lead a more relaxed life.

Right until the time you’re wrong and it actually is a bear.

Then you die a painful death.

But suppose you always assume that shape is a bear, and you run.

Most times you will be wrong, because it actually is a rock.

But the one time it really is a bear, you’ll survive.

So species that respect and cultivate fear are the ones that survive.

They learn to make fear their unfair advantage.

They are more aware, more attentive, and have an edge over the competition.

Like Steve Jobs, they know fear is their friend.

FIRST DO NO HARM

Marc Koska is not a doctor, yet he’s saved nine million lives.

How did he do that?

He did it by preventing doctors doing what they see as their job.

But how can that be a good thing, isn’t that harmful?

No because, amazingly, fatal diseases are being spread by doctors.

He’s preventing a great deal of that.

This didn’t happen back in history, this is happening right now.

Doctors are transmitting fatal diseases by re-using and recycling hypodermic syringes.

In India and Africa the scale of the problem is vast.

Every year 23 million cases of hepatitis are transmitted via re-used syringes.

Every year 300,000 cases of HIV are transferred via re-used syringes.

Marc Koska secretly filmed a hospital where forty patients were given injections from just two needles; whatever disease anyone had was passed along to the rest.

Koska secretly filmed doctors injecting patients suffering from syphilis and HIV, then immediately using the same needle to inject babies and small children.

Nurses tell Koska their hospital routinely uses each needle on thirty to forty patients a day.

Then it’s washed in the same luke-warm soapy water as all the other needles and they’re all used again tomorrow.

Marc Koska has invented a way to stop this happening.

He’s invented the single-use hypodermic syringe.

It’s made on exactly the same machine as ordinary syringes but after one use the plunger breaks off and it can’t be re-used.

It costs 5 cents.

The World Health Organisation estimate it’s saved nine million lives.

The problem is it seems a waste to throw away a syringe.

To doctors a needle is just a way to deliver medicine.

They don’t understand washing and re-using a syringe is doing more harm than good.

Hospital authorities estimate single-use syringes cut an average 60% off the time patients spend in hospital.

So every $1 spent on these syringes saves $200 in hospital costs.

But in India, when 495 people contracted hepatitis, the government spent $150,000 on mass vaccinations.

Each vaccination cost twenty times as much as a disposable syringe.

But 92 people died because the government saved money by re-using and recycling their hypodermic syringes.

And yet in India a bottle of Coke costs 50 cents, the same as ten single-use syringes.

The problem is that doctors have a high-status occupation.

They’ve had many years of training.

They’ve learnt to recognise the symptoms of many diseases.

They know the names of all the medicines available.

They can’t be bothered with something as trivial as needles.

How the right medicine gets into the patient is a trivial concern.

So the doctors concentrate on the complicated part of their job and ignore the simple part.

Because humans are always attracted to a complicated solution.

The more complicated it is, the better it must be.

We are all susceptible to that.

And, like the doctors, we ignore the simple solution and are seduced by the most complicated explanation available.

Which is why, like those doctors, most of what we do doesn’t work.

We never learn: simple works, complicated doesn’t.

TWO MINUSES CAN MAKE A PLUS

Every year two million stray dogs are put to death in the USA.

They are taken to shelters to see if anyone wants them.

Hardly anyone does of course.

They’re dirty, often diseased, undomesticated.

No one has the time and patience to clean and train them so they die.

What’s the alternative?

If only there was a group of people that had enough time to clean and train those dogs?

They’d be much more likely to find good homes.

Then they wouldn’t have to die.

But where could you find a group of people like that?

People who would do all that work for no pay?

A group of people with that amount of time to spare?

There is one place: prison.

In prison there are lots of people with nothing but time.

So the Massachusetts Department of Correction tried an experiment.

They partnered with a rescue charity called Don’t Throw Us Away.

They asked prisoners to volunteer to train and look after dogs.

For eight weeks a dog would share an inmates’ cell.

Each inmate would keep the dog clean and handle all its medical needs.

They would feed and exercise the dog.

And they would train the dog in basic obedience, so that after eight weeks the dog could find a good home.

And they wouldn’t have to die.

The results were better than anyone expected.

Inmates couldn’t wait to get a dog to share their cell.

From hardened criminals came an outpouring of pent up emotion.

Feelings they couldn’t show in front of the other inmates.

But they could to a dog.

And prison authorities found the inmates began to open up and learn tenderness, care and companionship.

And an amazing thing happened.

While the prisoners were helping the dogs get better, the dogs were doing the same for the prisoners.

As one inmate said “When you’re in prison you put a wall up. A dog is a live being that trusts you totally, so you trust the dog. You don’t need that wall.”

More than that, the inmates felt sympathy for the abandoned dogs.

The dogs had had a rougher life than they had.

Another of the inmates said “People forget about you when you’re inside. Just like these dogs been forgot about. They have to learn to trust again.”

And for once the inmates could see the benefit of rules.

If they could teach the dogs to learn to obey simple commands, they had a chance of finding a good home.

And the inmates worked with the dogs on learning the rules.

Another inmate said “Some of these dogs have been through a lot. I’ve got to show her there’s a better life.”

And, when their dog actually gets a good home the prisoners are thrilled. It’s almost like graduation.

And gradually, without realising it, the inmates are also being rehabilitated back into the world.

They are learning about patience, responsibility and trust.

As another inmate said “I’m learning to be a dad, to be part of my family when I go home”.

It reminds me of an ad Neil Drossman wrote years ago in New York.

It was for a charity that retrained disabled people, and it showed a man in a wheelchair repairing a TV set.

The headline said: WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS A TV SET REPAIRING A MAN

A KERNEL OF TRUTH

Harland David Sanders was born in Indiana in 1890.

In 1903 he got a job painting horse-drawn carriages.

In 1904 he became a farm hand.

In 1905 a streetcar conductor.

In 1906 he joined the army and drove a team of mules in Cuba.

In 1907 he became a blacksmith in Alabama.

In 1908 a fireman on the railroad.

In 1909 a labourer in Tennessee.

In 1911 a lawyer in Arkansas.

In 1913 he was selling life insurance in Indiana.

In 1924, for the first time, he moved to Kentucky and got a job.

He ran a Shell station and discovered the concept of franchising.

The more he sold, the more money he, and Shell, made.

Harland David Sanders loved the idea.

He began thinking of ways to get people to choose his station rather than the one across the street.

He started selling food: country style ham, chicken, and steak.

He began by selling it from his own kitchen table.

It was so successful he eventually bought the station across the street and began serving his food there.

In 1937 he opened a motel and restaurant selling his food next door.

Trade was so good that the Governor of Kentucky made him a ‘Colonel of Kentucky’.

This was a purely honorary title given to any businessman who contributed to the good of the state.

The Governor made 5,000 ‘Colonels’ that year.

In 1952, aged 62, Sanders decided to try the franchise concept with his food.

He had a friend who owned a diner in Utah and he persuaded him that fried chicken would separate it off from the local hamburger joints.

And Sanders would get 5 cents for every chicken sold.

In order to make it a franchise he needed a brand.

He decided to call it ‘Kentucky Fried Chicken’ to make it sound different to ordinary fried chicken.

He used the line ‘finger lickin’ good’ to give it the feel of southern down-home quality.

And he decided that he himself would become the symbol that sold the franchise.

So he began to dress like a Southern, civil-war era, plantation owner.

He called himself ‘Colonel Sanders’ (although he’d only ever been a private in the army).

He wore a white suit and a white hat, he wore a string tie and carried a cane.

He grew a goatee, which he dyed white to match his hair.

And everyone accepted him as ‘The Colonel’.

Despite the fact that this was 1950s America, and no one had dressed like that for a hundred years.

And so no one questioned ‘the Colonel’s secret recipe’ embodied the quality of ‘Kentucky Fried Chicken’.

In fact it soon became America’s alternative to hamburgers.

‘Colonel Sanders’ travelled everywhere promoting the brand.

By 1965 there were 600 franchises.

In 1969 the company was listed on the New York stock exchange.

In 1986 PepsiCo Inc bought the company.

Today KFC has 37,000 outlets in 110 countries.

And ‘Colonel Sanders’ is still on every box, every bucket, every sign, every napkin.

As Harland David Sanders knew, all you’re ever selling is yourself.

WE DON’T WANT WHAT’S GOOD FOR US

Henry George was an enlightened economist.

Martin Luther King, Albert Einstein, Franklin D. Roosevelt, George Bernard Shaw, and Leo Tolstoy have quoted him.

He proposed a third way, between capitalism and communism.

His main principle was that a man should profit from his labour, but not profit from what belonged to everyone.

So, instead of income tax, he proposed a tax on the value of land.

Because the land itself belongs to everyone.

One of his followers was Lizzie Magie.

In 1904 she decided this should be taught to children.

She turned it into a game, so they could learn while playing.

It was called ‘The Landlord’s Game’.

It was designed to show children the cruelty of profit for greed.

It consisted of rents, mortgages, deeds, imprisonment and fines.

The object was to keep acquiring land until you owned all the land in a certain sector.

Once you had a monopoly, you could charge double or treble the normal rent.

The goal of the game was to bankrupt every other player.

Lizzie said of her game “It is a practical demonstration of the present system of land-grabbing with all its usual outcomes and consequences. Let the children once see clearly the gross injustice of our present land system and when they grow up, if they are allowed to develop naturally, the evil will soon be remedied”.

Not surprisingly, it wasn’t a big success.

Except in the Quaker community in New Jersey.

These people used it as Lizzie intended, to teach their children the evils of profit for greed.

But in 1933, an unemployed salesman named Charles Darrow was visiting a friend in Atlantic City.

His friend showed him ‘The Landlord’s Game’ and Darrow liked it a lot.

Not for learning the evils of greed, but for the exact opposite reason.

The fun of taking money from the other players.

In 1933, he patented the game under a different name: ‘Monopoly’.

Inside a year he was selling 20,000 sets a week.

Monopoly went on to become the biggest-selling board game ever.

To date, it has sold 275 million sets worldwide.

It’s sold in 111 countries, in 43 different languages.

So far, 10 million Monopoly phone apps have been downloaded.

Because, as Charles Darrow spotted, it wasn’t teaching children the evils of unrestricted capitalism that people wanted.

Exactly the reverse.

It was having fun with the evils of unrestricted capitalism.

That’s what games are about: someone wins, someone loses.

That’s the fun.

In the year 2000, in a masterstroke of irony, the toy store FAO Schwartz sold a special edition Monopoly set for $100,000.

The dice was 22 carat gold and had diamonds for dots.

The ‘Chance’ square was dotted with emeralds.

The ‘Community Chest’ square was dotted with sapphires.

And on ‘Free Parking’ the car’s rear-lights were rubies.

We should learn from Lizzie Magie and Charles Darrow.

People don’t necessarily want what we think is good for them.

People want to have fun.

THE NAKED TRUTH

There seem to be two main opinions on The Sun’s page 3.

One is that it demeans women by showing attractive young females posing naked.

The other is that it’s free speech: if you don’t like it don’t buy the paper.

I can see both sides.

But I think it helps to know why page 3 came about in the first place.

When I was growing up, my mum always bought the Sun.

My dad never liked it, he thought it was just gossip.

But Mum had always bought it because her dad always bought it.

The Sun was originally the Daily Herald.

My grand dad was involved in the trade union movement and the Daily Herald was the official paper of the TUC.

Consequently it was mainly left wing politics.

In the early years the Daily Herald had massive support but over the years the public got bored.

Most of the working class switched to the Daily Mirror which was more fun.

The Daily Herald changed its name to the Sun, but it was still dull.

Eventually, it was losing so much money it was sold.

To Rupert Murdoch.

Being Australian he was more brash, and decided to take on the Mirror at its own game.

He put in more sex, more jokes, more gossip, more fun.

In particular, the Mirror always had a bathing beauty in a bikini.

Murdoch decided to go one better and lose the top half of the bikini.

(Controversy is always good for a challenger brand.)

My mum didn’t take much notice.

The Sun’s readership was 41% female, and they didn’t really care.

Which was the best influence of page 3.

It normalised nakedness.

Before page 3 no woman would have dreamed of sunbathing without a top.

Having topless women in a national newspaper made it more normal.

Women became less ashamed of sunbathing topless.

Even women that didn’t look like page 3 models.

When their husbands said “Put your top back on” the woman could say “You don’t mind looking at page 3”.

But people who weren’t around in those days won’t remember that.

They’ll say that page 3 only ever shows attractive women.

Well yes, but the media has always shown attractive people.

At GGT, when Steve Henry wrote the Holsten Pils campaign it was the same situation.

I’d shown the creative department Steve Martin’s ‘Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid’ as a starter.

Steve was the only one who could make it work: a comedian talking to dead Hollywood stars.

Steve wanted Robbie Coltrane to be the comedian.

At that time he was new, no one had heard of him.

We shot a test with him and Humphrey Bogart and it looked great.

But the client turned him down.

It was a rule in beer advertising that you never used fat people.

It might remind men that beer makes you fat.

So we had to cast for a thin comedian, and we ended up with Griff Rhys Jones.

Steve wasn’t happy because Griff was more mainstream.

And he was right, it wasn’t as daring.

But people want what they want.

Should we try to force people into having what we think is right?

Or should we let them have what they want?

Everyone has to decide that for themselves.

WHAT DO MARKETING EXPERTS DO?

1993 was the year ‘the brand’ died.

At least that’s what all the marketing experts thought.

Investors wiped $13.4 billion off Philip Morris shares, because they owned the most profitable brand in the world.

And they wiped billions off the owners of the other valuable brands: Proctor & Gamble, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, H.J.Heinz, RJR Nabisco, Quaker Oats, and many more.

So why did the experts suddenly decide ‘the brand’ was dead?

It started with Marlboro cigarettes.

Marlboro had 24.3% of the American cigarette market.

They sold as much as the next five brands combined.

But this had fallen to 22.2% because of cheaper cigarettes.

Marlboro were selling at around $2.20 a pack, but cheaper cigarettes were selling for half that.

Previously, Marlboro decided they could charge a premium for ‘brand’.

Now, they decided all consumers cared about was price.

So Marlboro cut 20% (40 cents a pack) off their cigarettes.

It was called ‘Marlboro Friday’.

Marketing experts saw it as proof ‘the brand’ was dead, you couldn’t charge a premium for brands anymore.

And investors began dumping shares in big brands.

But the marketing experts had been concentrating on the wrong thing.

They hadn’t spotted the real problem.

Marlboro had always kept profits high by encouraging stockists to over-order.

To take more cigarettes than they actually needed.

But how do you get stockists to do that?

The best way was to keep putting the price up.

If stockists buy them now, before the price goes up, they can sell them at the new higher price later.

So that’s what Marlboro did.

They knew people would always pay a premium for a brand.

They kept putting the price up, sometimes 10% a year.

Sales kept going up, profits kept going up.

You’d think experts would spot this couldn’t go on forever.

But they didn’t spot it.

And eventually, Marlboro got to be too expensive for some consumers.

So they switched to cheaper cigarettes.

Marlboro decided ‘the brand’ was dead and announced they were cutting prices.

And guess what?

What the marketing experts hadn’t spotted happened.

The stockists stopped over-ordering cigarettes.

Because cigarettes would actually be cheaper next year.

In fact they stopped ordering any more stock at all while they sold all the stock they’d built up.

It’s estimated that alone cost Marlboro nearly a billion dollars.

The problem wasn’t that the brand was dead.

Because the brand is never the only answer.

The brand is always just one of several possible answers.

By ignoring everything except the brand the experts got themselves in trouble.

Then, by ignoring everything except the brand again, the experts got themselves in worse trouble.

But surely these were ‘marketing experts’.

Isn’t pricing and distribution part of what a marketing expert does?

Ensuring the pricing and distribution of the product is right?

Apparently not.

Apparently these marketing experts were so busy worrying about ‘brand’ they didn’t have time to worry about things like that.

ON THE OTHER HAND

Joe Stegner had often been asked to make recommendations to the board on profitability.

There are usually two ways to increase profitability: raise income or cut costs.

Joe Stegner worked with numbers.

He saw an obvious and simple way to cut costs that could save many millions of dollars.

The company had lots of factories that bought their own supplies.

They negotiated their own prices.

But the negotiations differed from factory to factory.

It was a waste of time and money for everyone to do separate deals.

Stegner had tried presenting this argument to the board before.

Usually they saw his presentation and nodded along with it.

Then nothing happened.

It was presented as slides of abstract numbers.

Very logical, very sensible, very reasonable.

And that was the problem, it appealed to the wrong side of the brain.

The reasonable side of the brain likes to put things on the back burner while it thinks about them.

And company-wide savings on every purchase seemed like something that needed a lot of consideration.

So nothing happened.

Joe Stegner realised he had to talk to the other side of the brain.

The emotional part, that feels it rather than thinks about it.

So he chose just one item.

One of the things each factory was purchasing was work gloves.

Dozens of different factories meant dozens of different prices.

So Joe Stegner briefed an intern to buy a pair of each of the work gloves that the factories purchased.

That made four hundred and twenty four different pairs of gloves.

Then he got the intern to put the price tag on each pair.

Then he waited for the next board meeting.

Before it started he took all the gloves and placed them in a huge pile on the table.

So when the board members filed what they saw was the polished boardroom table with a massive pile of work gloves in the middle.

Of course they asked “What the hell are these?”

And Joe Stegner explained the problem.

The board members began picking up and examining the gloves.

They all looked identical but some had $3.22 price stickers, some had $5.00, some had $10.55, and some had $17.00 on them.

The board members looked at each other.

This was crazy, who the hell was paying $17.00 for gloves that could be bought for $3.22?

Why wasn’t someone in charge of this?

If this madness was happening over work gloves, imagine what else it was happening on.

The company must be haemorrhaging money on this wastefulness.

And the board members immediately agreed to centralise buying and negotiations across standardised deals.

The same four hundred and twenty four gloves were taken to every factory to explain what was happening and why it must change.

Buying across all commodities was centralised.

In their book “The Heart of Change” Kotter and Cohen explain how profits increased massively because costs were slashed.

Costs were slashed because it wasn’t just abstract board members looking at abstract numbers.

It was human beings looking at simple, everyday objects.

We can learn a lot about communication from that.

Campaign Jobs