Not Sour Grapes.

Or talking out of school. At least, not entirely.

But after years, okay, decades, of waiting for advertising to find and follow its better angels, I keep playing Charlie Brown to Lucy’s football-yanking set piece.

The disappointment, no matter how predictably repetitive, is palpable.

It happens every time we get into one of those “why does production cost so much” conversation, especially if it’s “only” going to appear on digital.

Aside from making me want to sigh the sigh of the historically persecuted, a specialty of the heritage, it does bring to mind the just made-up parable of the penurious fisherman who thinks that throwing the cheapest possible chum into the fishing hole is fine because “the fish can’t see the difference.”

To me, it’s a classic illustration of a root cause and result wrapped up into one: a modern chain of consequences that's dragging down the whole of advertising to sleep with aforementioned fishies.

Devaluing the “where” our brand is seen, we inevitably proceed to diminish the “how.”  

Sadly, it’s infectious, at least judging by the profuse mediocrity on TV last weekend, the first of the NFL season. Seems that even the biggest platforms are now viewed as entirely disposable.

A screen, it would seem, is a screen, is a screen.

The unfailingly perceptive Bob Brihn talks about how excited and demanding clients were, once upon a time, knowing their ads were going to appear in high profile venues.  

“It wasn’t enough to have a good ad on Seinfeld— we wanted to create the ad that stomped all other ads that night.  The bar, at its lowest level, was work that was memorable, interesting, and entertaining as the episode itself."

The devoutly to be wished, actually demanded, outcome: "Hey, you see that Liquid Plumber ad on Seinfeld last night?"

Based on that mindset, the medium wasn’t the message, it was inspiration. 

Granted that’s very different from the feeling you might get when the big whup is knowing your brand :15 is about to drop on a thousand programmatic digital channels, give or take.

Human nature being hard-wired to respond to external cues, we think to ourselves, “big freaking deal.”

Well, I have news: it is a big freaking deal, and you are every bit under the microscope on a campaign across whatever the interweb flavor du moment happens to be, as you were when you stayed up all night, to grab a first edition of the Times to see your maiden 2-page spread in all its glory. 

In fact, I’d argue the need for brilliance is at an even greater premium.

Imagine that fisherperson wasn’t afloat on a single tidy pool of water, but a myriad of loosely connected inlets and bays.

The fish, literally, are spread all over the pond.  

Is the expert angler best advised to dig into her tackle and pull out the bluntest, dullest, least remarkable lure? 

Or find the brightest, sharpest and most alluring hook in the box?

Bet you get that right in one.