Doritos ‘put up’…now the naysayers can ‘shut up’!!!

So I saw the ads yesterday during the Superbowl. And as you night have guessed, I was elated to see “Man’s Best Friend“, not only winning the Doritos vote, but scoring the number one spot on the USA Today Ad Meter. $1,000,000.00 to Jonathan Friedman. Boo-freagin’-yawwwhhh!!!!

When “Man’s Best Friend“, made His Highness’ top five list month’s ago, I’ll admit the selection was with some reservation. I just plain loved it, but it didn’t quite fit the mold of what Doritos had selected in the past. As a result, and despite my appreciation for it’s brilliance, I almost left it off the list. After all, it flew in the face of the frequent advice I had given inquiring creatives regarding base content. Ultimately, I couldn’t deny it’s strength from a pure advertising perspective (for the brand), as well as for the Ad Meter folks. It was in my estimation, the strongest submission to the contest and why it continued to stay in the top five no matter how the hierarchy of the list morphed. In the end it’s nice to be able to say: “Damn, it feels good to be so right!”

Funny, but I also found myself not minding being marginally wrong about the type of content Doritos is willing to choose for the CTSB. It used to be if there weren’t visible carnage inflicted to the human male scrotal area, a submission had no chance of registering with Doritos. Not only was “Man’s Best Friend” non-carnage content, it was pleasantly more cerebral than normal, requiring the viewer to do a little work, and actually follow the storyline to get the humor. Wonderfully subtle sight gags with little to no dialogue. Bravo Mr. Friedman. The larger implication here is that Doritos just might be open to a wider range of content ideas moving forward should they continue with the CTSB.

FOR THE NAYSAYERS:
I remember years ago when I was a babe in the young woods of what is today’s video contest world. Every time I lost a contest I was sure the brand or marketing firm holding the contest were either evil, or just had very poor taste. While some contests are certainly run in devilish fashion, brands do occasionally run contests for the purpose of using it’s content for legit advertising (Doritos). Yeah, brands like Doritos tend to know exactly what they are doing and what they are going for, when they select representative content. No one knows the tradition and ambition of a brand, better than the brand itself, as a general rule.

It was amusing to witness everyone dissing Doritos for their CTSB picks this year (something I have also been guilty of in year’s past). Equally amusing was watching Doritos nab THREE TIMES IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, the #1 spot on the USA Today Ad Meter (USATAM). Can you say, “Duh”!!!!

After yesterday, anyone who still thinks they know better than Doritos, how to pick a winner, needs to re-think how they process thought, since similar logic might also be affecting the balance of decision-making in their lives.

Whatever particular CTSB submissions made us (as individuals) laugh out loud, hold our stomaches, call our Mommies, fist pump our buddies, turn green with envy, etc. etc., is purely a matter of subjective opinion. The CTSB submissions  chosen by Doritos, on the other hand, were a matter of calculated brilliance. We in the freelance community should be nothing but grateful for Doritos’ collateral accomplishment of drawing attention to themselves, and simultaneously showcasing to the world what we independent creatives are capable of on the biggest stage the advertising world has to offer.

Doritos CTSB Runners-up:
Too bad “Sling Baby” didn’t score higher than 4th in the USATAM. It would have been awesome for a fellow creative to get $400,00.00 or $600,000.00 for either a 2nd or 3rd place finish courtesy of the Snack Strong bank account. Still, notwithstanding the missed payday, it is a remarkable accomplishment for Kevin Wilson and Doritos. Doritos basically owns the Ad Meter. I’d also be curious to know how “Bird Of Prey” would have fared with USATAM. Thereto, Joby Harris did an awesome job with special effects and stunt work.

The PopTent Factor:
Though not in the top 5, it should be noted that PopTent.net scored in a big way by taking slot #13 in the USATAM, with their Dannon Greek Yogurt spot. Congratulations Remy Neymarc (director of the PopTent sponsored spot). Not shabby for an ongoing crowd sourcing portal with about .00001% the marketing budget of a SNACK STRONG marketing megalith. When you add in that Poptent.net provides ongoing production opportunities for we creatives year round (not just during a single annual football game), the implications should excite us all. If the brands were watching, and there’s little doubt they were, it should eventually translate into an increase of freelance production opportunities for we creatives from Poptent and from crowd-sourcing portals in general.

Similar to the year I was a finalist (2007), Doritos broadcast only two spots during the SuperBowl this year. I and two other creative teams (The Herbert Brothers – Duct Tape and Billy Federighi’s – Mouse Trap) remained un-broadcast that inaugural year. Trust me when I share, it doesn’t feel very good to have gone through the Doritos contest campaign whirlwind only to come up short. I have this to offer the creators of the three spots that didn’t air this year: Though not getting air-time back in 2007, Billy Federighi’s and Brett Snyder’s submission of  ’Mouse Trap’ would go on to air during the 2008 Superbowl, a non-CTSB Commercial contest year….because Snack Strong could…  And The Herbert Brothers would go on to be the first Doritos commercial to nab the #1 USATAM slot winning them a cool $1,000,000.00 in 2009. I don’t have all of the particulars in front of me but I think a few of this year’s finalists have already enjoyed some of the ‘repeat success’ phenomena which seems to manifests itself with the CTSB when the talent is undeniable.

Well, I’ll summate by concluding that IMO this year’s Crash was nothing short of an overwhelming success. I hope that Doritos got whatever paydays they were targeting, enough to justify running the contest again next year. It is just plain good for everyone.

The King

Poptent and the Superbowl

Congratulations to Remy Neymarc and Andrew Neymarc and everyone involved with Poptent’s Dannon OIKOS Greek Yogurt Superbowl Commercial Broadcast. What a great story with even greater implications for our freelance creative community. I would so love if Dannon’s spot scored right there with the Doritos spots on the USA Today Ad Meter poll. Even more awesome would be if Dannon barely edged out Doritos for high ranking in the top five. I say this, not because I wish Doritos ill. I say it because in this particular instance there is potential for enough publicity for everyone. In fact, IMO Doritos stands to get more than the normal coverage if there is some additional ‘special’ story involved. ‘Crowd Sourcing Crowding Madison Avenue‘ is quite the nice story line. What better way to demonstrate it than on the biggest TV advertising stage the world has to offer.

LET ME EXPLAIN:
If both companies rate high in the USATAM, and if Dannon is a close second to Doritos, it may slip through the cracks of the media, as once again Doritos beats all comers. If however Dannon scores high and beats out Doritos, Dannon stands a much better chance of catching the attention of the media. The resulting story would be that ‘crowd sourcing’ is on a meteoric rise and something that mainstream brands need to take a serious look at en masse. Ultimately, we all (in the freelance/crowdsourcing fraternity),  would stand to benefit in a big way and in the very near long term.

I would have loved to have been a visitor to the Dannon set to see what kind of lighting, camera and production techniques Remy and Andrew employed. I loved watching the YouTube video and dug some of the diffusion techniques they had set up, from what I could tell. I would have also loved to re-connect with John Stamos. I had the pleasure of working with him during a week of shooting on the Warner Brothers lot back in 2006. Despite what most of you here in the Video Contest Kingdom have come to know His Highness for, on the W.B. ER set, my work was limited solely to ‘acting’. In fact, the ER experience occurred just prior to my changing careers path from acting to a more comprehensive production career. In my brief traditional acting career I was fortunate to have enjoyed success enough to appreciate the importance of writing and producing ones own content if controlling what you are part of is a priority.

I would bet that this experience with Dannon and Poptent was quite the education for the Neymarc brothers, considering their admission of being self-taught and their relatively young age. (Remy, 21 yrs. and Andrew 23 yrs.). It’s the kind of experience that can help propel talented professionals to the next level. What a great resume addition. BTW, when you get a moment you should check out their website, NEYMARCVISUALS.

Now I have even more reason to watch the Superbowl. I wonder if Dannon knows when it will broadcast. I know when I was a finalist in the Crash The Superbowl contest they let us know the winning spot would air as the 3rd commercial spot immediately following the opening kick-off. At any rate, I will be glued to the USA Today Ad Meter Poll immediately following the game to watch as the final scores are tabulated and posted to the website. This is honestly, very exciting stuff.

To check out some of the behind the scenes action, Danny Winn suggested I post the correlating YouTube video. I thought that was a brilliant idea.

The royal crown is dipped to Dannon, Poptent and the NEYMARC brothers.

The Video Contest King

Let’s help Kickstart Joel Berry

Hey Peeps, on the VCK I occasionally showcase fellow peers creative accomplishments. I do it in part, to help further careers that are largely authentic independent and entrepreneurial efforts, similar to most of us in the freelance videography community.

I hope through this post, to draw attention to a buddy of mine who has taken part in several of the King’s (Jared Cicon Films) video productions, both as crew behind the scenes and as on-camera talent. Joel Berry is a talented writer, actor, producer who, similar to most of us in the freelance community, is trying to carve out for himself a full time career in this entertainment jungle. Joel is a family fan. He is a married father of three little crumb-crunchers. (I use the term crumb-crunchers affectionately, since I used to have four of my own who have since graduated from crumb-crunching to steak-bone gnawing).

I first discovered Joel’s talent through his YouTube channel SweetTeaFilms. On it, Joel Berry plays ‘Tavin Dillard’, a very lovable piece of trailer park refuse who is an avid internet blogger. Tavin is a grass cutting professional (who still lives with his Mee-Maw), who shares through his blogging, the exploits of his Trailer Park world. Tavin is a family friendly character with enough edge and sophistication to satisfy tastes ranging from the cerebral to the flippant. You need to watch more than a single video to fully understand the Tavin character, but even after just a single blog you start to appreciate the solid comedy that Joel Berry has developed. I’ve been a fan for several years now.

Similar to many highly creative individuals on YouTube, I am astounded that after so many years of great comedy, Joel is still sitting on just 7K-8K subscribers. It boggles the mind. Oh, the inequities of the YT Universe.

Joel’s creative expression is not limited to his ‘Tavin’ related production alone. He has acted in several Jared Cicon Films commercials over the last several years. Joel produces ongoing content for Orange County, Ca. communities. He recently traveled to Nashville TN., to film a pilot episode for a TV variety show which he is currently pitching to the industry. Joel recently scored a regional, national commercial for a national Cable Television service provider.

KICKSTARTER and Joel Berry
Joel has taken the leap and decided to take his Tavin Dillard character on the road. He is bringing ‘Tavin’ to live stage venues in several states in the South, (Mississippi, Missouri and Arkansas to name a few). He will execute a multi-state U.S. tour and needs our support to do it. He will be doing it by himself and just one other friend/producer/assistant. The usual expenses related to biting off this type of exploit are what Joel needs kick start help with. (Gas, Motel 8, food etc.). Though a personally risky and time consuming investment for himself and his family, it employs very financially modestly planning, but even Top Ramen costs greenbacks. Joel’s figured he needs just $2,340.00 to make it happen. I’ll tell you though, I know Joel very well, and I would bet that he has probably factored in the most spartan of accommodations/logistics for his journey. On my calculations he will more than likely need closer to 5K-6K to be on the safe side and to have a little bit of ‘fall-back’ money for unseen expenses and emergencies.

I’m hoping that regular readers of the VCK will give what they can to Joel’s ‘Live Tavin Tour’. I’d like to see the figure to reach at least 5K to see that he and his producer get to the five states he plans to travel to, knock em’ dead with Tavin, and return home safely.

If you can spare a few bucks for this great guy who is taking his dreams into his own hands (great example to the rest of us), than go to Joel’s  KICKSTARTER
PAGE, and hook him up. BTW, you get a bunch of Tavin Fan stuff when you make a contribution. Joel Berry is undertaking what most of us which we had the guts to do. Be a part of his odyssey. DONATE!

You can follow Tavin’s progress on the official Sweet Tea Films website.

ARTICLE UPDATE:
Joel met his KICKSTARTER fund raising goal and will be taking ‘Tavin Dillard’ on the road. “WooHoo”!!! Can’t wait to hear the stories from the tour. Congratulations Joel.

Doritos, The NBA, Obama and Affirmative Action

Above are screenshots of the dudes behind the productions that scored little bits of gold in this year’s Crash The SuperBowl. A commercial contest run annually by Doritos (Owned by FritoLays North America, a subsidiary of PepsiCo). Earlier today I was on the Crash the Superbowl (CTSB) site, and was viewing the 2-3 minute interviews of each of these five creatives and something dawned on me, besides the fact that they all seem very professional and arguably very talented and likable chaps. These guys all kind of look alike. They’re all the same approximate age. All except one have good hair. They all speak/articulate well. It’s clear they all know the craft in which they create very well. They all kind of dressed the same too (wardrobe color/style), and if you listen to their interviews, they all know how to talk ‘the talk’ of the business.  They seem to have successfully conformed (either consciously or unconsciously) to what is expected of them in their industry, in an outwardly way, and in a creative way. Otherwise, Doritos would not have recognized them as finalists for the CTSB.

All of these coincidences aside, the bottom line is that Doritos chose these fellows’ commercials, because their content impressed the brand. It was only after the spots impressed the judges that these dudes were identified. So please don’t get the cart before the horse and suggest Doritos was looking for a specific type of person and accordingly went about vetting finalists. That would be absurd, and anyone who suggests such in the comment section of this blog will get an appropriate response.

The question I have for the reader is this: In looking at the make-up (physical appearance), of the five finalists, does it bother anyone that they are all from the same rather narrow societal demographic? Hell, they could be siblings. And it doesn’t bother me at all. Should it? Let’s talk NBA.

I was watching the Lakers play The Jazz last night and saw Kobe Bryant rain 40 points down on Utah, leading his team to victory in overtime at the Delta Center. The game before Kobe scored another 48 points making for back to back 40 point games. I became curious and started to check out his chances of winning the scoring title this year and found out that he was currently in 1st place running a close 2nd to LeBron James. Curious further still, I did some searching to refresh my memory on who had won the NBA scoring title in recent history. Always very interesting to consume tidbits of knowledge from the lives of these very talented Hall of Fame players who have wowed the sports world during each of their respective careers. In doing so I found myself going further and further back until some time in the seventies when I saw the picture of Pistol Pete Maravich. It suddenly dawned on me that I was looking at the picture of a white dude.

I had gone back almost forty years before happening upon  recipient for the highly coveted NBA Scoring Title….who was white! Amazing but true. Was there a racist conspiracy about?

Doritos and the NBA:
I mused while it sunk in that for some reason or other, the NBA scoring Title had been awarded annually, perennially, repeatedly to black males, starting in the mid-seventies to the current date, and without fail. Was there something ‘racist’ going on in the NBA? Hmmmmm. Ok, so my tongue’s in my cheek.

Fact is, where Doritos and the NBA are concerned all the respective awardees just happen to have been the very best at what they were doing, bar none, and were recognized as superior by the organizations to which they submitted themselves. Let me repeat that…….

These awardees were recognized over their peers as the ‘best’ by the organization to which they submitted themselves.

Over the years, those athletes who’ve shown superior scoring skills resulting in the winning of the NBA Scoring Title just happen to be black individuals. These are black men who play the NBA game at a very high level. This year in the CTSB contest, those creatives who won the highest Doritos award, who’ve shown superior creative/production skills just happen to be be white men. White men with superior skills, who understand how to ‘play the game’, to a higher degree than the other 6,000 creatives who accepted the CTSB challenge and came up short, yours truly included. Special favors, conspiratorial agenda, favoritism nor racism factor into the equation in determining who will ‘win’ here. In both cases, only execution of the understood assignment distinguishes the winners from their peers.

Now The Bigger Question:

Michael Jordan won the Scoring Title 10 times. Is that fair? I mean, he’s only one man. Isn’t a single scoring title enough for him?  Shouldn’t we limit the amount of times a person can be rewarded with accolade in any given competition to a single time? Many Doritos Finalists over the years have repeated victory for their superior ability to interpret the Doritos creative brief. Should Doritos have watered down their brand messaging/strength/options by disqualifying these past winners? No. That would be absurd. There are however, a lot of people who think that should be the rule.

Governments and even normally rational citizens often fall into this trap of entitlement posturing. Though very young at the time of it’s incorporation into American society, I sensed there was something fundamentally ‘wrong’ with the Affirmative Action legislation passed in the early 1960s as a remedy for inequities in society. And by the way, keep in mind that affirmative action includes provisions for inequities beyond race stratification. Even as a kid it just didn’t make sense that a person should be given something that they neither earned nor for which they were prepared to accept. I’ve recently read several individuals who explain the follies of affirmative action much better than I could, and I’ll allow them to do so here.

Matt Patterson (columnist for the Washington Post, New York Post and San Francisco Examiner) writes:

“Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves
on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which
they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable
poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t
care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness
the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the
racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone
to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin — that’s
affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing
is. And that is what America did to Obama.“

Yeah, it’s time for the Obama tie-in alluded to in the article header. Relative to Barak Obama’s questionable personal/social history, renowned author and commentator, Norman Podhoretz, in a recent Wall Street Journal article writes:

“Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote ”present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator.“

“To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.” “…because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom [he] was given a pass — held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.“

What Norman Podhoretz is expressing here, is we gave a presidency to a man who was ill-equipped to execute the commensurate responsibilities. No wonder Obama embarrasses himself (and our nation) at every turn, with knee jerk comments about racist cops or other world leaders (when he doesn’t know the mic is on). No wonder his divisive communication skills renders him ineffectual at uniting a warring congress. No wonder his foreign policy has lowered our stature in the world community, along with our world credit rating. He just isn’t up to the award of the oval office.

I’ve put it to several of my friends when we debate the matter. Would any white male seeking presidential office have had a chance with a resume similar to Barak’s? Being President is kind of a big responsibility. It requires quite a bit of talent and experience. The kind of fiscal and diplomatic talents necessary to bring both sides of the congressional aisle together (and the American people for that matter) to get the business of the nation done. I offer for perusal, Obama’s executive record leading into his last year as as evidence that he was wholly unprepared for the office given him in the election of 2008. It was the result of citizens en masse assigning to themselves their own brand of affirmative action regardless of the qualifications of this particular candidate of color. After all, he was a good ‘speaker’…when the teleprompter worked.

In the critically acclaimed book by author Shelby Steele he explains the misguided sentiments and destructive results of affirmative action better than any I’ve heard. The book is titled: ‘White Guilt’: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of The Civil rights Era.

Tying it all together:
To score finalist status in the Doritos Crash The SuperBowl contest, or an NBA Scoring Title are arguably, huge personal accomplishments that bring with them reward and opportunity beyond the trophy itself. And though neither of these prizes is as profound as  winning a bid for presidency of the United States of America, all three have something rather extraordinary in common:

None of these awards should ever, EVER be granted to anyone other than the person who is most qualified to receive them. In the real world of business and economics, the NBA and Doritos continue to operate under this modicum of fairness, and they enjoy the success of getting it right, year after year after year.

Politics and Government on the other hand tend to be perpetually mired in emotions, sound bytes, and perceptions that result in all of us being saddled with the debris of the affirmative action experiment. Debris that grows deeper and deeper with each passing year, and we have only ourselves to blame.

When our favorite athlete or sports team gets beaten by a rival in a seven game playoff series, it is usually because the best team won. When we fail to turn the heads of the judges at Doritos with our creative content and are passed over for other creative, it is our own shortcoming, no one elses.  If we don’t deserve the kind of leadership we say we want from our government, it is the result of voter apathy and disconnect. We only get out of anything a reward equal to the effort we put into it. The importance we place on our future, whether it be our own careers or the society around us is dependent on each and every one of us becoming as educated as possible in the matter at hand, and putting forth an effort to make things better.

This includes our careers as freelance creatives. No one ‘deserves’ anything they aren’t qualified to receive. Make yourselves superior to your peers and you’ll achieve the deserved award. In the meantime, hang up the conspiracy theories. They profit us nothing. And get your ass off the couch and vote in an election now and again. If we continue down our current path as a nation, we may find ourselves caring very  little whether the latest edition of the Doritos contest is ‘fair or not’.

The King

Doritos Finalists Selection: Debunking the Conspiracy theorists

Every year, a large amount of disgruntled creatives and/or their friends, girlfriends, associated talent, mothers, hairdressers, bloggers, give their two cents on just how badly Doritos ran the newest edition of the CTSB contest.

And every year the assertions are pretty irrelevant to the how and why that goes into Doritos choosing finalists. Some arguments defend unselected submissions because they are legitimately superior in a PV sense to all other entrants EG: DORITO TRIANGLE. Even in my NTBHO some spots seem funnier than the five finalists du jour, EG: THE DORITOS PROPOSAL, or TAZE THE FLAVOR. I am also aware however that credible debate on the strength of even these three spots could be made, yet I stand by them unapologetically. You see, none of us is the lone arbitor of what is funny, professional looking, well produced, etc. etc. And none of us has the right to tell Doritos what is most appropriate to their brand. I’d like that to set in. It’s like telling a bride what kind/style of dress she’s going to have to wear on her wedding day……..not gonna happen.

Here are the cold, hard to swallow facts.
1. In 2007 Doritos scores 5th place in the USA Today Ad Meter (USATAM).
2. In 2008 Doritos scores 4th place in the USATAM. (And they weren’t even running the contest. They simply ran a spot from the previous year that market tested well).
3. In 2009 Doritos scores 1st and 5th place in the USATAM.
4. In 2010 Doritos scores 2nd place in the USATAM.
5. In 2011 Doritos scores 1st, 4th and 5th in the USATAM.

In five years Doritos has been in the top five of the USA Today Ad Meter Poll, 8 times (EIGHT TIMES!!!). Does any of my fellow peers understand how ridiculously difficulty it is to do something line this? This is unheard of in the world of advertising. In those five years there are only 25 spots to be won in the USATAM and against the best ad AGencies and creatives the world can produce, Doritos (a single brand) took 8/25. Please, please let that sink in.

USA Today uses a sample of people (about 300 individuals) that represent the average viewing public during the Superbowl. Doritos does well with this smattering of sweaty palm joystick/dial holding joe-shmos. These shmos may not be as artsy-minded as you and I. They may not understand the difference between a scrim and a baffle where PVs are concerned, but they represent the masses. Sorry if this makes you lose any faith with the average human being, and their ability to judge quality as compared to your own, but the type of content doritos chooses annually scores in a HUMONGOUS way, every single year. Frankly that you, I or anyone else thinks we know how better to choose finalists is a little haughty.

Any person or ‘blog’ (VCN ) who thinks Doritos is selecting spots because of past relationships with it’s creators is on it’s face, foolish. As a regular contributor to the blog here in the kingdom, Matt Pulliam puts it this way:

“That Doritos would select the ads that rank highest in
marketing test instead of selecting past finalists. Doritos
goal is to make #1, #2, and #3 on the SuperBowl ad meter.
We all know that everyone has a different opinion on which
entries were the funniest, so ad meter marketing tests are the
best way to determine the finalists (what ad exec would want
to risk  his/her job on picking a potential dud without analytical
proof of success). If the test audience favored past finalist,
then it’s only because they make funny, like-able
and memorable spots. It’s not easy!!“

Anyone who rationalizes that Doritos chooses finalists based on ‘favoritism’ probably shouldn’t be in our line of work. It is the kind of reasoning that taints everything else we do in life, including our own content creation. Stop it with the conspiracy theories people and instead focus that negative energy in improving yourselves against the ever-incresing wave of talent that continues to join our freelance force in the advertising world. It’s going to get increasingly more and more competitive as we (freelance creatives) become relevant in our industry.

One more note on why Doritos has such a slick, smooth, efficient and highly successful model that they will probably run again and again and again until they either lose interest or something more effective replaces it:
Doritos is so successful with the CTSB because they advertise….in a myriad of ways through the contest. The 30,000 bags of Doritos that get purchased that run through the checkout line and the resultant conversations, the family and friends who see/consume the sudden increase in Doritos around the house. The cast and crew that eats them all day long as they are everywhere on the set, the individual campaigns that last for a month with these creatives spamming everyone they ever knew on their own email address book, and as many friends as will allow them access to additional address books.

Doritos can’t legally spam anyone concerning their product/brand/business, but there’s nothing illegal about having the five finalists (or 6,000 submittors) do it for them….

And as far as the submissions/content is concerned: Does anyone realize how many ad agencies or production companies would have to be hired by Doritos to produce as much content and/or to give them the same options that the CTSB provides? And to then be able to test and choose only the most appropriate submissions for broadcast, summarily discarding the rest without obligation to compensate any of the creatives? And what is so awesome about the whole exercise, is that we all knowingly give it all to Doritos…for free. We as freelancers agree to all of this. It’s brilliant. If this pisses you off, too bad. Because before the Crash The Superbowl contest came on the scene we had pretty close to ’0′ direct access to any brands. You can thank Doritos for being a catalyst for changing the advertising model in a HUGE way, where video/commercial content is concerned.

The King