1

By David Rothman

Batgirl the librarianThe purging of Mao from the Minneapolis library campaign–at least for the moment–is the big news of the day. But what about the role of Andrews/Birt Advertising, the ad-and-PR outfit that created it? Here’s an email dialog I’ve had with CEO Bill Andrews.

Bill’s side: It’s a pro bono campaign with the best of intentions to use buzz to get results for the library. Follow the dialog link for Bill’s full replies. It’s not as if Mao was the only star in the campaign. Among the others? Batgirl, the librarian turned crime fighter. What’s more, Bill assures me that the campaign won’t just be grist for a “self-congratulatory” advertising contest.

My side: I think Andrews/Birt has some good motives, but that the agency came out ahead of the public library. The buzz is an attention-getter, but not good long-term for libraries and librarians. Despite the captions, it’s the image of Mao the Librarian that will remain in people’s minds. You can go to the Friends of the Library’s just-posted news release, click on the PDF links and see the posters for yourself. Batgirl flew, Mao didn’t.

Some positives–and a friendly suggestion: The Andrews/Birt campaign is technically brilliant–the graphics, the copy, everything, even if some facts in the captions are a little misleading. I suggest to the Friends group that it cherish Andrews/Birt’s talents but substitute Bunny Wilson and Marian the Librarian for Mao and J. Edgar Hoover. Hey, who would you rather get homework or job-hunting help from? Katharine Hepburn–Bunny in Deskset, opposite Spencer Tracy–or Mao the Librarian? Think about it, Friends. I’d really like to see your campaign succeed, not just in raising money but in drawing people to the library over the long term. “Buzz” does not necessarily mean permanent goodwill. More than a few right-wing business people just might get their facts confused and think: “Is that how I’m spending my tax money?” I want to see the MPL get money from conservatives and lefties alike (disclosure I’m a lifelong liberal Dem).

The flame: Chris Birt, Andrews/Birt creative director, was a little less statesmanlike. On the “continued” page, I’m reproducing in full a flame he emailed me with a cc to a reporter at the Minneapolis paper. Public stuff!

What a riot it is–Chris’s distorting some humor to make it seem as if TeleRead does paid plugs. Earlier, after Bill and I had commented on the Catch-22, namely that I was adding to the buzz by writing on the Mao controversy, I joked: “No charge for the further Buzz. And my continued best wishes for fund-raising efforts.” Hey, Chris, is that what you actually do in your blogs–run paid plugs? Odd that you should do a quirky Mao campaign and then distort a quip.

I did not know there was a “charge” for this buzz.

The fact you imply there is greatly limits my desire to submit my detailed response. That’s the thing about you bloggers (see how I generalize) you’re just little megalomaniacs telling everyone else how great you are.

This belated “I don’t want to hurt you” thing here is a little late don’t you think? What about the original post on your website?

p.s. I have a blog and five bulletin borads too but I won’t charge you for that knowledge.

Time for the Star-Trib to check out the local Minneapolis PR agencies to see if they’re secretly paying bloggers for plugs? I doubt that Andrews/Birt is as an agency. But what about other companies?

 
1