Power Crazy

Surely the worst-managed crisis in South Africa since the notorious "Info Scandal" of the 70s. Yep, that's the current electricity situation.

Though no fault of our own, Eskom is making us pay, and pay dearly, for their gross incompetence. But what really galls is their attempt to lay the blame at our door.

A few weeks back the electricity company began running ads extolling their valiant efforts at solving the problem. Buying in huge coal supplies (which should never have been allowed to run so low in the first place), commissioning new power stations (which should have been commissioned at least 10 years ago) are among the solutions they told us about in radio ads that polluted the airwaves only a little less than a coal-fired power station going full blast.

Of course, we're not as stupid as Eskom would like to believe and I doubt anyone was fooled by their pathetic attempt at damage control.

Now we are told that because we couldn't, collectively, reduce our electricity consumption by 10%, Eskom is left with no choice but to carry out its threat of enforced "load-shedding" (black-outs/power failures). And once again they are polluting the airwaves with their message, this time to induce a sense of guilt in you and me, their customers. The gist of the ad is "listen assholes, you didn't cut your electricity consumption so we'll do it for you. If you suffer blackouts it's your fault. Don't blame us."

Screw 'em. I won't feel guilty. I won't turn off my geyser. I won't switch off my lights. I'll leave my computer on all night. I won't do anything to help this arrogant government-controlled beurocracy haul itself out of the dung which it landed in with absolutely no help from me. They can take their fat, undeserved performance bonuses and shove 'em where it hurts.

I don't think Eskom realizes the damage this little crisis is doing South Africa.

Eskom sucks. Their radio ads suck just as much.

If this is the Apex, I'd hate to see the base.

Last night my "insider" connection attended the APEX awards, held at Emperor's Palace on the east Rand (methinks the Ekurhuleni municipality is fighting a losing battle to foist this ridiculous name on us).

According to my source, the food was fine, the entertainment was so-so, and the entries were dismal.

Of course the usual gang of idiots (I mean that in a loving kind of way) were all represented; Jupiter, Network, Ogilvy... (surprising by their absence, at least among the APEX recipients, was Hunt Lascaris , although I'm reliably informed they did have some people there).

Organized by the Association for Communication and Advertising (ACA), The APEX Awards are supposed to be about effective advertising. There are only three categories:

• Launch - Brands or services which are new, or have no significant history of advertising.
• Change - New campaigns from previously advertised brands, which resulted in significant short term effects on sales and/or behaviour.
• Sustain - Advertising campaigns which benefited a business by maintaining or strengthening a brand over a long period.

These definitions come direct from the ACA website ( ACA is the organisation that runs APEX).

As you'll quickly fathom out, these are pretty hazy criteria for judging the effectiveness of any advertising. Nothing here about increased sales - except the somewhat vague, weasel-worded "significant short term effects on sales and/or behavior" - or about anything else that really constitutes effective advertising. Perhaps it's escaped the attention of whoever laid out these criteria that a "significant short term effects on sales" could cut both ways. So if my ad actually causes a significant sales slump, would that make me eligible for and APEX?

Because no-one actually has to prove anything, the usual suspects collect the gongs and can now trumpet about how "effective" their creative ads are.

Let me be absolutely clear here; I don't say creative advertising doesn't work. What I do say is that if your efforts are focused on awards then they are not focused on sales. Advertising that is sales focused looks very different to advertising designed to impress awards judges.

No matter how much lip service is paid by the creative agencies whose names crop up with such regular monotony at the black tie, mutual back-slapping sessions, they really have no way of proving anything.

So, the APEX, who won what? My contact can't remember. What the heck, does it matter anyway?