You can have my hard copies of the OED, American Heritage, Webster’s, Word Menu, and the NY Public Library Desk Reference when you ply them from my cold, dead hands.

Personally, I tend to prefer the idea of compassion over morality. “Is my ad compassionate?” is a much easier question to answer than, “Is my ad moral?” And I think ultimately they’re about the same thing.

Those who actually did the programming/wrote the code/bla bla bla should have been seen as a supplier much like editors or sound houses or production companies etc. Executors of ideas.

There would have been fierce competition that would have propelled the development of the internet forward far faster than it actually did evolve.

Suddenly we had woefully undertalented monkeys performing the task of “interactive art director” and “interactive copywriter”, and thus, the second – far far far shi*tier – creative department was born.

The split that never should have happened, happened. Interactive should have been treated like simply a new medium and CW’s and AD’s should have just carried on with that on their plates. But no. That ain’t the way to maximize profits.

So we’re stuck with (and always will be) this second rate churner-outer of internet advertising. Shrieking applause and golds abound for those who figure out how to make the site do something cool on screen. Forgotten is the so tired and old school idea of rewarding ideas.

We’re also stuck with an amazingly arrogant attitude from digital shops who have the ignorant balls to think mass creatives can’t switch to digital because digital, they claim (manure sandwich in mouth), is so different from all the other mediums. Which, of course, is a pile of some dumb shyt right there.

I find the age old question “what is art?” a fascinating philosophical conundrum.