Friday, February 22, 2008

Result of Campaign Poll


I'm told this poll was closely watched at Campaign HQ. And funnily enough, the voting did swing sharply more positive on one single day. Still, MP's are allowed to vote for themselves so there's no reason why Campaign staffers shouldn't be.

I suspect they might have been surprised by some of the negativity in the comments. Does the anonymity of blog posting cause people to be excessively nasty? Or is it that when people are speaking to Campaign face-to-face they are excessively nice, because they want to get good coverage? I don't know.

Anyway, the final verdict as you can see is that Campaign is quite good, and that's how I voted so I'm happy.

Previous poll results:
Friday Poll No.18 - Should A Creative Look Creative?
Friday Poll No.17 - Ad Of The Year 2007
Friday Poll No.16 - Do Difficult People Do The Best Work?
Friday Poll No.15 - Who Is Responsible For Ineffectiveness?
Friday Poll No.14 - Your Personal Success Record
Friday Poll No.13 - Which Department Is The Most Insane?
Friday Poll No.12 - What Music Do You Listen To While Working?
Friday Poll No.11 - What Time Do You Get In?
Friday Poll No.10 - Who Drinks The Most?
Friday Poll No.9 - Press v Online
Friday Poll No.8 - Success Or Glory?
Friday Poll No.7 - Is Reading Blogs A Waste Of Time?
Friday Poll No.6 - Job Satisfaction
Friday Poll No.5 - Festive Greetings
Friday Poll No.4 - Ad Of The Year 2006
Friday Poll No.3 - What's Your Favourite Medium To Work In?
Friday Poll No.2 - Agency Of The Year
Friday Poll No.1 - Which Department Is The Most Overpaid?

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Post connected to 'pick of the day?' This mutual appreciation thing stinks.

Scamp said...

It was pick of the week actually.

Rob Mortimer said...

It's a big thing on your blog sadly Scamp (because its so well known), people posting as anonymous often think they don't have to backup vitriolic arguments as you won't know who they are.

Anonymous said...

Scamp, I read nothing positive about campaign and like you say they must have voted themselves to even it up.

Why not be honest and say people think it’s shit.

john dodds said...

No those figures don't show it's quite good - using riecheld's one number idea (http://makemarketinghistory.blogspot.com/2007/03/should-marketing-count.html) you'd throw out the mealy mouth quite good quite bad categories and look at the extremes.

18% unmissable minus 13% unreadable yields a positive number of 5. Since the aim is a positive rating around 75, Campaign's score doesn't look that good.

Anonymous said...

i'd have to agree.

unfortunately you look a little sycophantic scamp.

nice review on your levi work though.

oops. post deleted.

Bone said...

seems like Scamp's in favour at Campaign because he does good work. What's wrong with that?

Anonymous said...

The right outcome. It's not a brilliant mag, but then most of what it has to write about is pretty shite. But it is a good mag -- if you're genuinely interested in the whole industry.

Anonymous said...

yep, he's done one ok poster campaign.

(although earlier in your career there were a few peaks i remember?)

but by the same token, i wonder if he'd of slagged off campaign he'd still get the same treatment?

sadly i think not.

Anonymous said...

It's a petty mag that you have to be constantly leaking stories to, giving them video iPods or taking them to Verbier for a long ski weekend in order to get coverage