Cobain beats Elvis as richest artist (deceased)
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
Published: 25 October 2006

Death is not always the dumbest of career moves, especially if you are a rock star of enduring appeal. Kurt Cobain, the one-time frontman for Nirvana who committed suicide in 1994, earned $50m (£25m) over the past year, according to Forbes magazine’s annual list of Top-Earning Dead Celebrities published yesterday.

That figure catapulted Cobain into first place, beating the most reliable of posthumous money-spinners, Elvis Presley, as well as a predominantly musical dozen of also-rans including John Lennon, Ray Charles and Bob Marley. (Story.)

Fascinating stuff. For my part, I’d like to earn a bit of money before I die. But that’s just me, I guess.

The full top ten looks like this:

1. Kurt Cobain ($50m - £26.3m)
2. Elvis Presley ($42m - £22.1m)
3. Charles Schulz ($35m - £18.4m)
4. John Lennon ($24m - £12.6m)
5. Albert Einstein ($20m - £10.5m)
6. Andy Warhol ($19m - £10m)
7. Dr Seuss/Theodor Geisel ($10ms - £5.3m)
8. Ray Charles ($10m - £5.3m)
9. Marilyn Monroe ($8m - £4.2m)
10. Johnny Cash ($8m - £4.2m)

Oddly, this list arrives at a time when I’ve been thinking about a related issue - the question of control in the image business. Once you begin cooking for the Kennedys you lose a great deal of your ability to control your own brand, and every time I see another dead celeb being danced around like a grotesque digital marionette hawking product, I have to tell you, I get a little queasy. John Wayne. Humphrey Bogart. Steve McQueen. And now Audrey Hepburn, expressing herself to sell skinny black pants for GAP.

We live in a world where people become brands and identities are routinely co-opted by the demands of celebrity and commerce, and it’s a little disturbing to realize that if I became famous, video of me shot today could be deconstructed and reconstructed after I die and put in service to things I would never support in life. Hell, by that point they won’t even need video - just give them a couple photographs and they’ll create the rest.

Aren’t there some pretty powerful ethical questions in all this? Sure, a lot of the income in that list above issues directly from the continued sale of the work the artists produced while they were alive, and that’s fine. But there ought to be a line somewhere, right? For instance, all recording artists have outtakes laying around. Songs that aren’t released, often for good reason. If an artist chose not to release a song while alive, isn’t it unethical to cash it in after his/her tragic death?

This question is actually part of a much larger issue I’ve been pondering lately - has the “digital revolution” completely annihilated the possibilty of controlling message and image? Well, that’s a rhetorical question. The real conversation needs to address the negotiational strategies and tactics that have to replace old modes of control (primarily a marcom and PR question) and the ethical implications of image and visual communication (on the ad side).

Hmmmm….

:xpost:

So, you look at the situation and realize that you need to make a short-term TV buy (or up the frequency of an existing buy). To quote one of my favorite cartoon dogs, “Ruh-roh.”

As Dr. Denny notes over at 5th Estate, thanks to an election that’s mounting in importance to both parties, there isn’t any air time to be purchased.

According to a report from Broadcasting & Cable:

[The $1.6 billion] exceeds initial forecasts of $1.4 billion and approaches the $1.61 billion spent in 2004, a presidential-election year. “Candidates may have more money to spend than there is time to buy,” says Evan Tracey, COO of CMAG. [emphasis added]

Wow. Good news for broadcasters, bad news for those who didn’t plan ahead.

Of course, this is only likely to effect smaller, local marketers, but there are possible implications to be considered past the 2006 election cycle:

• Broadcast outlets have to take the political money, regardless of whatever impact it might have on their customers. This is especially true in an environment where multiple factors are undercutting the value (real and perceived) of traditional media as a marketing tool. It’s always dangerous when you have to say no to those who pay your bills on a regular basis, though.
• There’s a lesson here for the big national advertisers, too. This is likely nothing compared to the frenzy we’re going to see around the 2008 elections. They might want to think about pushing out their planning and buying even further than usual, because by April of that year there might be no time left. Hard to say at this point, but if I’m in charge of the planning process, I’m going to assume the worst, and then add three months additional lead time on top of that.
• Finally, if you’ll indulge the social/political/media analyst in me for a second, what might this all mean for the news coverage emanating from the broadcast outlets? Mass media facing eroding credibility as marketing channel - check. Political spending a reliable and lucrative source of income - check. Political controversy drives the urgency to spend - check.

Hmmm.

Before IABC’s current regional alignment, US District 5 (southwestern US) was well-regarded for its annual professional development conference.
As the new Southern Region, the tradition of high-quality programming at a reasonable cost ($399 US/members) continues. This year’s conference is in Kansas City.
From a branding perspective, my belief is that the conference will continue to achieve great heights. It’s not about the chapters, the region or the association itself.
It’s about the people.
Having attended many District 5 conferences, I’ve been able to establish and maintain meaningful relationships with some of the brightest people in the business. It was the opportunity to engage with those people that encouraged me to invest my time and professional development dollars into this conference.
The personal aspect of branding was brought home by Mike Swenson, president, Barkley, Evergreen and Partners Public Relations. In his morning session “Doing Well by Doing Good,” Swenson reiterated that point that regardless of the sophistication of a branding effort, it always comes down to people.
I am sure that many of you are already beginning to plan for your 2007 marketing year. As you develop those strategic plans, always keep in mind how you can engage your internal and external audiences to promote your brand.
And for all of you who serve as regional IABC leaders, I strongly encourage you to begin your tradition of providing members a quality conference. It will help you raise funds. And best of all, it will help you engage your members.