China: Land of Opportunities?

So China is booming. A lot. The luxury market is soon to become the largest in the world and they have more cash in stock then America and Europe combined. But is it a threat? The media likes to believe so. Especially with financial instability in the US and Europe we are still enduring for almost 5 years now, China is “the place to be now”. It’s something that brought me here like so many others and I’d still love to believe it. But being here for now more than 8 months in total, I start to see certain things a little bit differently.

For the past weeks – due research I had to do on different projects and more observing in the streets – it has become clear to me there’s a social ticking time bomb going on here I believe.

As everybody knows, there’s an enormous wealth gap between poor and rich in this country. Millions of self-made entrepreneurs and business men got to get a piece of the capitalist pie that started 25 years ago. But in a country with a population of more than one billion people, that’s “ok”. The majority still lives on the countryside and the ones that migrated to the city live in almost unbearable living conditions; right next to parked Rolls Royce. Where the majority is warming themselves up with some street food noodles on the sidewalk, the expats consume their favorite Western beer and scotch brands on imported price in the bar right in front of it. It’s a truth you will face once here and there’s nothing much you can do about it right now.

But … there’s more. The biggest threat I believe is the fact that millions of college students with good degrees can’t find any job right now. China has become the place where connections and looking white only guarantee you a job nowadays. Millions of young adults, of which their parents invested all their life saving for them to go to school, have to find jobs now as a guard or a waiter, making around 100rmb (12 euro’s) a day.

Sure, there are lots of people here not complaining having the same social and living situation. The only difference is that this starts to become the majority of educated, intelligent, assertive people. They speak English, have a degree in law, finance or engineering, are internet / mobile experts and are becoming more and more frustrated with the system. The ‘American Dream’ China has been selling its inhabitants for those past 25 years is nothing more to become than an illusion for so many of them. They live now completely outside the city (as living expenses are still going up) with sometimes 7 people in one room. They have access to the internet and actually have nothing else to do then being active on platforms

Besides that, within a few years there will be 24 million men that can’t find a woman to marry because of the enormous gender gap the one-child policy has been creating. 24 million!! I don’t want to put this into a Freudian context, but I am damn sure this on top will frustrate a lot of educated young guys even more. They see progress, wealth and an enjoyable lifestyle all around them; yet feel they have been fucked big-time by the system. They will feel betrayed. And despite the fact the Chinese government is still ruling this country with an iron fist, it’s well aware a social revolution by millions of young, intelligent, digital savvy people is one they can’t handle or strike down. They also watched the Arab Spring Revolution taking place.

Everybody is aware of the problem. The rich are fleeing the country, the government is slowly putting a stop on expats like me steeling jobs from locals and providing better social housings for college students who can’t find a job. But without a decent unemployment or pension system, things could turn really nasty here. And it’s people like me that could become the targeted enemy in this revolution.

There’s a lot to think about, when debating “China is taking over the world’. Sure their economy is still booming and doing a lot better than any other nation. But never forget the strongest force to take a nation down comes from the inside.

For Knowledge

“I want to live my life taking the risk all the time that I don’t know anything like enough yet …”

You may have missed it, but two weeks ago one of my contemporary inspiring figures died at age 62. Christopher Hitchens, author, journalist and best known for his atheist writings, debates and harsh language, left his last breath after a long battle against cancer.

Next to Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris I think he was the leading voice in a new form of atheism that’s not only trying to leave religion alone and taking distance from it as we saw happening in the late sixties but actually attacking organized theocratic religion. Because it does serve a purpose, unlike many liberal thinkers who think it’s better to just leave it alone.

‘God is Not Great – How Religion Poisons Everything’ – his bestseller explains in a very narrative yet documented and brilliant way how religion is the main source of hatred, discrimination, abuse, and oppression. It explains how it’s impossible and completely irrelevant for atheists to disprove God. How can you disprove something of which the existence hasn’t been proven? Think of the Flying Spaghetti Monster Metaphor of Dawkins. I simply hate when you go into the debate “But you can’t prove there’s a God either”.

I recently had a talk with somebody that pointed out to me to say “I believe there is no God” is actually also a form of religion since you do believe in something. That’s absurd. First of all, even though I don’t need to disprove the existence of God because somebody else claims the existing (see above), I am simply convinced there is none. It’s not a matter of faith; it’s a matter of rationalism. Second of all, you can’t put atheism on the same line as other religions since it does not require a supreme being in any way.

Thank you Christopher, for showing more people to way into true knowledge, morals and existence.

Being the Outsider

Last week in a meeting we wanted to put the luxury market in China into a historical perspective. The history chart marked from having 30 years of communism, followed by 30 years of capitalism to a new area of most likely 30 years of consumerism which we are facing today. By putting the 3 different generations coming along those decades into the chart we have The Baby Boomers, Generation X and now Generation Y.

I had to protest. I simply couldn’t stand the idea we would name the Chinese period 1945 – 1975 Baby-Booming. Babies weren’t booming at all, babies were starving to death. While the West indeed was facing an era with increased food supplies, medical treatment and social stability; the Chinese were having one of their hardest moments in their nation’s history. Putting “30 years of Communism – The Baby Boomers” underneath a photo from Mao Zedong was simply too much for me.

And here we had a problem. I noticed immediately they actually had no idea what I was talking about yet did not try to prove me wrong. There was silence. Awkward silence. We decided not to put the generations into the deck and left the subject alone. That was it. Should I have kept my mouth? People at home will say “of course not, bring them the truth!” while expats here will understand already situations like these are not as easy to solve as they may look like.

When people travel to China they obviously know about the government policies and censorship but what lots of people estimate themselves wrong with is that they think they will be welcomed here with open arms by the local youth to bring them the ‘true history of their country’. It doesn’t work that way at all. They don’t want to hear it. The educated ones realize things perhaps didn’t happen exactly as they had been taught at school but all was necessary to lift up the country from where it is today. The Machiavellian way of doing things.

It brings you in a very delicate position. Because – even despite the fact what they know and don’t know or believe and don’t wish to believe – this is a culture that simply does not need a foreigner or outsider to tell them anything about their country. Whether this deals with current policies coming from Beijing or the nation’s history. And especially not when it comes down to questioning the heroism of the nation’s icon of progress, virtue and collective values. Yes, this is how it is here today. We still pay with his head on each bank note we pay with. And you have no idea how glorified he still is among the lower classes living on the countryside, while those are exactly the ones who had the hardest time during the starvation.

It’s hard to stand near the line here realizing few can be done. Last year I spoke to a student journalism. Asking her whether or not it was challenging to study journalism in a country you couldn’t speak fully your own mind on which she replied that she had no idea what I was talking about. Is it denial, blind ignorance or simply not knowing any better? It does make you feel you shouldn’t come in between, despite how important you believe these things are. And despite how much you would want to and always thought of yourself you would before coming here.

Content Collapses

Last week a tragic attack happened in Luik, Belgium. A guy threw grenades and opened fire on innocent people waiting for the bus, killing 3 people and himself. Since Belgian news was almost ‘proud’ to announce it was world news and ‘trending’ (suitable word, don’t you think?) on Twitter even when it was still happening at the moment, I doubt you don’t have heard of it.

We live in an amazing age where the speed of information is almost faster than the speed of light. You read immediately who died (Steve Jobs, Christopher Hichens, Kim Jong-II … to sum some recent names), which country went from one minute to the other bankrupt or simply ‘what happened in the world 15 minutes ago’. It’s amazing. The world has never been so well connected and the advantages that come along are utterly brilliant.

But there are also some disadvantages (aren’t there always?). It was annoying me last week when I was trying to follow what was happening in my country on the other side of the world. I was of course happy I could follow immediately and take notice of the events that took place through the online version of a Belgian quality newspaper and through Twitter #luik or #liege. But what was pissing me off, was the fact how I realized how journalists and people (but I actually only need to attack journalists since it’s their profession to bring facts onto the table) were spreading news facts about the event constantly without having any verification or proof. First, there were multiple ‘gangsters’, I even saw the word ‘terrorists’ appearing one time. Then, there were at least 6 people dead (or another number, I don’t know anymore but you get my point). Then, police were still chasing criminals in the streets with open gunfire. Still today I wonder where the hell they got that information? And if it was true, who the fuck were the police shooting at?

On the one hand, it’s amazing I’m being notified and updated by what is happening exactly on that moment somewhere else on the globe; on the other hand I have the feeling news becomes cheap. The speed of delivering news is dominating the quality. In fact, news has become cheap already. Actually, it’s free. I don’t pay anything to read that news site yet have all the knowledge of the world right at my desk. I guess it’s my own fault. It’s our fault. We are still in the illusion that digital content should be absolutely free.

And there lies our biggest mistake. The biggest mistake we made at the beginning of the dotcom-revolution and actually something we need to blame Google for, despite how much I respect them. We have been growing up with the idea that everything we find coming from the World Wide Web has to be free since we “already pay for our monthly internet subscription”. It’s a mindset that will take a while before it can change. Will it ever?

Newspapers all over the world are struggling and sales are decreasing while the costumer is still expecting quality news and journalism. Steve Jobs in an interview had a pretty positive view on the future on that. In the sense that we are going to an era where there will be more multi-functional devices for people to read, view and share content on constantly around them and that should be a good thing for a company that produces content. The only problem we’re facing right now is that those shifts once in while can take some time and so we’re now at a shifting point in history. We definitely are. Not sure how we are going to solve this problem and try to close the gab that is widening constantly through (micro-)blogging and SNS but I do hope we won’t get lost in a world of journalism where speed reigns and where quality, proof & facts and honest reports get behind.

When the Line of Digital should be Fading

So this week AKQA was chosen and awarded by Adweek and by Campaign with the title ‘Digital Agency of the Year’. Yes, we celebrated here although credits obviously do not go to me, but I do am bloody proud for being part of it. I was glad to read the articles where the magazines are already debating whether something still needs to be called ‘digital’. Does it still need a separate title? I actually think not. Like Yacce Vijn recently said on the Amsterdam Ad Blog: “The term is slowly eroding; when I go to a shop to buy a camera, I’ll ask for a camera, not a digital camera. It’s obvious that it will be digital – everything is. I think the time is ripe to stop putting digital labels on agencies and go for integrated by default“.

He is absolutely right and they should cancel the title ‘digital agency’. Every (successful) campaign today has a digital component. Even if only the case study video goes viral afterwards. You can immediately distinguish the innovative agencies that were considered traditional and have proven themselves completely integrated in today’s communication. Think for example of one of the most brilliant campaigns of 2011 that’s still ongoing today: The Old Spice campaign from “traditional” (?) agency Wieden+Kennedy where they truly have proven how direct the communication between consumer and brand can be. Or agencies that have proven to put the border of definitions even further away with full-integrated campaigns connecting outdoor with digital such as what Droga5 did for Bing and Jay-Z (one of the most inspiring campaigns in the last decade if I may say so).

The other direction we see as well and I actually hope we will see more in the future: AKQA’s viral video ‘Trick or Treat’ for Audi pleased the client so much it went on tv afterwards as well – done by a ‘digital’ agency. So what’s the definition of a TVC anyway? Both Old Spice and Heineken’s The Entrance videos first appeared online before going on tv, so is that a digital or a traditional video? It’s time we don’t need to ask ourselves that question anymore and just call it ‘advertising’ from now on. As it always has been of course.

As well as I’ve said here before that I love AKQA for having the reputation of a quality (digital) agency, yet the planning of the campaigns is exactly the same as in any other ‘traditional’ agency: trying to have a deeper understanding in the people and the world. Obviously there’s digital data as well, but that simply is part of the entire strategy spectrum and definitely what all agencies deal with today as I’ve been trying to explain above. I actually dislike the term ‘Digital Planner’ instead of calling yourself just ‘A planner’. It somehow limits your possibilities and is actually contrary to what the whole idea of advertising planning is: finding the relevant tone of voice, audience, communication style AND communication channels.