137929257Those 4 words are the most opened e-mail sub­ject line most peo­ple have ever tested: “You are not alone.”

And while that’s a nice Cliff Claven-esque CRO tip to throw out, it’s ask­ing WHY that’s such a pow­er­ful sub­ject line that’ll get you somewhere.

Here’s why:


Or if that’s not quite explicit enough, per­haps this will be:

YouTube Preview Image

Because if your ads aren’t doing any of those things, they’re prob­a­bly not doing much of any­thing else, either.

Selfies suck. They're even worse as advertising.

Self­ies suck. They’re even worse as advertising.

What are the two biggest mis­takes in advertising?

Depends on who you ask.

My part­ner, Roy Williams, has a list of The 12 Most Com­mon Mis­takes in Adver­tis­ing that’s awfully hard to argue with. But they’re the most com­mon mis­takes, not “biggest.” Plus, they are 12 of them.

For me, the biggest mis­take is cre­at­ing great adver­tis­ing for a lousy prod­uct. By putting the adver­tiser out of busi­ness that mis­take will have the biggest neg­a­tive repurcussions.

Once you take that off the table, though, then I’d list:

  1. Not say­ing any­thing that’s worth say­ing (let alone adver­tis­ing), and
  2. Bor­ing your audi­ence with ignor­able and for­getable ads

Ira Glass’s Two Biggest Mis­takes in Advertising

But if you ask Ira Glass, he’d tell you the two biggest mis­takes are:

  1. Using an inau­then­tic, over-hyped “voice” or pre­sen­ta­tion style, and
  2. Keep­ing the focus on your­self instead of the customer

Don’t believe me? Check him out:

YouTube Preview Image

In other words, respect your audience.

Respect them by talk­ing to them like a friend,  one sit­ting right next to you at the bar. And respect them by keep­ing the focus of the ad on them and what mat­ters to them, rather than on yourself.

Use Real Peo­ple Lan­guage. Talk Like a Friend

Here’s how all-time copy­writ­ing leg­end Bob Lev­ensen says to do it:

“Start off with ‘Dear Char­lie,’ then say ‘this is what I want to tell you about. Make believe that the per­son you’re talk­ing to is a per­fectly intel­li­gent friend who knows less about the prod­uct than you do. Then, when you’ve fin­ished writ­ing the copy, just cross out ‘Dear Char­lie’.“

This is the same guy who told us that most intel­li­gent peo­ple ignore adver­tis­ing because most adver­tis­ing ignores intel­li­gent peo­ple. And he was right.

So skip the hype, the pre-amble, the hemmin’-‘n-hawin’, and just say the thing.

Instead of wast­ing your cre­ativ­ity on witty, charm­ing, and clever lan­guage, save it for fig­ur­ing out how to be believ­able and cred­i­ble and to best sub­stan­ti­ate or dra­ma­tize your major claim.

Ditch Your We-We: Keep Your Focus on the Customer

Most adver­tis­ers try to stay cred­i­ble by focus­ing on why they’re bet­ter than the com­pe­ti­tion. Not a bad thing to do.

Unfor­tu­nately, they for­get to tie those dif­fer­en­tia­tors back to ben­e­fits that the cus­tomer will actu­ally care about. Instead they just thump their chests and make We-We claims:

  • We’re the best at this,
  • We’re num­ber one at that,
  • We’ve been in busi­ness since 1893.

We this, we that, and they we-we-we all the way home, and all over them­selves in their ad copy.

Everyone’s Favorite Radio Station

Ditch the we-we and take up the you-you. Make the cus­tomer the hero and the focus of the ad. Remem­ber your copy­writ­ing basics: always answer “What’s In It For Me?” for your customers.

WIIFM: everybody’s favorite radio sta­tio, play­ing 24–7 in their heads.

The good news is that ditch­ing the we-we, switch­ing to you-you, and answer­ing WIIFM makes it a lot eas­ier to talk to your audi­ence in a human voice.

And get­ting back to my list of mis­takes, it’ll also ensure you have some­thing worth say­ing, and keep you from bor­ing your audi­ence. Way to go, Ira. Thanks for your won­der­ful, won­der­ful radio show, and all the great sto­ry­telling (and adver­tis­ing) advice.

Now all you have to do is make sure your prod­uct lives up to its advertising ; )

P.S. Yes, I skipped Part III. I’ll cir­cle back to that later this week or early next week. Trust me, that les­son will work best com­ing last. 


Where’s the Beef?

Imag­ine you’ve been hired to cre­ate a PSA for the local police. Too many peo­ple are speed­ing in res­i­den­tial areas, and the police want a PSA-style radio ad designed to get peo­ple to slow down.

What kind of ad do you create?

If you’re like most adver­tis­ers, you DON’T dig for the facts and the insights and the logic. You won’t research the issue, and that means it’ll be tough to put real sub­stance behind your messaging.

Instead, you jump right to brain­storm­ing ways to dra­ma­tize  your safety mes­sage: How can we cre­ate the most shock­ing, dra­mat­i­cally pow­er­ful ad, built around a “Don’t speed or lit­tle johny will get hit by a car” premise.

And because you skipped that essen­tial first step of dig­ging for sub­stance, you’ll never get the chance to cre­ate some­thing as awe­some as this:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (ver­sion 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Down­load the lat­est ver­sion here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

If you hit me at 40 mph there’s around an 80% chance I’ll die. Hit me at 30 and there’s around an 80% chance I’ll live.”

You wouldn’t cre­ate that because you (likely) didn’t stop to ask: why is the speed limit set at that speed to begin with?

In order to say some­thing pow­er­fully, you must start by hav­ing some­thing pow­er­ful to say.

And that means you have to spend as much time look­ing for the “stuff” of your ads (or radio drama) as you do writ­ing or pro­duc­ing them. Which is exactly what Ira Glass says in Part II of his video series on storytelling:

YouTube Preview Image

The amount of time find­ing the decent story is more than the amount of time it takes to pro­duce the story. And that as some­one who wants to do cre­ative work, you actu­ally have to set aside just as much time for the look­ing for stories…

…I think that, like, not enough gets said about the impor­tance of aban­don­ing crap.” — Ira Glass

I con­cur with Ira on this.

Stop choos­ing to work the heart with “emo­tional” ads and great pro­duc­tion when what’s required is for you to dig harder for the right insight, fact, prod­uct dif­fer­en­tia­tor, or ben­e­fit that’s actu­ally worth adver­tis­ing in the first place.

The key is to start with what Leo Bur­nett called the “inher­ent drama” of the prod­uct or ser­vice itself. THEN you can add in all that great writ­ing and production.

When you don’t start with the inher­ent drama of the prod­uct itself, you get some­thing like this:

YouTube Preview Image

No one believed those ads because no one drinks milk as a high-performance sports drink. The adver­tiser was try­ing to stick a false drama onto the prod­uct and the approach flopped.

Com­pare that to the “Got Milk” cam­paign. It started from the truth about — the inher­ent drama of — milk, as in when, and under what con­di­tions, do real peo­ple actu­ally crave milk and only milk? When eat­ing a peanut but­ter sand­which, or eat­ing rich cook­ies. That’s when noth­ing but a cold glass of milk will do. An inher­ent drama that led to ads like this:

YouTube Preview Image

What about you? Are you set­ting aside as much time search­ing for great sub­stance as you do for writ­ing and pro­duc­ing your ads?

Or are you still try­ing to bluff with fluff?

P.S. I’d like to pro­vide proper attri­bu­tion and credit for the radio ad, but… I can’t seem to remem­ber or re-find wher­ever it came from. My apolo­gies to the ad group that cre­ated that PSA

Surprise! The "Best" Ad Ain't What You Think

Sur­prise! The “Best” Ad Ain’t What You Think

When most peo­ple judge a Super Bowl Com­mer­cial, they typ­i­cally judge it as:

  1. A piece of 30 or 60-second, feel-good the­atre, first and foremost,
  2. A pos­si­ble brand-awareness tool, sec­ond, and
  3. An actual ad, not at all—doesn’t even enter into the equation.

Basi­cally, if the ad looked cool, made you laugh or gave you the feel­ies, and was some­how vaguely related to the brand, then it’s judged a good Super Bowl Ad.

This is stu­pid. 2015-02-03_2333

The first thing an ad has to do is sell.

No, not every ad has to have a hard sell. I’m not advo­cat­ing for a Super Bowl full of Billy Mays-style infomercials.

But, yes, every ad should be selling.

And by that stan­dard, the real “best” ad of the Super­bowl is actu­ally a pretty crappy ad. There’s no emo­tional appeal and the “idea” behind the ad, if it could even be called that, is mis­guided at best.

Good drama it ain’t.

The Best Crappy Ad of the Superbowl

But the ad for Jublia is really the ONLY ad that actu­ally had a snowball’s chance in hell of mak­ing a sale.* Watch it:

YouTube Preview Image

Again, it’s a gen­uinely crappy ad that makes no dra­matic sense.

And yet it packs enough moments of clarity—enough infor­ma­tive, sub­stan­tive messaging—to actu­ally sell the product.

Even dur­ing the game, at a noisy party, I was able to pick-up on and remem­ber these three things about Jublia:

  1. It’s a new FDA-approved drug to treat toe­nail fungus
  2. It’s top­i­cally applied (rather than a pill), and
  3. It’s capa­ble of going under and through the toe­nail to actu­ally get at the infec­tion and kill it.
Stupid, but the idea of a topical solution to toenail fungus that works DID get through

Stu­pid, but the idea of a top­i­cal solu­tion to toe­nail fun­gus that works did get through

Hall of Fame Wor­thy stuff? Not hardly.

But enough of a value propo­si­tion to actu­ally sell some product?

Yes. Yes, indeed.

I can say that because I have toe­nail fun­gus and the ad man­aged to sell me on giv­ing Jublia a try.

More to the point, I bet you can’t name one other ad for a prod­uct (not count­ing movies and TV shows) that actu­ally accom­plished the same feat (pun intended) of mak­ing a com­pelling USP sales propo­si­tion of any kind?

Go ahead, name one other ad that told you some­thing new or com­pelling about the prod­uct or ser­vice. Some­thing that would likely make you con­sider buy­ing, if and when you are ever in the mar­ket for what­ever was being sold. Name another ad that said some­thing of substance.

The Bud­weiser “Brewed The Hard Way” ad came close.

I really liked the hard stance Bud took. Yeah, “punch­ing down” ain’t the best brand strategy—if the so-called “King of Beers” is that threat­ened by pumkin ale, it’s prob­a­bly time to relin­quish the beech­wood throne—but defin­ing what you stand against always brings clar­ity to the brand, and that’s a good thing. Appar­ently Bud stands against decent beer. God bless ‘em. At least they know their tar­get market.

And while the BMW i3 Ad got me intrigued by the new car, it didn’t actu­ally sell me on it. Know what I mean?

So What Was The Worst Ad of the Super Bowl?

I’m not sure of the actual worst ad, but I’m will­ing to pre­dict which ad rep­re­sented the biggest wasted opportunity.

That would be the Loc­tite Commercial.

That ad cost Loc­tite their entire ad bud­get for the year. Seri­ously. The entire adver­tis­ing bud­get for the freak­ing year.

And what did they get for a year’s worth of ad budget?

An ad that barely reg­is­tered as hav­ing some­thing to do with… glue? And fanny packs. I think. 2015-02-03_2350

But here’s the real shame of it: Loc­tite actu­ally makes an awe­some prod­uct that most home­own­ers should have on hand and would likely buy, if only they knew about it.

And isn’t that where Super Bowl ads can do the most good: for great prod­ucts with mass appeal but low awareness?

The prod­uct is called thread lock (though most peo­ple refer to it as Loc­tite, natch), and you apply it to screws and bolts that keep com­ing loose. Just put it on the threads and it keeps every­thing “locked tight,” effec­tively pre­vent­ing screws and bolts from back­ing out, vibrat­ing loose, or rust­ing shut, etc.

  • Got a kid who wig­gles in her seat and causes the bolts in her chair to work loose? Loc­tite ‘em.
  • Does your lawn­mower vibrate a tiny metal screw loose on the reg­u­lar? You know what to do.

You get the idea: it’s a great must-have prod­uct that most peo­ple don’t know about—who wouldn’t want to adver­tise that on the Super Bowl? Plus, you’ve got the entire comedic world of “loose screws” and “stuck nuts” to mine… I mean, c’mon, people!

But instead of adver­tis­ing that bit of great­ness with a com­pelling ad capa­ble of actu­ally, you know, sell­ing some­thing, we had that harlem shake dance num­ber and lame jokes built around Loctite’s me-too super­glue prod­uct. Whoopee!

And that’s my curmed­geonly take on “Best Super­bowl Com­mer­i­cal That Actu­ally Sold A Prod­uct” along with my opin­ion on “Biggest Missed Opportunity.”

P.S. I am pre­pared, of course, to eat my words (along with some hum­ble pie), if Loc­tite super glue starts sell­ing like crazy fol­low­ing Sunday’s ad. If you get news of Loctite’s 2015 sales, send it to me and I’ll do a follow-up post.

P.P.S. Love to hear your thoughts on which ads kicked butt and which ones failed in the com­ments section.

*OK, the “Like a Girl” com­mer­cial was a bril­liant piece of pro­pa­ganda that “sold” it’s per­spec­tive. Kudos to it. But I believe PSA’s have a leg up on the old “rel­e­vance” depart­ment, mak­ing them an unfair, Apples to Oranges com­par­i­sion when judg­ing actual prod­uct ads. I think that’s at least one rea­son why we were OK with the domes­tic vio­lence PSA and not at all OK with Nationwide’s downer of a “Make Safe Hap­pen” commercial.


2015-02-01_1414Ira Glass has advice on advertising?

Well… not specif­i­cally, but he did do an amaz­ing four part series on sto­ry­telling, and I thought I’d trans­late his advice to adver­tis­ing, start­ing with the first video in the series.

The first video cov­ers Ira’s two basic build­ing blocks of sto­ry­telling: the anec­dote and the moment of reflec­tion. And in adver­tis­ing terms, I think these are roughly anal­o­gous to Rel­e­vance and Cred­i­bil­ity. But stick­ing with sto­ry­telling for a moment:

  • The anec­dote is the nar­ra­tive that presents action in real-time, pulls peo­ple into the “world” of the story, builds sus­pense, and gen­er­ates inter­est, and
  • The moment of reflec­tion is the part that helps raise ques­tions and frames the mean­ing of the story

You can see Ira explain­ing these two build­ing blocks here:

YouTube Preview Image

Anec­dote = Meaty Fac­toid or Real­ity Hook = Credibility

In adver­tis­ing speak, the nar­ra­tive is often some inter­est­ing fac­toid or prod­uct fea­ture that can then be tied to a ben­e­fit, need, or desire.

  • “Our prod­uct uses a bet­ter grade of X, so it [pro­vides this benefit].”
  • Or, “We spend twice as long doing Y as the other guys, and that means you get [this benefit]
  • The coakroach you see in the morn­ing is the strag­gler behind hun­dreds of oth­ers that were in your home last night.

Or it’s a real­ity hook that’s tied to an imme­di­ate moment of need:

  • You hit your garage door opener and hear this [sound effect of Garage Door spring break­ing], leav­ing your car trapped in your own Garage. Now what?
  • That roach you saw scur­ry­ing away when you opened your pantry…

In the case of the fac­toid, the Anec­dote is pro­vid­ing cred­i­bil­ity and, with the asso­ci­ated ben­e­fit, some degree of relevance.

In the case of the drama­ti­za­tion, it’s 100% rel­e­vance, framed in terms of a recall cue. As in, when this event hap­pens to you, remem­ber [our brand promise]

Moment of Reflec­tion = Raise Ques­tions, Frame Mean­ing of Ad Campaign


Plant­ing a flag on occu­pied ter­ri­tory involves a fight

Brand­ing and posi­tion­ing (almost) always involve theft and warfare.

The mean­ing of your brand and the “posi­tion” you want in the minds of con­sumers is usu­al­lly already occu­pied, or at least con­tested, by another brand. Some­body else owns, or is try­ing to own, what you want because there are only a few posi­tions worth own­ing. If you want to plant your flag on that piece of men­tal real estate, you’ve got to remove their flag first. Either steal the land out from under them or fight for it: theft and warfare.


That bunny HAD to keep going and going if it wanted to take “long last­ing” away from Duracell.

Take reg­u­lar old bat­ter­ies: the only three qual­i­ties peo­ple care about are:

  1. long-lasting,
  2. reli­able, and
  3. cheap*.

And of those three, the only two suit­able for brand­ing are “long-lasting” and “reli­able.” That’s why Ener­gizer spent gazil­lions of dol­lars on that bunny that just kept going and going and going… until it had stolen “long-lasting” out from under Dura­cell. They could have owned some other attribute with far less effort and expense, but it wouldn’t have been worth owning.

So now Ener­gizer owns “long-lasting” and Dura­cell has switched to adver­tis­ing reli­a­bil­ity, sim­ply because it was the only thing left to take that was still worth owning.

The point to all of this is that it’s almost never enough to posi­tion your brand; you have to de-position (aka unseat) your com­pe­ti­tion as well.**

And that positioning-de-positining dance is what the moment of reflec­tion is all about.

When you men­tion the fact that your brand does X (and the other brands don’t), you get to frame the mean­ing of that fact:

We do X because we’re com­mit­ted to deliv­er­ing, [this ben­e­fit]—which means that the other guy sim­ply doesn’t care.

Now the tag end of that state­ment doesn’t always have to be explic­itly stated. In fact, it’s often bet­ter to have the audi­ence draw that con­clu­sion them­selves. Some­times, though, it helps to openly call out the com­pe­ti­tion and rhetor­i­cally punch them in the face. But regard­less of which way you accom­plish it, that bit of de-positioning should be part of your ad.

For exam­ple:

When your garage door breaks, call us, because we’re [the only ser­vice cen­ter in this area that is] open 24–7 and have fully stocked trucks capa­ble of fix­ing your door on the first visit, even at night and on week­ends. We’re here when you need us, not just when it’s con­ve­nient. [Unlike the other jerks that are only open dur­ing busi­ness hours]

But that’s just for one ad. When you start talk­ing brand­ing and posi­tion­ing, you’re really talk­ing about campaigns.

Chances are, if you do X because you’re com­mit­ted to Y, then X isn’t the only thing you do.

In fact, you’re prob­a­bly doing an entire alpha­bet full of things dif­fer­ently or bet­ter than the other guy. Actions that point back to the val­ues that drive your com­pany. And a good ad cam­paign will frame all those fac­toids to con­sis­tently estab­lish and sup­port the posi­tion you wish to claim in the mind of the customer.

So each ad, you raise a fac­toid (or an Anec­dote in Ira Glass terms) and you frame it in terms of this value, or brand posi­tion (through a moment of reflection).

And your ads should do all of this while rais­ing ques­tions about why your com­pe­ti­tion doesn’t do these things and whether or not they really care about the cus­tomer at all. Posi­tion your­self; de-position your competitors.

Where Most Adver­tis­ers Go Wrong

Most adver­tis­ers go wrong in three places:

1) They pro­vide no facts, real­ity hooks, or dra­ma­tized moments of need. There is noth­ing to estab­lish cred­i­bil­ity or rel­e­vance. They have no anec­dote or story, so they come off as bor­ing, irrel­e­vant, and/or unbe­liev­able. In the words of Roy H. Williams, the ad is all cheese and no meat. What most adver­tis­ers want to skip to is the fram­ing part, the moment of reflec­tion, where they just openly state what they believe and stand for, and so it comes off as so much solip­sis­tic blah-blah-blah.

2) They try to cram all the facts into a sin­gle ad, rather than string­ing them out into a cam­paign. When you just list the facts, they lose their dra­matic impact, and you’re back to blah-blah-blah land.

3) They state a fea­ture or function—what should be an anec­do­tatl buld­ing block—but don’t con­tex­tu­al­ize or dra­ma­tize it. There’s no inter­est or dra­matic force in the fact they give the audi­ence, so it doesn’t trans­late into rel­e­vance or even all that much cred­i­bil­ity, either.

4) They attempt to posi­tion them­selves, with­out depo­si­tion the brand that already holds that posi­tion in the minds of cus­tomers. If you claim a qual­ity or posi­tion that another brand already owns, you’re really just pay­ing to adver­tise them—unless you depo­si­tion them in order to repo­si­tion yourself.

And that’s Part 1. Stay tuned for part 2 later this week.

* Yes, eco-friendly or green is another qual­ity peo­ple might care about for bat­ter­ies, but then you’re into the land of recharge­ables rather than reg­u­lar old alka­line bat­ter­ies. Dif­fer­ent market.

** Some­times you are lucky enough to have no mean­ing­ful com­pe­ti­tion in your cateogry, allow­ing you to sim­ply claim what you want for a brand posi­tion. And that’s a very good thing. Take advan­tage of it! Also, I’m aware that “depo­si­tion” is a legal term, which is why I’m hyphen­at­ing the word so as to mean un-position. Thanks for indulging me in this : )

 P.S. I’m usu­ally wary of talk­ing about mar­ket­ing or adver­tis­ing in terms of war, sim­ply because the anal­ogy doesn’t hold: in war you can attack the enemy directly, in mar­ket­ing you usally can’t; all you can do is per­suade the cus­tomer. Wal­mart didn’t kill Kmart, we did when we stopped shop­ping at Kmart and started shop­ping at Wal­mart instead. But the anal­ogy is use­ful when describ­ing a zero-sum com­pe­ti­tion. There is only so much mar­ket share, cus­tomer dol­lars, and brand posi­tions avail­able. Either you get them, or the com­pe­ti­tion does. Just keep in mind that the only way to beat the com­pe­ti­tion is to win the customer.   



The Mighty HIPPO

The Mighty HIPPO!

“Adver­tis­ing is the only busi­ness where the largest clients with the most amount of money can bully and demand the agency’s worst work…while the small­est clients with lit­tle or no money must meekly accept the agency’s best.”

I don’t think there’s an adver­tis­ing or mar­ket­ing pro­fes­sional work­ing in Amer­ica today who hasn’t had the chal­lenge of con­vinc­ing their boss or client to run what should have been an obvi­ously bril­liant ad cam­paign or mar­ket­ing idea.

The first solu­tion to this, of course, is to learn how to explain, defend, and sell your work and then hav­ing the sim­ple courage to do so.

Learn to Wres­tle — and Defeat! — The HIPPO

But even pro­fes­sion­als who are nor­mally great at sell­ing their work run into obsta­cles when faced with an obsti­nate, heavy-weight HIPPOHigh­est Paid Person’s Opin­ion.

And that’s when one has to use the magic words.

The Magic Words

The magic words are: Let’s Do An Exper­i­ment. Or per­haps, “Let’s Just Test It, First.”

No one wants to be seen (or to think of them­selves) as a don’t-confuse-me-with-the-facts dog­matic bully. And that makes it hard to refuse an exper­i­ment or a test, which then gives you some room to prove out your idea.

Unfor­tu­nately, you still have to con­vince the HIPPO of the valid­ity of your test, and this is where per­sonas come in.

The One Opin­ion to Rule Them All

With­out a per­sona, the ques­tion of whether this or that ad or ini­tia­tive is worth doing (or even worth test­ing) comes down to per­sonal opin­ion and gut feel. So nat­u­rally, the high­est paid person’s opin­ion wins out. Hence the power of the HIPPO.

But, when you have a 3-dimensional, fleshed-out Per­sona that rep­re­sents the customer’s use-case, buy­ing moti­va­tions, and descision-making style and cri­te­ria, you’re no longer forced to argue your opin­ion vs. the HIPPO. You can now resort to the persona’s opion. And since the per­sona rep­re­sents the cus­tomer (and there­fore sales), that becomes the one opi­o­nion capa­ble of trump­ing the HIPPO.

Com­bine the power of the Per­sona with the magic of lets do an exper­i­ment, and you’ve got the key to push your best work past the HIPPO. The per­sona lets you argue why your idea is mean­ing­ful to the cus­tomer, and the test gives your idea a fair chance at prov­ing itself with actual customers.

Build Your Own Per­sonas & Learn From The Best

2014-10-30_1027So now all you need to do is craft and get buy-in for your personas.

And for­tu­nately for you, THE experts in the field of persona-based mar­ket­ing have just cre­ated a short, how-to on doing just that in the form of an easy to read kin­dle book avail­able for just $2.99.

It’s called Buyer Leg­ends and if you buy it now, you can have a set of per­sonas fin­ished within a few hour’s work.

Need help sell­ing your ideas/ads/campaigns/strategies/initiatives?

Down­load your copy of Buyer Leg­ends now. Then use the magic words.

P.S. As a “side ben­e­fit,” per­sonas will not only help you sell your bril­liant ideas, they’ll also help you cre­ate more of them 

P.P.S. If you’re too cheap to pay $2.99 for the book, my Wiz­ard of Ads col­league (and all-around good guy), Tim Miles, is giv­ing copies away, no strings attached.

Page 1 of 3112345...102030...Last »