Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce you…
on a different note, Whitenoise are in the design press again, this time with a full page in Computer Arts Projects, highlighting our bizarre yet effective self-promo efforts – predominantly centred on yummy ‘A year in Chocolate’  calendars (one bar per month, with a bespoke themed sleeve for each bar). Hey, you know what they say: “9 out of 10 people admit they love chocolate. The 10th is a liar.”…

The piece also features the well-known Whitenoise-branded taxis (very effective mobile advertising that works really well in a small city such as Belfast), and also the outrageously expensive Whitenoise Books (number 6 is in the throes of production as we speak).

Dear Spider… coming to a cinema near you…
We hear on the grapevine that our mate Colin Reid is in negotiations to get Dear Spider chapter 1 screened at the Belfast Film Festival. We’re working hard at putting the finishing touches to this very chilling gothic masterpiece, and the final cut will be up on his website in the next few days. For now, go here to see the rough cut. Whitenoise will be holding a private screening this Wednesday lunchtime. Any clients, friends, family or co-conspirators who want a sneak peek, drop me a line – the price of admission is ‘bring your own popcorn’…

ICVA gets the message out…
It’s magazine time again for longstanding client the Independent Custody Visiting Association. As usual, Lynsay was on the case and produced another excellent edition…

Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce you…
on a different note, it’s been a few days since the last Whitenoise ‘alter ego’ card was spotted in the wild, so here’s the next in line, this tim for Steven ‘The Body’ Forbes and his fab fast tanning salon – get a load of those pecs!

And finally…
We’re on the last push to the launch of ‘At Least Thirteen Ways of Looking At A Blackbird’, an exhibition of art inspired by the 9th century poem…

Following on from last years’ successful event, at which 13 local artists contributed work, this show has been widened in scope and scale and now numbers 30 pieces in total. Check it out at the old website, here, (due to be updated imminently) or why not get along to the opening? The exhibition runs from 1 to 25 April, but if you’d like to be on the guest list for the opening night contact Rory Jeffers for more info.

And that is all I have to say at this present time.

Mark C

The boffins in white coats (oh alright, Peedy and Ryan) have been busy beavering away learning some delightful new tricks, to gasps of amazement from all:

Should be able to put all this to good use for all our lovely motion graphics clients…

Mark C

Glad (or maybe sad) to see that it’s not just the Belfast design industry having to jump through hoops to get new work. Check out this from the Creative Review blog:

- – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - -

Our naïve hopes that the 2012 Olympics might result in some landmark creative work were dealt another blow today with news that design studios are being selected at random to work on the games…

After learning that its bid for design work relating to the sustainability of the games had been unsuccessful, Sparkle Studios in London thought that it would try to find out why. A further enquiry prompted a response from CompeteFor (the organisation administering the tendering process via an online portal) revealing that a shortlist of suppliers had been “randomly” drawn up from those studios who “scored the highest mark in our questionnaire”.

Back in February, the Olympic Delivery Authority advertised for design and print services via CompeteFor. Sparks submitted its portfolio (only three images are allowed) and filled out the questionnaire which asks for details on areas such as liability insurance and number of employees but nothing to do with how good your work might be. Yesterday the studio learnt that its bid had been unsuccessful. It scored 94% on the questionnaire, while the average score of shortlisted bidders was 100%. After enquiring further, the studio were emailed this explanation of the process by the adjudicators:

“Thank you for taking the time to respond to this opportunity. We had an overwhelming response from 245 organisations. Due to the number of high scoring responses we have short-listed a number of suppliers randomly from those who scored the highest mark in our questionnaire. This was done anonymously.”

“We’ve applied for four or five projects this way, none successfully at this point,” says Sparks’ Michael Gough. “It’s the most expedient way to get a shortlist, but this is the first time it’s been a random selection.”

What really surprised the studio was the admission that companies who had made the shortlist were chosen “randomly” from the top-scorers. “It’s an absurd process for selecting suppliers,” says Gough.

It seems that designers’ suitability for working on one of the most high-profile projects in UK history rests more on sheer luck than it does on their creative abilities. We suspected that the quality of 2012 design was likely to be questionable, but should it really be a lottery?

- – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - - - – - -

It’s all very sad – commissioning decisions really should be based on creativity, track record and a solid portfolio of historic work rather than a box-ticking exercise.

I fear that the commissioning bodies (mainly government departments and publically-funded organisations) have been sold the lie that in order to deliver maximum value for the public purse the whole exercise of identifying creative services and procuring design or advertising work needs to based on points scoring alone.

This is all fine and dandy in theory, but frequently throws up anomalies – such as printers who manage to get themselves on to a pitch list for creative work being awarded a design contract which includes the development of a corporate identity, advertising messages and copywriting – hello??? In what way does this possibly make sense?

Anyone else out there agree or disagree? let me know your thoughts…

Mark C