Few in the ad industry will lament the departure of Steve ‘Yoda’ Hilton, David Cameron’s director of strategy. Indeed, such is the relief that he is going, some would willingly pack the diminutive ‘blue sky’ thinker’s bags, as he contemplates a year’s ‘sabbatical’ with his family in California. Politically speaking, California is the sunny side of Siberia.
Why good riddance? Well, the word that best sums up Hilton’s relationship with the ad industry is ‘renegade.’
Although Hilton’s relationship with Cameron and the Tory party goes back beyond the 1992 election campaign, most of the intervening years to date were spent in the service of advertising, the career that actually earned him a living. Hilton quickly hooked up with Maurice Saatchi, who professed to see in young Steve a kind of son: “No one reminds me as much of me when young as Steve”, he is reputed to have said. And the admiration was mutual. Steve dutifully followed Maurice from Saatchi & Saatchi to breakaway M&C Saatchi as a kind of intellectual bag-carrier.
Hilton’s ability to think out of the box or perhaps more accurately, ‘to get out of his box,’ soon became apparent with his contribution to the 1997 election campaign. The ‘Demon Eyes’ poster was certainly visually arresting and highly memorable, but trying to make the then saintly Tony Blair into the Devil Incarnate probably did more to win votes for Labour than for the party originating it. The episode would seem to underline an abiding truth about Hilton’s career: that high intelligence and original thinking are no guarantees of common sense.
Never mind. After 13 years of hard Labour, which saw the 2002 ban on cigarette advertising followed in 2007 by severe TV restrictions on foods high in fat, salt and sugar, and much muttering about out of control drinks advertising, the ad industry seemed to have every reason to pop the corks when it emerged that one of their own was to become the man officially in charge of David Cameron’s brain.
How wrong they all were. Had they done their homework more carefully they would have found our man wasn’t the pragmatic trimmer everyone hoped he might be. A Steve Hilton blog post from 2004, entitled ‘Will sexual marketing be the next consumer backlash,’ espoused some rather unfashionable, untraditionalist opinions on the matter of “the relentless drive by big businesses to sexualise small children, ageing them prematurely in the process” and denouncing the “sexual predators of the advertising industry.”
Ring a bell? “The Bailey Report“, says one insider, “appears to have taken its brief directly from Steve Hilton’s old blog.” Too right, and laudable though the principles informing Reg Bailey’s report are, what a nightmare they have proved to implement. The regulators have gone into puritanical overdrive with a zeal last seen at the Salem witch trials. Practically any female flesh exposed in a public place (ie, on posters) is now regarded as a potential contaminant of young minds – as the recent case of the Advertising Standards Authority versus Marks & Spencer only too vividly reminded us.
However, the Bailey Report and its aftermath are a mooncast shadow when compared with Hilton’s other bequest to the ad industry. Fairly or not, Hilton’s blue sky thinking is blamed for the ultimate destruction of the Central Office of Information. For which read a £540m a year ad industry gravy train.
Pinning the blame on a single person for what may yet turn out to be a government-wide communications disaster zone might seem a little harsh. After all, there are plenty of available villains – if that’s what they are – from Francis Maude to half the cabinet office. And yet the suspicion lingers that Hilton somehow gave Maude the intellectual confidence to take an axe to the venerable institution, with his bizarre proposal for a spare and minimalist US-style Ad Council to displace the heavily bureaucratic COI.