Sorry to post about Gorilla yet again... I couldn't help noticing that buried in the story of Cadbury's annual results is a quote from chief executive Todd Stitzer saying he "overrruled his own marketers" when they presented the idea to him without the "Cadbury cues" of the purple background and glass-and-a-half device.

This is surely baloney - just a CEO bigging-up his own role. I bet it was actually the Cadbury's marketers overruling Fallon.

Interesting, though, that someone thought it was a good idea for the spot to be virtually unbranded. Whoever did insist on the "Cadbury cues" made the right call, in my view. Misattribution is a deadly sin, and if the Gorilla is going to be sitting in front of a wall then it might as well be a purple one.

Why some creatives are so sniffy about branding I will never understand. For sure there's no need for packshots the size of alient spacecraft, and it's annoying when an ad repeats the brand name three times - I always fight client requests for 'branding that will hurt' - but if the brand's colours appear here and there in the ad, then so what? Nobody dies.

UPDATE: In today's Campaign school report, Fallon only got a 9. Despite doing the best ads of the year, and finishing top of the new business table. What would it take to get a 10?