• by Lydia Loizides , Op-Ed Contributor, April 4, 2008

Recently I had a conversation with a gentleman who runs a branded entertainment agency. We were meeting to discuss working together, but the conversation quickly spiraled into a lively discussion about the perceived inequality that creative and media buying agencies have vis a vis talent agencies when it come to representing brands as clients.

Now, don't get me wrong. I know inequality when I see -- it but I was truly taken aback by this. Granted, this gentleman was not being mean-spirited, but there was a certain edge in his voice, an underlying connotation in the language he was using (if not blatantly stating at various points) that the advertising community, and more specifically the branded entertainment divisions, were up in arms about talent agencies' representation of brands. Somehow this was seen as a conflict of interest -- because talent agencies could then bundle their talent clients in with their brand clients.

Hang on a second here, folks. Is this really true? Is this the perception? If so, then how is this different from a creative agency packaging its interactive division for services? Or packaging media buying as part of the relationship? Do we believe that a brand is not going to exercise free will and choose the best representative for its brand? I mean, really!

While, yes, there is a certain leverage that a talent agency could have in that it has direct access to a brand, I have to believe that somehow, someone would have the wherewithal to be able to make an independent decision. To my friend with whom I had the conversation, my only response is this: Rather than bemoan your perceived fate, figure out a more direct way to partner with the talent agencies. I believe the saying goes -- keep your friends close and your enemies closer, no?