In November 2001, as we were brainstorming about our spring ad campaign, one thing became quickly apparent: September 11 was still foremost in our minds. Our creative group discussions yielded nothing more relevant, so we set out to find a new way to address the catastrophe, but we realized we couldn't. Every minute of that terrible day had been examined in microscopic detail.
Instead we decided to talk about something that had been ignored: the day after. On September 12, we believed we all changed in profound ways--many of which were for the better. The campaign expressed some of those sentiments.
When the campaign ran, an article by a Daily News writer followed, accusing us of exploiting the emotions of the moment. Fox and CNN also picked up on it. In the end, other editorials defended our position, and noted that we were doing what we always did.
Could we have done it better? Maybe. Was it a mistake to have done it? We don't think so.