Trust Keith Reinhard, the soft-spoken 68-year-old Chairman of one of the advertising world's most creative agencies, ddb Worldwide, to come out with, well, his very-own perspective on everything from outsourcing and consolidation to improve America's poor image abroad. For, in between writing jingles, like arguably the most memorable jingle of all time (McDonald's "You deserve a break today" way back in the 1970s) and leading an advertising powerhouse with 206 offices in 96 countries, Reinhard finds time and effort to burn on 'Business for Diplomatic Action', a 9/11-inspired, year-old group aimed at improving America's image using a business-oriented approach. On a personal holiday in India, Reinhard spoke to BT's Shailesh Dobhal on a host of issues, from ddb's plans for India to how American businesses can help America fight Bin Laden. Excerpts:

What are the big trends you see in the advertising business?

The big trend globally would be the trend towards consolidation.

But there is an opinion that consolidation is almost over with very few things left to be consolidated...

I would disagree with that. Because as advertising agencies become more and more the custodians of brands, we will have to have more services, different kinds of specialists and different disciplines. And that in itself opens up a whole new set of consolidation possibilities. And who knows where consolidation could eventually go. I mean, you look back and say, could a magazine like Time ever consolidate with online (media), when we didn't even know such a thing existed! Or with Warner Brothers, a motion picture studio? Who says Omnicom can't be one day in the entertainment business?

Is the thought already there?

No. I am just saying (in future), who knows! There is a trend, not yet universal, in compensation for results. Procter & Gamble (P&G), for example, not a client of ours, is now paying all of their agencies in the us strictly on how much (of the products) is sold, as opposed to how much media is bought. That's a good trend, because when we get paid-and almost all ddb contracts now have performance- or results-based clauses (right now maybe it's a bonus added, maybe it's not the whole thing like P&G, but this will happen)-for how good we are, then the level of excellence will rise, we will embrace all the disciplines-direct marketing, promotions, online-equally.

What about consumers increasingly rejecting traditional sales messages?

I think that's wonderful. The more consumer choice there is, the better we have to be. We are also seeing in terms of Tivo and other digital recording devices, people copying, recording our ads, sharing it with their friends. But the only ones that they will copy and share are those that are very entertaining or very informative. In a survey last year of Tivo users in the us, what do you think was the least omitted or zapped category? It was beer! Why? Because it's very entertaining. What was the second least (zapped)? It was pharmaceuticals because it was very informative. So we have to be as entertaining or as informative that people choose to watch us.

What's your view on branded content?

It's like any (other) trend. Everybody wants to jump on the bandwagon. Few people understand it and get it right, and a lot don't.

Outsourcing is not a big enough issue for creative advertising agencies to be thinking about

Outside DDB, who is getting it right?

Well, I think there are some other people getting it right too (laughs). I thought the earliest (good) example in the US was the BMW film series. I think we will see this more and more in the motion picture industry. I, Robot used Audi. Audi made a very specific car just for that movie. You know, when I began in the (advertising) business we were doing this (branded content). We were doing it in radio; that's how soap operas began. We were doing it in television-where the first commercials I wrote were not film commercials, but the script for the comedian to work into the whole show! It was all integrated. And now we're getting back to it again.

So why did the industry stop doing it?

Because of the media explosion. It was no longer efficient to sponsor just one programme, specially when cable came to the us market. It (the ad) had to be at every place. And if the ad had to be everywhere, it had to be a self-contained commercial.

DDB Worldwide is among one of the largest ad agencies in the world and acknowledged as the industry's most creative network. But in India, you are neither the biggest nor perceived to be creatively hot. And you have only a minority 10 per cent stake in Mudra. What are your plans to give DDB its rightful place under the Indian ad sun?

Not creatively hot at the moment, but we're making progress. It's true that we do not have a ddb brand presence in India. Our approach is to start to introduce the ddb name in a franchised way with Mudra, starting with Tribal ddb, which is our interactive brand. Tribal ddb India will be a sort of ddb flag here. Working with Mudra, ddb will be doing other activities, not always branded ddb, but using internally ddb concepts, strategic processes and bringing ddb people more and more to (this) market.

Are you launching DDB's second agency (after Mudra) in India?

There is a possibility that some day we might. But there are no current plans.

India, in terms of the advertising business, is largely a WPP country; it controls almost half of the market. IPG is number two, with Omnicom and Publicis as poor numbers three and four. Do you see your group, Omnicom, getting more aggressive on India?

Sure, recently John Wren (Omnicom's Chairman) has appointed an executive, Michael Birkin, as Chief Executive of Omnicom Asia-Pacific. And obviously India is an important reason for that (appointment). It's a country of great promise to all of us. Omnicom has been behind, and we look for acceleration now with Michael in the seat.

Will it be inorganic or organic?

Well, you have to speak to Michael (for that).

What about DDB? Will you be looking at inorganic acceleration in India?

We would be looking for strategic growth with Mudra and also opportunities for working with Mudra. Always with Mudra, for any strategic opportunities that might arise or present itself.

Is the global advertising business, and DDB in particular, looking at outsourcing to India?

Not seriously. I think, you know, people say why not? But it hasn't caught on. For example, take the area of television animatics. I can get them done in Brazil, or some other countries for one-third of what it costs in the US.

But you can get it at one-fourth (of what it costs in the US) in India...

But none of the creative directors (in the us) really want to take the time to go through this. It is not a big trend. Am I against it philosophically? No. In the overall scheme of things, outsourcing is not a big enough issue at this point of time for creative advertising agencies to be thinking about.

Do you see agencies re-inventing themselves to what you refer to as 'agency of the future'-nimble, both small and big, local and global, bundled and unbundled, forming and re-forming?

I believe that ddb has made great progress against those standards. A typical ddb agency will have 50 per cent of its revenue from international business and 50 per cent local. So that's big and small, both at the same time. Bundled and unbundled... This is what's wrong, in my opinion, in saying: "Oh, Mr. Client you need 360-degree marketing, or you need the whole egg!" Not every client needs it. What I am saying is, bundle and unbundle as need be. Mudra, for instance, is assembling best-in-class services in all these disciplines. But it will customise what the client needs. Are we there yet? No, we will never be, because we are always forming and re-forming.

My big idea now is to see if we can get American firms to join hands to out-recruit Bin Laden

What have you achieved in one year of 'Business for Diplomatic Action'?

First of all, we have been very successful in raising the issue and getting media attention (laughs). We have brought the issue to the surface. The second thing we have accomplished is, because of the media attention, we were invited to testify to the (us) Congressional sub-committee in August (2004). And that in turn got some action going, working with some of the staff people in Congress (on) some of the proposals we made in that testimony. The biggest proposal we made was that they (us government) should consolidate the communication and public diplomacy programme under one cabinet post. And what came out in the question and answer at (our) testimony is that the US government is not a credible messenger.

Is (US) business a credible messenger?

More credible than the US government. For example, take the newspaper published by the State Department for young people in the Middle East, called Hi. The young people in the Middle East, and we talked to them, said they were not going to read it because they know it comes from the (US) government; that it's propaganda. Plus they said the content was not good. Now let's say, and purely hypothetically, that Nike, and all these kids are wearing Nike, decides to put out a magazine that listens carefully to the kids in the Middle East and says this is what they want to hear, and designs the content for that. It will have more credibility.

Isn't there a danger of business being seen as an arm of the government?

Well, yes, there is a risk. The main point is that the Federal government would be well advised to help private actors run some of these programmes, because they have more credibility than the government. That was one recommendation. Another thing we pointed out in the testimony was that you have to have objectives, and measure against these objectives, and you have to be accountable. We told them that McDonald's and Coke both spend $1.2 billion (Rs 5,280 crore) in winning friends for their brands, and I mentioned that we can't send armies to force people to use the brand. But the US government spends half-a-billion and it is divided into so many people you can't even count. And nobody is accountable. Now, you can bet that at Coke and McDonald's, somebody is on the hook for spending that billion-and-two!

Who funds 'Business for Diplomatic Action'?

At the moment it is privately funded by its members. Pepsi (PepsiCo) gave us quarter-of-a-million dollars, to publish 'Little World Citizen's Guide' for (American) kids who study abroad, for (helping) them to behave a little more sensibly, be more curious about other cultures, and learning and listening to others. Americans don't listen very well. We want to have a 27-country listening programme, 'Day America Listens', soon.

My big idea now is to see if we can get American companies to join hands to out-recruit Bin Laden. Neither of our presidential candidates talked about recruitment. Both promised to find terrorists and shoot them. But neither talked about the pool of recruits that is being turned out by the madarsas, so more terrorists are being produced than we can possibly kill. And us business understands talent, and how to recruit. Can you imagine if we found some of these recruiting pools in Western Europe, even Indonesia, and American businesses go in and give free English language training to these young unemployed people, because right now they're not sure what their options are. Maybe they haven't bought the mullah's brand, but they don't have access to Western brands. One barrier is language, so give them intensive English language training. Then bring them in large numbers to work as interns inside American companies, the Fulbright of internships.