 |
     |
|
|
I've been musing recently [not good . . . everyone clear the area] about marketing and advertising. Among those two people who read my blog and half care about the subject matter, the idea on paper (not the idea in conception, which I can not claim pure authorship over) will probably cause dissention, possibly distaste, maybe disgust, and almost certainly defensiveness. Every good religious debate does all those things -- and starts a round of name-calling to boot. That's OK: I can take it.
The idea I've woven into a 1,500-word essay entitled, A Lutheran view of advertising orthodoxy, is this: The advertising world, through its organization, priests and prophets, and its adherents has managed to create an interesting and largely dichotomous religion categorized by brand and direct advertising. They are the catholic and orthodox of the advertising world.
These two branches of the same overall theology have developed their own rituals and rites. And, like good variations on a theme, manage to depricate one another's beliefs on rather inconsequential differences all the while obligingly ignoring the absence of underlying reason for the persistence of such distinctions.
What I'm saying is, I think that advertising and marketing communications in general is due for a post-reformation (to carry on the religio-historic theme) restructuring. For any who remember, the Cluetrain Manifesto actually numbered many "theses" although I can't recall or not whether they were actually nailed to any doors. With a little bit of time between then and now, and some further changes to the context of the advertising model(s), it's probably good time for marketers (specifically advertisers) to reassess what they're doing.
Despite the comfort in continuing with what we know ("better the devil . . ."), there is ample evidence to suggest that (a) what we know isn't working all that well anymore, (b) there is no need for the dichotomy and distinction between Brand and Direct, and (c) at a competitive level, we better do something else before it's too late. I don't know exactly what that is, but I have taken a stab at it by suggesting it has an awful lot to do with "iterated communication," "interaction rhythm," "consumer engagement," "media-agnostic, multi-channel instant response technologies," and "undiscovered country."
I spent a whack of time re-writing the essay not to be pointedly aggressive to any one in particular, especially advertising people of either variation, so download the PDF and give it a read. (IOW: I'm not going to retype it here.) Get angry. Write me a nasty note. But if you do, please tell me why the status quo is so enviable.
Posted by Grayson at August 30, 2004 05:28 PM