Audiences are becoming increasingly fragmented, splitting their time between a myriad of media choices, channels and platforms. This, combined with the growing availability of on-demand, self programming and search, means we are moving beyond personalised to individualised viewing. As such, both the TV and advertising industries are facing unparalleled levels of complexity, dynamic change and pressure to innovate; if they are to reach audiences when, how and with the appropriate content consumers want.
I believes that technology has fundamentally changed the relationship between brands and consumers through all channels, not just digital. Consequently interactive thinking needs to be at the heart of marketing strategy; and interactive channels at the centre of campaigns and service offerings.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Digital is much more than a channel
Editorial: Digital is not a strategy
Craig Smith, editor Marketing 13 Sep 2006 00:00
href="http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/search/article/592402/editorial-digital-not-strategy">If you haven't heard of ASOS.com before, you will be surprised at its claim to be the UK's leading online fashion and beauty chain. It is less important whether the claim is true or not than the idea that it might be.
I think it is unwise to dismiss digital as just a channel to be absorbed. It is true that very soon all agencies will have to digital capability merely to compete effectively in their own specific field. Technology however has fundamentally changed how brands and consumers communicate. As digital channels increasingly become the hub of campaigns so too interactive thinking needs to be at the heart of marketing strategy. By launching a consumer magazine, ASOS rather than capitulating to offfline and going against the flow, are merely showing they understand this new demanding, creating, sharing, interactive web 2.0 consumer and are giving them what they want.
Craig Smith, editor Marketing 13 Sep 2006 00:00
href="http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/search/article/592402/editorial-digital-not-strategy">If you haven't heard of ASOS.com before, you will be surprised at its claim to be the UK's leading online fashion and beauty chain. It is less important whether the claim is true or not than the idea that it might be.
I think it is unwise to dismiss digital as just a channel to be absorbed. It is true that very soon all agencies will have to digital capability merely to compete effectively in their own specific field. Technology however has fundamentally changed how brands and consumers communicate. As digital channels increasingly become the hub of campaigns so too interactive thinking needs to be at the heart of marketing strategy. By launching a consumer magazine, ASOS rather than capitulating to offfline and going against the flow, are merely showing they understand this new demanding, creating, sharing, interactive web 2.0 consumer and are giving them what they want.
Friday, September 08, 2006
The European Marketing Confidence Gap
Interesting to see that despite the increased media money flowing to digital channels there is a huge disconnect between the % of time people spend online and the % of money advertisers spend online. Obviously there are a couple of flaws to the data - money spend creating websites is not counted nor is simultaneous channel usage.Advertising
Marketing
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Bad carpenter, New tools
Everyone knows the maxim, “A bad carpenter blames his tools.”
There should be another maxim: “A bad carpenter thinks his shiny, new tools are going to save his sorry ass from oblivion.”
The digital impact on traditional marketing.
There should be another maxim: “A bad carpenter thinks his shiny, new tools are going to save his sorry ass from oblivion.”
The digital impact on traditional marketing.
Saatchi creates girl band
classic marketing gone mad. instead of leveraging the existing relationships that people have with sites/magasines/social networks etc. they decide to create their own. you can already sponsor p diddy to sing about mcdonalds burgers why would i hire some tin pot threesome. selling out before they even made it - interesting approach. we see it all the time online but it mainly comes from clients - to have an agency do it off their own back is shameful.
http://www.popjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=377&Itemid=115
http://www.popjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=377&Itemid=115
Monday, September 04, 2006
Who is best placed to manage your brand...
Who is best placed to manage your brand: consultancies or ad agencies?
I note with amusement the squabbling between brand consultancies and advertising agencies about who is best positioned to manage brands now and more importantly in the future.
The logical answer is of course neither. The technological revolution has fundamentally changed the relationships between companies and consumers so that, as never before, consumers are sharing, discussing creating content about products, services and companies; ultimately driving the direction of the brands they love or hate.
This happens not in broadcast channels or is a one off event on company terms. This happens constantly and through interactive channels whenever the consumer feels like it.
Surely the agencies who are closest to, or part of these regular conversations should be the ones driving and managing brand direction. Already we are seeing that increasingly communication and brand insights are coming from interactive agencies who have this direct relationship with the audience.
Consequently clients, and informed agencies, are starting to put interactive at the heart of their approach. Dove's brand positioning and approach is constantly recreated, refreshed and repositioned by the thousand of daily conversations, comments and pictures posted by consumers on campaignforrealbeauty.com. Brand management for a world where brands are debated rather than consumed.
I note with amusement the squabbling between brand consultancies and advertising agencies about who is best positioned to manage brands now and more importantly in the future.
The logical answer is of course neither. The technological revolution has fundamentally changed the relationships between companies and consumers so that, as never before, consumers are sharing, discussing creating content about products, services and companies; ultimately driving the direction of the brands they love or hate.
This happens not in broadcast channels or is a one off event on company terms. This happens constantly and through interactive channels whenever the consumer feels like it.
Surely the agencies who are closest to, or part of these regular conversations should be the ones driving and managing brand direction. Already we are seeing that increasingly communication and brand insights are coming from interactive agencies who have this direct relationship with the audience.
Consequently clients, and informed agencies, are starting to put interactive at the heart of their approach. Dove's brand positioning and approach is constantly recreated, refreshed and repositioned by the thousand of daily conversations, comments and pictures posted by consumers on campaignforrealbeauty.com. Brand management for a world where brands are debated rather than consumed.
Friday, September 01, 2006
Would Ogilvy recognise advertising today?
How the Internet changed advertising forever
Are today's big advertising firms the equivalent of the "buggy-whip manufacturer" in the early days of the automobile? Fortune's Daniel Gross says the Internet and other user-controlled, on-demand technologies are changing the practice of advertising "into forms that patriarchs like David Ogilvy and Leo Burnett would scarcely recognize." Fortune, Aug 8, 2005.
I am surprised that Dan suggests that David Ogilvy would have difficultly recognising the changing practise of advertising today. Ogilvy's belief was that deep consumer insight, coupled with big creative ideas, is the engine of brand building. Ogilvy has always been about 360 branding, using all channels to reach a consumer, always about inviting customers in, rather than forcing a broadcast message.
Ogilvy has always accepted, adapted and embraced all channels and technologies to allow the consumer and brand to converse - whether it is, PR, Interactive, Direct or traditional marketing or a combination of them all.
By pioneering cross discipline integrated planning, creative and account teams worldwide across all Ogilvy groups, I am sure David Ogilvy would recognise the industry today. In fact I think he saw what it might become a long time ago.
Co written with Rory Sutherland, Vice Chairman Ogilvy Group UK
Technorati tags:OgilvyOne Ogilvy
Are today's big advertising firms the equivalent of the "buggy-whip manufacturer" in the early days of the automobile? Fortune's Daniel Gross says the Internet and other user-controlled, on-demand technologies are changing the practice of advertising "into forms that patriarchs like David Ogilvy and Leo Burnett would scarcely recognize." Fortune, Aug 8, 2005.
I am surprised that Dan suggests that David Ogilvy would have difficultly recognising the changing practise of advertising today. Ogilvy's belief was that deep consumer insight, coupled with big creative ideas, is the engine of brand building. Ogilvy has always been about 360 branding, using all channels to reach a consumer, always about inviting customers in, rather than forcing a broadcast message. Ogilvy has always accepted, adapted and embraced all channels and technologies to allow the consumer and brand to converse - whether it is, PR, Interactive, Direct or traditional marketing or a combination of them all.
By pioneering cross discipline integrated planning, creative and account teams worldwide across all Ogilvy groups, I am sure David Ogilvy would recognise the industry today. In fact I think he saw what it might become a long time ago.
Co written with Rory Sutherland, Vice Chairman Ogilvy Group UK
Technorati tags:OgilvyOne Ogilvy
Digital vs Direct
After "Digital vs Direct" article in campaign and the numerous letters it has spawned, I am still wondering "Is everyone missing the point?"
Yes both are competing and complementary 'channels' depending on use (although the two or three addressable media of traditional DM ill compare with the multitude of possibilities offered by digital). But this is still too comfy an approach: it suggests we all can relax, content that it's just "marketing as usual".
In fact Digital media are more than just a channel choice. Having become an integral part of people's lives, they have changed people's expectations of how they acquire and use information - and how they relate to brands. This affects far more than channel choice - it changes strategic marketing thinking.
This means marketing must be about thinking digitally, not just doing it. Having made this leap, you can then use any channels that serve your end. The work for Dove appears mostly in conventional media. Yet it is, at heart, an interactive campaign. A campaign for a world where messages are debated, not merely consumed.
Yes both are competing and complementary 'channels' depending on use (although the two or three addressable media of traditional DM ill compare with the multitude of possibilities offered by digital). But this is still too comfy an approach: it suggests we all can relax, content that it's just "marketing as usual".
In fact Digital media are more than just a channel choice. Having become an integral part of people's lives, they have changed people's expectations of how they acquire and use information - and how they relate to brands. This affects far more than channel choice - it changes strategic marketing thinking.
This means marketing must be about thinking digitally, not just doing it. Having made this leap, you can then use any channels that serve your end. The work for Dove appears mostly in conventional media. Yet it is, at heart, an interactive campaign. A campaign for a world where messages are debated, not merely consumed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)