Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

I figure you probably didn't use words like "consumer" and "consumer-centric" in your talk. Probably not new paradigm either.

This sounds to me--not having been there of course, but then why blog conferences if not to tell something to people who aren't there--like someone weaving cluetalk into old school badadvertising mantra. Nothing frustrates me more than to see good ideas coopted into nonsense.

"We need to reintroduce "consumers" to ads." No. Actually, the first step is this: Shhhh. Shut up and listen. You might understand that there is no such thing as "the consumer."

"Ads need [[to be]] relevant, utility, entertainment [RUE]." I need to say, WTF?

"In the future, consumers will pay for content with their time or money." That time started about six or seven years ago.

"At best we can hope to enjoy the conversation, to facilitate, to stimulate, to be invited to participate in the conversation." - okay!

"If you're here today it's because you're part of the new wave of leadership." -- No, actually, if you are HERE today you are the new wave of peopleship.

"Consumer generated content is important. Don't forget it." I can't imagine not knowing this by now. Is the Boston Ad Club, like, err, old fashioned or something?

Out of all of what you've detailed here, the only thing that resonates with me is: the chicken AND the egg. That's a keeper. For what I'm not sure. Maybe the chicken. And the egg.

Okay, that's the end of my live blogging the live blogging of the remote conference.

peace out.
j.

So is this one of your bogus-contests? Find the fourth element of the paradigm: conversation, permission, involvement, and ????

My vote would be "reputation." The first three are directed at the consumer (but the term, consumer, has taken on the patina of cliché, and is becoming increasingly less useful). Reputation is an emergent attribute of the organization or advertiser, and perhaps even of the agency and PR firms themselves (although the latter two have not yet gained the visibility to be brought to general awareness - I said "yet").

In this context, I might even say that "conversation, permission, involvement" are external, but inner values, while "reputation" is an outer value, in the modified Competing Values Model of organizational effectiveness.

Damn, I forgot to use "paradigm"! Oh well, next time :)

I have a different perspective on Joe's talk, Jeneane. I think he is a true believer coming at this from the other side of the aisle, so to speak. He's speaking that language, and it sounds odd to us. That's one of the reasons I enjoyed his talk. And, yes, the ideas that you and I have been talking about for a while have been slow to make their way into the marketing departments; I have noticed an increased interest in Cluetrain among marketers in the past 6-12 months. Joe is an evangelist.

Mark, in my talk I said that while reputation was a better term than "brand" (because branding is something you do to your customers), actual relationships are now becoming possible, where "actual" means: 1. reader/commenter to blogger and 2. customer to customer.

In any case, I still can't remember what the fourth term was. I suspect it was something that amped up involvement, like "engagement" or possibly "arm-twisting" (ok, maybe not that one), but I just couldn't type fast enough.

"Stand for something"? Jobs, decent paying, interesting jobs people take pride in doing I can understand. Or best product at the best price. When a company tries to make out that the 'stand' they're taking is in some way more noble than having the best product at the best price, I find not only that they don't have the best product at the best price, but the 'stand' they're taking is transparently insincere.

Advertising is not consumer centric. The entire mass marketing model is not consumer centric. We tell consumers what and where to buy.

It's a little unclear from this to what extent the third sentence is Joe's statement, as opposed to a rehearsal of someone else's argument. Anyway, it's the sort of thing that probably gets a lot of people upset, because the moment "we tell," the legendary "conversation" is over. Brief anecdote: I'm in the mall with my teenager the other day. She notices that a lot of boys there that evening are wearing pajama bottoms. Have I missed something, or were these kids making a statement that in part said to clothing designers: "You may tell us what to buy, but we decide what to wear. This item (PJ bottoms) was outside your vocabulary, and here we are." Or something. A "conversation" of sorts can continue, to the extent anyone is listening, as Jeneane sez. Subject to singular disruptions of control.

Tom - my point is that the entire media model is based on one way traffic i.e. marketer as sender/originator and consumer as recipient. The same applies to the message, which is a linear monologue. Most of the time, the message itself is irrelevant, bland, and void of utility.

My challenge to the media community is to meet the consumer halfway and figure out a way to transform this failing paradigm/business model into one which takes into account the various changes that are commonplace today.

If necessary we need to reintroduce ourselves (advertising) to consumers and ask or even beg for a second chance...

I agree with Mr. Jaffe's observations. Many brands who spend enormous budgets on advertising also know that simply shouting louder does not necessarily yield better results. If you consider this from the media perspective and their business model it becomes interesting. Media creates content and puts ads on it.

What if the ads are no longer as valuable as they have before? Media has to reinvent their business because everyone is a media and people have too many choices to pay as much attention to traditional media and advertising.

The social media not only affects advertising industry but also broadcasting, print and digital media business. Mostly, this is not a threat as much as it is an opportunity though.

Find the fourth element?

Relevance

conversation, permission, involvement, and relevance?

Now this is two fold,

1) content needs to be relevant to the participant (Some still call us consumers) in order to have any value to marketers
2) Marketers need to tune into what makes that content relevant to the participant at that particular moment and present that person with a message that is relevant to them.

This is not just a glorified version of target marketing; this is corporate sponsorship of the transfer of information between two parties without the traditional necessity of compromising the nature of the information itself.

If the unfortunate nature of TV was about compromising the nature of the content in order to reach a dumber broadcast audience for marketers, then new media is about compromising the marketing message to meet not just the individual, or the content, but the realtionship that these two have with each other at that particular time.

A targeted 30 second interactive TVC personally complied to be relevant not only to the person, but also relevant to the content they are participating in at the time is a great way for marketers to reach people, and people to reach out to marketers.

Person - information - sponsor its the same three parties, just the nature of hte relationships has changed...

Hello ,

My name is Erin Tomasello. I am a Casting Director
for Oxygen. We
are casting a new show titled "Ad Fight". It is all
about the
wonderful world of advertising! It is a competition
reality show in
which teams of two (copy writers and art directors)
compete for a
national TV spot. It is a great opportunity for
exposure and to show
your competitors that you truly are the best in the
business! Is it
possible to send an email blast to your students and alumni? I've
attached
a show flier with more information. Let me know if
you or your staff
is interested. Feel free to contact me with any
questions. Hope to
hear back from you! Thanks!

All the best,

--
Erin Tomasello
Casting Producer
213.630.6530 x 284
NOW CASTING

Oxygen is giving advertising duos the opportunity to show the Advertising World their skill and creativity!

Are you part of a creative duo with the talent to make your mark in the Ad World? Does your team have what it takes to land any account?
We are looking for advertising teams with all levels of expertise.
So, whether you’re an amateur, rookie, or veteran in the industry this is your opportunity to land a National TV Spot and show America what you’ve got!
Send all submissions to:
adfight@yahoo.com
All *submissions must include a photo of you and your teammate, contact information, resumes, and selling points of why your team has what it takes to win this AdFight!

*Submission deadline is Friday, June 12TH