Oh Bob, I’m sorry, I have to say you’re an ignorant.
Look on the bright side of things:
I’m no digital guru, but reading this dialogue between you and Felix I realised these “conversations with brands” led to a visible form of evolution. It is called… SPAM FILTER DEVELOPMENT. 
Sorry, Felix:
“But a million of them in the UK will be buying the stuff Tesco offered them as a special via email the day before, based on what their Clubcard recorded in their basket the previous week.”
NOW THIS is what I hate about online shopping. God forbid you ever order something online – for the next 2 months you have to keep pressing “unsubscribe” (even though you never subscribed to any e-mail notification system) and “record as SPAM”.
My theory about online marketing is this simple: all you can do is be there IF someone is looking for whatever it is that you’re selling. And, as Vinny Warren often points out, that’s something Google brilliantly solved by introducing Google Ads and improved SEO. But brutalising consumers with spam and horrid banners that make any website/ web application look like hell, that’s anything but clever/efficient use of the internet.
Not long ago I had this conversation about interactive banners with a CD that was inviting young creatives to participate in Cannes Lions, Cyber section. This year’s theme was interactive banners. I asked him and anyone else on his blog if they ever bought anything based on stumbling upon some internet banner. OBVIOUSLY no one said yes! The only interaction I have with digital banners is quickly press that X to see them gone as soon as possible! It’s the most imbecile invention “digital brains” came up with! As for non-interactive banners that replace headers, all they do is ruin the design. I NEVER, but NE-VER read any of them, honestly.
Digitalists mistake SEO for SO (Spam Optimisation). SEO means returning certain results WHEN THE USERS SEARCH FOR SOMETHING THAT MATCHES YOUR PRODUCT DESCRIPTION, not messing with their online activity and keep appearing everywhere like a huge magenta cow in the middle of the boulevard! Please don’t confuse visibility with annoyance. Though, I have to say I experience plenty of conversations with brands – and I mean with annoying brands -- …and the conversation always consists of two words and ends with an exclamation mark…, if you know what I mean.
Look, Felix, I feel I'm in the unpleasant position to tell you there's no Santa. Seriously now, isn't it obvious that the internet cannot change human brain? As long as we don't switch to virtual food and house cleaning via the web, I see no bright future for your theory about the internet changing EVERYTHING.
All together now:
If your only tool is a hammer then every problem looks like a ...
Sorry Bob.
this was the funniest post I've read in the past half hour. rant on, Bob!
Hi Bob, I've followed you with interest so far, but Felix raises valid points which you didn't address (internet as a mean of expression, internet as a place where you can build your brand identity).
Maybe internet didn't change everything for good, but it certainly did change quite a few things.
Why the animosity, by the way?
Bob, don't worry, that was very interesting to read.
Your rant about riding horses and flying gliders made me laugh out loud and greatly improved my day.
(By the way, not only did Dave Trott give you Felix, he's also given you Anca. I think that's what he's apologising for...)
Keep up the good work and don't let the web maniacs grind you down.
Until I can squeeze a peach via internet for ripeness, I will pretty much stick to a walk in grocery. Maybe delis and car dealers and such will just be turned into museums.
My conversation with a brand would go like this:
Brand: Hey there, in a non-intrusive, purely inquisitive way.
Me: Fuck off.
TAC,
I always feel a slight twinge of disappointment when you find it necessary to descend into 'f' words to make a point. It destroys, sadly, the integrity of your arguments. In this case, Pompous Brit vs. Crass Yank, both lose.
i do love your refreshing 'emperor's new clothes' approach to all this BS spouted by Felix et al.
however... the very fact that i'm reading (and commenting on) this from eastern europe shows that SOMETHING has changed in the way we communicate...
the reality is probably somewhere in the middle of all this claim and counter-claim. As usual.
Still, its a lot of fun watching those on the margins slugging it out, keep of the good work TAC.
I found that entertaining Bob.
Although I fear some of the problem may have just come from a translation problem:
In England we sometimes use the word 'visionary' in exchange for the word 'twat'.
Might clear a few things up.
This sounded so familiar, and it took me quite some time to figure out why: it sounded amazingly like past arguments I've had with a friend who believes in pyramid power, pyschics, and the healing power of crystals. Every time I argue the validity of his evidence on one point, he supplies me with a dozen more examples of equally questionable verification. I like him. I really do. But it's just possible that I may have to kill him.
I really do think you should take Felix up on that offer of a pint. You could sell tickets - I'd come...
@Dave Trott:
You owe me big time.
Thanks a lot Bob.
It was a great final, like watching Federer and Roddick.
Well done.
Here's a nice piece from McKinsey on the consumer decision process.
http://bit.ly/14y8G6
Quite a bit of stuff now gets in the way of consumer viewing TV ad, visiting supermarket shopping shelf, selecting product, going to register, taking out money, purchasing. The least of which is not going to a physical supermarket (substitute auto showroom, travel agent, music store, book store, etc)at all; and for a tiny percentage it's checking an online review in front of the shelf.
Although you may disagree, I'm thinking some consumer behavior has changed?
I agree that some demand needs to be created, but then deliver answers in places consumers are going. Let's say TV ads create that demand and drive web searches and web site traffic (Jupiter Research/Forrester claims so). Make the most of that by connecting them.
Lumping search, display banners, affiliates, email, social networks, web sites, mobile all into 'internet' is too general to be productive.
I think Felix's main point that "The internet did change everything, utterly and without mercy." is ultimately false. Did the internet change things? Without a doubt. Did it completely revolutionize how everything exists online and off and change our lives in profound ways? Not really.
The thing we need to realize is that it's a tool that's part of the equation - not the only answer.
what about this bob? Any comments?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=d...player_embedded
Bob,
You're either stupid, disingenuous or mugging for the cameras (so to speak). Maybe all three. I'll disregard the fact that you rip Felix for not providing "facts" yet provide only one yourself. Let's get to the heart of the matter - how the Internet has changed everything.
On the business side: Previously local-only business can now quickly and easily sell globally. The need for a brick and mortar store has vanished. Advertisers can target based on immediate current behavior. You can learn specific preferences for each individual consumer and market to those preferences (try that with TV). Effectiveness of individual marketing messages can be tracked and ads can be optimized on the fly. Sending time sensitive marketing messages (coupons, sales, product recalls, etc) via the Internet is quicker and less expensive than sending them through the mail. I could go on and on...
On the consumer side: Consumers now have more access to products, information on those products, and opinions about those products than ever before. It's easier than ever to compare prices and bargain hunt - not just locally or regionally, but globally. There's a convenience factor that wasn't present before - hell, you don't even have to go to the grocery store anymore if you don't want to. On TV, you get to see and hear about a product for 30- or 60- seconds. On the web, you have as much time as you want to learn as much as you want.
I can see why you like traditional media. It's the brand simply shouting at the consumer and not listening for a response - just like you do on this site. But the longer you stick with this "contrarian" bullshit just to get people riled up, the more and more you sound like an old, out-of-touch dinosaur.
Old Friend:
You want facts that prove the internet has not "changed everything", I can do it with one fact:
1. Online commerce accounts for less than 5% of business.
Now kindly provide me facts -- not assertions, not name calling -- that prove the internet has "changed everything."
"Previously local-only business can now quickly and easily sell globally."
Name two. The average local store is still only selling to the local populace. Most local-only businesses sell common items that can be picked up in other local-only business stores anywhere in the world. Is my local kitchen supply store selling woks to people in Cincinnati? I don't think so, any more than my neighbours here in Toronto are buying their spatulas from Detroit.
"The need for a brick and mortar store has vanished." Damn! When did that happen? And why are there all these buildings around claiming to be stores? And why are there more being built everyday. Someone should definitely tell WalMart. Save them a bundle on building those humongous, but apparently useless big boxes everyone keeps going to.
"hell, you don't even have to go to the grocery store anymore if you don't want to."
Home delivery of groceries has been around for decades. The aisles are about as packed with people who don't bloody well know to move their damned carts out of the way while they're looking at a can of beans and just seem to think that nobody else exists...sorry. That's a separate rant.
"On the web, you have as much time as you want to learn as much as you want."
Which you heard about through the commercials on TV. And the information on the web is notoriously unreliable. It either comes from a company website (which is hardly going to tell you the product's weaknesses) or from a batch of people you've never met, some of whom simply enjoy going online and complaining.
"I can see why you like traditional media. It's the brand simply shouting at the consumer and not listening for a response"
Funny -- that's the most common complaint users of social media have about social marketing: they come onto a site where people like to get together to socialise and then start throwing unwanted marketing messages at them.
"The more and more you sound like an old, out-of-touch dinosaur."
Who is probably moving 100 times the product you are.
If you want to argue against the dinosaurs (who, by the way, were actually one of the most successful forms of life, living for over 160 million years), you should bring facts to the table. That's what dinosaurs feed on. A good start would be to point to one truly successful web-only sales campaign. And please don't try to pass off the social media proponents' recent circle-jerk over Dell's $3 million in sales over Twitter.
(Sorry for the long comment, Bob. Since shutting down Ad Nauseam I've been going through withdrawal.)
Christopher, you want me to name two local businesses that now sell globally? Go on eBay. There are THOUSANDS of previously small, local retailers who now sell anywhere. I've personally bought several pieces of electronics equipment from retailers on the east coast (and I live on the west). I bought a car from Texas and a car from NY and had them shipped to me. I've bought art from France that I never would have found otherwise. I buy X-mas presents for my sister who lives in Australia directly from Sydney retailers.
Where did I say there are NO brick and mortar stores? I just said the need for them isn't required. There's this great site called Amazon.com. You should check it out sometime.
"Which you heard about through the commercials on TV." No, which I heard about by using Google - you know, by searching for something I need whenever I think about it. Not by passively waiting for a commercial to be forced on me.
You want numbers: Amazon 2007 revenue - $14.85 billion. More than 460 million unique visitors shopped at Amazon during the first 10 DAYS of December 2008. iTunes 2007 revenue - $1.9 billion with a 30% profit margin. Are you really going to make the argument that the internet hasn't fundamentally changed the way we access, buy and listen to music? Google did $5.7 billion in revenue for just Q4 of 2008. Salesforce.com is doing $1 billion on revenue. Dell does $12.3 billion on revenue - more than half of which comes from their website.
From Juniper Research: JupiterResearch estimates that online activity — ranging from looking up a store's address to redeeming a gift certificate — influences approximately 36 percent of off-line sales. That number is expected to grow at a rate of 12 percent a year through 2014, eventually accounting for $1 trillion in purchases.
If a technology that influences 1/3rd of all off-line purchases isn't considered a game changer, I don't know what is.
Bob, if you want to backtrack and parse "everything" versus "nothing" go ahead, but if you want a list of exactly the "everything" the internet has changed (specifically in regards to marketing):
How we track ad effectiveness
Ways to more specifically target consumers
Information we can gather about consumers real habits vs what they claim
The time needed to update messages
The ease of hearing directly from your customers
The ease of communicating directly to your customers
How music is marketed, listened to and sold
The vastly expanded geographical areas very small business can sell to
Expanded word-of-mouth advertising
The ability for consumers to search for information
The convenience involved in purchase
The amount of marketing information that can be conveyed
The PR opportunities
Models like NetFlix are currently booming while places like Blockbuster are dying.
The MLS online and places like Zillow have fundamentally changed how Realtors market.
I'm sure some of your more astute readers can think of more.
I'm with Rylee. I also feel "... reality is probably somewhere in the middle of all this claim and counter-claim. As usual."
As someone who has worked as an interactive designer/producer for more than 13 years, I can say the web has most certainly had a powerful impact on advertising. It has made some possible, it has made some things easier, and it has solved a number of problems. It has also introduced entirely new problems and issues and generated a level of noise that is nearly impenetrable.
"On the web, you have as much time as you want to learn as much as you want."
I would modify that sentence to read, "On the web, you can spend as much time as you like exposing yourself to information that may or may not actually have any value to you as a consumer."
At one agency, one of my primary clients was Travelocity. I do believe the web has completely and UTTERLY revolutionized the travel industry.
However, I've also served clients like Sony and BK and Audi and H&R Block and Colgate-Palmolive, so I know the web has NOT changed everything. Some things, it has scarcely impacted at all.
It's easy for interactive wonks to fall into the trap of seeing everyday/real world consumers as we see ourselves and each other, but most people do not behave or consume or adopt OR utilize the way we do, or to anywhere near the extent we do.
I'm always open to new ideas, new ways of doing things, new approaches, new attacks--but I'm also driven by performance. Success must be measurable at the bottom line. And people must maintain some freaking perspective.
I listen to my peers' verbal diarrhea (Felix, I'm talking to you, brother), and I laugh, and I understand utterly and completely why most people roll their eyes when we tell them what we do for a living.
AC, I don't think you're a dinosaur or out of touch--I think you're an exceptionally smart and practical guy who is focused on providing real value--but I do generally get the feeling that you're being drug into the interactive space kicking and screaming, and I always find myself wondering why. That's not an indictment, just a little bitty question mark at the end of a way-too-long, extremely babbly, barely coherent comment.
Old Friend,
You're damn right I want to parse what you mean.
Do you mean what you say, can you defend it, or are you just full of shit?
If you say the web has "changed everything" I want to know what you mean. Is that too much of a stretch?
Are you serious that a list of 15 things is evidence that the web has "changed everything?"
You're kidding, right?
"Everything" is a lot of things..
PS: Because I only mentioned travel, that's not to say it is the only industry I feel the web has revolutionized. It's one of a few, in my opinion.
Let's not play games here, Bob. you're just setting up a straw man, or again, just parsing "everything."
Might I remind you, you're the one who first used the word "everything". If you're going to literally define it, I doubt you'll find anyone who'll say the web has changed every last aspect of every single thing in every single person's life.
If you have proof someone said it in that context, please link to it.
Shooting fish in a barrel. Tippy-top of the thread. From Felix. "The internet did change everything, utterly and without mercy."
I want to hear from Felix that when he responded to Bob's assertation of "everything" he meant "every single aspect of every single person's life on the planet."
and if that's what Felix really meant, then I'll be happy to disagree with him.
But again, bob, in his earlier post, originally talked about uncited people saying the "web was going to change everything." I'm just looking to see who "they" are that he was referring to.
Surely the man who demands facts and proof from every commentor can cite his sources.
Old Friend:
See Michael Myers above.
No, I'm talking about from the April post "the thing that will change everything".
You claimed "then the web was going to change everything."
who said that? Where's the quote? What's your source for that claim?
This is great, keep it going, now I don't even need "TV for entertainment", I've got TAC vs Felix. Now only if I could turn the volume up on this silly thing...........
@Old Friend:
What drugs are you taking?
This whole debate is about the veracity of Felix's statement that "The internet did change everything, utterly and without mercy."
Is this a true statement or just the usual hyperbole of web zealots? That's what we're talking about here.
@Elise:
I secretly love the web and believe it is an amazing and wonderful thing.
But I can't stand the non-stop rhetorical overkill of web hustlers who have no sense of perspective about it and don't understand that there's another world outside the web.
In you post on April 8 - before Felix had ever commented - you wrote: "The web was going to change everything."
I'm just trying to find where that supposition came from.
As Garth in Waynes World says, "We fear change," but even if you don't believe all the jargon, and even if under all this C21st layer we're really still cavemen, change is undeniable.
Christ, imagine life without your mobile phone, how did we live?
@Old Friend:
So here's the deal, go to this website called Google, and type in "internet changes everything."
You will find 109 million citations, including these 5:
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/...nge-everything/
http://www.textuality.com/talks/...ep-1/
sld004.htm
http://www.inc.com/resources/tec...1/
goldberg.html
http://publicsphere.typepad.com/...e-says-
the.html
http://www.businessweek.com/
maga...31067611088.htm
You happy now?
Ok, this is all a moot argument until you define your terms. Because the links you provided clearly don't use "everything" in the literal meaning of "everything." They use it in the context of PR, or of being an entrepreneur, etc. It also comes down to what your definition of "changed" is.
In a response to Felix you said "There is a lot to life beyond the computer screen. There is food and music and art and friendship and talking and laughing and flowers and sports and, as you say, an argument down at the pub."
But I think plenty of people could make the argument that the internet has changed how we discover, buy and listen to music. Has it replaced the old way of doing it? Not entirely. But that doesn't mean it hasn't significantly changed it.
Same thing goes for food - how many thousands of people go on Yelp to scout out a good restaurant or go to epicurious to find a new recipe? Friendship? I think the success of Facebook in allowing people to keep in contact with friends they probably wouldn't have otherwise is proof that how people make and keep friends have changed.
We can say the same thing about advertising. Can you name a medium-to-large business that doesn't have a website? That in itself shows a fundamental change that wasn't around even 15 years ago. You see the fact that e-commerce is only 5% of all business as a sign that nothing's changed. I see the fact that companies are doing nearly half a trillion dollars online and the fact that Fortune 1000 companies like Dell and Amazon do all (or the majority) of the business online as a sign things have changed.
If you really want a back-and-forth (and I know you don't) you could throw out a segment of advertising or marketing you think hasn't been affected by the internet and I'll show you an example where it has.
Bob/Felix
I'm curious--I'd love to see a comparison chart that measures both of your client's profitability, as it relates to the services you both provide..It would be a real good indicator, no?..
Carlos
@hockeynuts
Since 1999, the Department of Congress has been keeping figures for online sales separate from those for catalogue and mail order, making the tallies more accurate. From these we find that in 2000, total online retail sales accounted for 0.7% of the total $747.8 billion in retail sales.
To put that another way: in 2000, less than a penny from every consumer dollar was spent online.
By 2007, DOC figures show $36.2 billion in online sales compared to total retail sales of $1,030.7 billion, or roughly 3.5%. While this is an impressive gain for online sales (up to three and a half cents per dollar), it is still a tiny fraction of the total, and its previously steady gain has suffered a severe drop in most key categories over the last year.
When we look at MasterCard Advisors' data for 2008 we find that compared to the same period the year before, the only areas that showed an increase in online spending were sport and fitness equipment (up 18%); video games, consoles and accessories (up 14%); and clothing (up 4%). The other top online product categories showed net declines: books and magazines (down 1%), computer hardware (down 8%), event tickets (down 18%), and even music, movies and videos (down 32%).
Furthermore, we find a growing division in the demographic of online buyers. There was a 13% decline among households earning under $49,999, and an 8% decline among households earning under $100,000. The only gain was among households earning more than $100,000, who showed a 7% increase in online spending.
Keep in mind too that because these data come from MasterCard purchases, there is reasonable expectation they are naturally skewed in favour of online purchases, since brick-and-mortar sales often employ cash.
However you look at it, the internet, while unquestionably adding another dimension to consumer shopping behaviour, has come far short of being truly game-changing. Certain segments have blossomed (online purchases of videos and movies has soared, putting companies like Blockbusters on the edge of bankruptcy), but the bulk of retail sales still occur in the presence of real human beings in real stores buying real merchandise.
Has it "changed everything" (even recognising the hyperbolic connotation in the phrase)? Hardly. It's completely changed the nature of a few, select purchase categories; it's significantly augmented a somewhat larger number of purchase categories, and left the bulk virtually unchanged.
Christopher:
Thank you for some sanity and logic. The web has become a religion and, unfortunately, true believers are not interested in facts and reason.
For every snotty perspective (which usually has the word 'utterly' in the blurb somewhere) conceived to rub people the wrong way there is always a Felix lurking somewhere.
You don't win against a Felix. A Felix is an entity akin to The Blob. It just keeps coming at you changing in form as it needs to.
As I read I was yelling "Run Bob, Run!"
Don't know about "everything" (although CS Monitor might have an opinion), but speaking of changes in consumer behavior, here are some numbers fished randomly from eMarketer (w/ chart IDs for the curious) at 2am:
Media that influenced a recent purchase, 2007, US Broadband users: shopping websites (36%), TV commercials (11%), magazine ads (6%) - #081555
Best source of automotive info according to in-market internet users, US, 2006: websites (31.9%), magazines (7.3%), local + national newspapers (6.4%), television (6%), radio (1.5%) - #080252
Select media used by US adult influencers for OTC medicine decisions: search engines (15%), company websites (7%), major network TV (7%), local newspapers (4%) - #090630
Average number of unique visitors to US classifieds sites: q1 2007 (37M), q3 2008 (52M) - #100619
US newspaper print advertising revenue growth, vs. same quarter of prior year, classifieds: q1 2008 (-24.9), q1 2009 (-42.3%), - #104398
There's no such thing as bad press eh fellas?
this is funny debate.
on one side there's TAC and Christopher that put out figures which actually lead to sales.
on the other side there's Felix and An Old Friend who scream that via web 'we can', 'it's possible', 'the ability', 'the convenience', 'gathering info' etc.
that lead to... what?
and since I'm new generation I can assure you that my peers (not to mention our parents) don't trust internet AT ALL.
everybody knows companies hire agencies to check the forums, blogs and similar social networks to spread commercial info (and even lies) pretending to come from an ordinary user.
everybody knows when PR is shot at them.
everybody deletes Amazon's emails before even opening them.
everybody knows that info is as relevant as in TV (or any traditional media for that matter)
well, I like facts.
Bob, this was very amusing. You were better at using this medium than Felix Velarde. You said more, using fewer words.
The one useful point he made obliquely is that some sizable companies have been built based on their ability to connect with people and sell them things online. As the internet evolves, there will be more of them, and they will probably displace a number of big TV advertisers.
More importantly, the internet makes it possible for new companies to promote themselves to an interested, but geographically scattered audience in a way that would be unaffordable using traditional media. So our ability to have our individual desires satisfied through online businesses from anywhere in the world gives us a lot of choices we never had before. Conversely, the internet has created a lot of new employment opportunities that don't involve commuting to a mindless job in a corporate office park or a factory. For an increasing number of people that does change everything.
I agree with you that the language being used is bullshit. But would you not consider the changes in our commerce, politics, news distribution, and our employment opportunities significant?
@Jon:
Significant, yes. But words still mean something.
Saying "the internet has changed everything" is just as stupid as saying "the internet has changed nothing."
Personally I don't think they're mutually exclusive statements.
The internet has changed everything and it hasn't changed anything.
the web did change much of the way we communicate and spend our money — maybe not by directly buying shit online, but even in researching, say, five different dvd players before i DRIVE TO THE STORE DOWN THE STREET to buy one.
the other day i literally drove to and called about 7 local targets to find something specific before i gave in and ordered it online (and i had to pay more too, because of s+h).
just because the web changed our society does not mean it is the new king of universe. banners ads are a waste. in regards to brands "having a conversation" with cunsumers through social media and such, i believe the only people they are conversing with are those already on their side, so to speak. i do not think they are reaching and holding conversations with new/potential consumers. those people went online to converse with their friends and the brands they already like and buy.
Well, it was OK for a change... Let me add something from a teacher's point of view.
When I was a school teaching, I felt a little sad: I taught to 5th-graders what I learned when I was a 3rd-grader.
Somthing out there is making people more stupid. The Internet started about that same epoch, so I will just say it is suspicious to my eyes.
Jesus Christ. Anyone who reads the above debate and feels that Felix has "won" is either a blithering idiot or a liar.
TAC's main point is that the statements of internet "gurus" like this Felix are overstated. TAC constantly reminds them that just because these gurus are doing something new doesn't mean they are doing something interesting or relevant to real consumers. (and really.. is it that "new" at this point?)
TAC's simple message to internet gurus is : stop overstating your abilities and the internet's relevancy.
Felix didn't even come close to answering TAC's points. In fact, he simply began shouting his lurid claims even louder. All he had to do is quiet down and admit that TAC has a very good point: the internet isn't SOOOOO game changing, and many of the attempts to use the internet have failed miserably. Unfortunately, those like Felix who have made their entire careers conning clients through hyperbole can never admit TAC's point. To admit TAC's very modest claim would be reveal themselves as frauds.
The fact that such a modest point of view (everyone calm down and forcus on communicating real ideas) is made to sound like a "reaction" or "extreme" is pretty pathetic.
Felix: your career of conning clients is slowly coming to an end as they all begin to realize that just because you've failed 5 different ways (interactive TV? Hilarious!!) doesn't make you an "expert". In fact, it just makes you an expert at failing.
TAC: your common sense and honesty is going to grow your business and make you an even bigger superstar in the ad world. If only the presidents of the bigger agencies were as smart, honest and tough as you are.
Edited By Siteowner
@tim:
Thanks for your nice comments.
I have taken the liberty of excising your last paragraph. I understand your point, but I try to discourage the criticism of innocent bystanders.
ha, you're right TAC, that was really long. you could sum it up as thus:
@Felix: The internet changed everything! rar rar rar
@TAC: No.
What fun! Thanks, Bob - and Felix, and the rest.
I don't know if the web has 'changed everything' - but it's obvious that this thread hasn't changed any minds.
My take - from my book:
When it all comes out in the wash, WOMM will be the best thing to happen to (silly retronym ahead) traditional advertising. Pretty soon, consumers won't believe anybody - even their best friends. They'll realize that they receive the most honest and straightforward information about a product or service from a TV commercial, print ad, or product web site. At least we don't lie about who we are and why we're saying what we're saying.
As far as all the claptrap about WOMM replacing advertising - people who are hawking that one have a slippery grip on history. Word-of-mouth marketing is nothing new. It's been around for a hundred years, since the beginning of modern advertising, always morphing into various forms. The latest morphs: online social networking and blogs.
There is plenty of marketing and advertising to be done on the Web, and who knows what forms they will take over the next ten years. We'll all be surprised. But word-of-mouth as the primary driving force of marketing? I think not.
Remember this: Advertising didn't die with the invention of the telephone.
In 1980 we launched an agency called GGT, this was one of the paragraphs in our launch ad.
"Everyone knows that the best advertising you can have is word of mouth.
Unfortunately you can't buy space in this particular medium.
At least not with money.
How you can buy it is with advertising that gets noticed and talked about.
The more it gets noticed the more it gets talked about.
The more it gets talked about the more it gets noticed.
Amazingly this kind of advertising doesn't actually cost any more than the advertising that doesn't get noticed or talked about."
Plus ca change.....
Commenting by HaloScan
