Tag Archives: content marketing

The Model Isn’t Broken. It’s Fixed.

Sony, VW, P&G, J&J, Bacardi, SC Johnson, Visa, 21st Century Fox, L’Oreal, Coca Cola, BMW, BASF. What do all these companies have in common? They all have placed their media business in review, or recently completed a review. Their incumbent media agencies; the usual suspects—OMD, Zenith, UM, Mediacom, Vizeum, Carat, Starcom/MediaVest. The agencies involved in the review; the usual suspects.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

I’ve heard and read that some people believe that industry change (content, integration, analytics) is driving this rash of reviews. If so, why are the same agencies that some clients are dissatisfied with all of a sudden appealing to others? Why would OMD be a good repository for Bacardi, which they recently won, when current clients J&J and Visa have put their accounts in review? Is it because what is shown in new business pitches is not what is used on a daily basis? I witnessed much of this when I was at Initiative, albeit a dozen years ago. The people who work on client business think many of the tools and sexy stuff shown in new business pitches is just that, only shown in new business pitches. It’s not practical for everyday use because the planners have too many boxes of GRP’s to fill in. They do not have the time to solve real business problems.

So what is the value proposition of these mega-media agencies? It certainly isn’t buying leverage because smaller agencies can match the big guys on media pricing—and often beat them. The big guys speak of relationships with the media companies, but the media companies are putting more and more inventory up for sale in the open market, using exchanges to eliminate the human aspect of transactions that is rife with inefficiencies.

Others suggest that the reviews are procurement driven, which explains why only the usual list of invitees are participating. These big agencies hate losing business and they’ll promise everything to win. They have a beast to feed to perpetuate their own myth and they believe their own BS.

You don’t have to. If you want the same-old solutions join in the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party. If you want real change you really have to want to change.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Relics Part 2–BLUR

In a meeting earlier this week a client was discussing what classes of trade they have distribution in and I mentioned that there’s no longer such a thing as a class of trade. For those of you under the age of thirty, product distribution used to be contained to what we called grocery stores, drug stores or mass merchandisers. Today, these types of stores are one and the same. Food products were sold primarily in grocery, health products were sold primarily in drug and household staples, mostly dry goods, were sold in discount stores. Today, Wal-Mart makes up about 40% of all product sales in almost every product category. Drug stores sell milk and grocery stores sell prescription drugs. The concept of selling through a single class of trade no longer exists. Why? Because consumers want convenience. Whether it’s a quick stop into a convenience store for coffee and breakfast while they’re gassing up or to have one destination for their once-a-week major shopping trip (if that even exists anymore). They don’t want to go to a drug store for their prescriptions, a food store for their groceries and a discount store for paper goods.

I call this blur. Blur refers to the blurring of the lines of delineation that historically existed to differentiate different “channels”. Blur is not only a retail channel phenomenon; it is a reality in the marketing world as well. Today, everything is everything. In my Integrated Marketing class I refer to video and audio as communication techniques, I hate to call them TV and radio. Why? Because TV and Radio are terms that reflect an archaic distribution AND consumption system that no longer dominates. Most of the students in my class don’t listen to traditional radio, but they are exposed to a lot of audio content. The same is true in video.

Even within traditional media concepts like dayparts in TV are blurred. Many cable networks air the same programs in daytime that they do in Prime. Many people DVR whatever they want and time-shift the viewing to their convenience, yet we still plan TV based on old reach curves and buy daypart ratings numbers.

Last year I recall speaking with a client who considered Social Media PR and not advertising. We said it’s neither and it’s both. The line between PR and advertising has blurred dramatically. Is Content Marketing advertising or PR? Is Native advertising or PR? The answer lies in redefining what we do not as advertising or PR but as marketing. And if it’s smart to do PR and advertising for your brand it doesn’t really matter if there’s a line. It only matters that it gets done right. But doing it together, in an integrated manner, where paid promotion of Tweets/Posts and DJ endorsements and product integrations and content all magnify the messaging to a brand’s business advantage.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Everything Old Is New Again

I get a kick out of folks who have only worked in new media and often times convince themselves that they invented some new technique ignoring all of the history that those who have worked in traditional media most of our lives ever did anything of note.

 I speak more specifically about content marketing and native advertising. First, content marketing and native advertising are not new. All that has happened recently is that new media folks have discovered them. Discover does not mean invent. Discover, by definition, is that someone found something that was already there.

 I managed media planning and buying for the Campbell’s Soup Company some 15 years ago. Guess what our most successful advertising was? It was recipes in magazines featuring soup as an ingredient. We ran these in food magazines and service magazines and most readers embraced the ads as if it were editorial in the magazine. These people were looking for recipes and the source was not important if the outcome was to their needs/standards. Does this qualify as content marketing?

A few years later I worked on the Victoria’s Secret advertising account. We put their annual fashion show on TV. The show featured the new line of merchandise with some entertainment (Mary J. Blige, Andrea Bocelli, etc.) and was funded by ads from Victoria’s Secret and other marketers. People tuned in to see the new line—and guys tuned in for the jiggle factor. It was a marketing message disguised as entertainment. Does this qualify as content marketing?

Magazines often offer paid advertisers ‘advertorials’; bonus space with content-like appeal written by either the editorial staff or, more often, the magazine’s marketing staff. These advertorials usually had a subject matter that was consistent with the editorial premise of the magazine. These are still done today and although editors almost always require the words “Paid Advertisement” stamped on top, if the content is of value the reader does not care. Does this qualify as native advertising?

I certainly hope that folks involved in new media continue to discover that some of our older ways have merit in their world as well as continue to develop new techniques that can only be executed via online/mobile. 

Tagged , , , , ,
%d bloggers like this: