An article in American Express says, "not so fast".

Senior marketers were asked which components of their current digital

marketing programs"search, email, display advertising, social networking, and

mobile advertising"delivered the best results. Only 11% cited social

networking.

As you know,IMG is highly skeptical of this type of research. The remarkable

thing, however, is that with social media getting so much hype, the tendency of

people who have invested in it would be to exaggerate its effectiveness.

Instead, it was tied for effectiveness with "I don't know." Marketers also said

that social media is significantly less effective than banner ads (display

advertising), and I just don't know how anything can be less effective than that.

Mobile advertising, by the way, didn't even make the chart. As I said 6 months

ago in a previous posting. "IMG predicts that when the frenzy over Facebook,

Twitter, and other social media calms down and the dust clears, email and

search will continue to be the dreariest and most productive forms of online

advertising."!

Discover the surprising benefits of using interactive marketing communication

contact PaulAshby on paulashby40@yahoo.com or (UK Landline) 01934

620047.

"Clicking-toward-oblivion."

"What was once digital advertising's dirty little secret is now

its big, ugly problem. Online ad performance figures are dismal..."

Adweek

　

Any way you slice it, the key fact is that 15 years after its inception, I

cannot come up with the name of one major consumer-facing non-native

brand that has been built primarily by web advertising. It is encouraging,

however, to see some people within the web advertising community finally

coming out and admitting the shortcomings. Maybe if

more web advertising people would stand up and acknowledge the issues

they could help the web become what we all want it to be -- a more

effective advertising medium.

Want more information on Interactive Marketing Communication?

Contact Paul Ashby : paulashby40@yahoo.com or (UK Landline) 01934

620047.

Do You Understand Why We Need Interactive Communication - urgently?

　


Quite simply it is the human desire for interaction.

All advertising is a form of learning whereby the advertiser is asking people to change their

behaviour after learning the benefits of the products or services on offer. However, we all

tend to filter out information that we do not want to hear. This clearly alters the effectiveness

of conventional advertising in quite a dramatic way.

The final purchase decision is invariably a compromise and this leads to a certain amount of

anxiety; the worry that perhaps the decision was not the best or the right one. In order to

minimize this anxiety the purchaser seeks to reinforce their choice and begins to take more

notice of their chosen product's marketing communications. Additionally we have created a

media society during the past 40 or 50 years, where the whole communication process has

been de-humanized and depersonalized.

Together with an extraordinary reduction in interaction because conventional media together

with advertising and marketing have become a one-way practice whereby information is

disseminated in a passive form. People have this desire to be taken account of. To affect

change, to learn and personalize their relationship with their environment. There are a

phenomenal number of reasons that cause people to interact, going far beyond just giving

them things.

When people agree to participate in truly interactive marketing programmes they are told that

their efforts and feedback are of positive help to the advertisers. Additionally the attraction of

interactive communication is that it is a return to the prehistoric human fascination with telling tales!

　

People long for more connection between what we do for a living and what we genuinely care

about. We long for release from anonymity, to be seen as who we feel ourselves to be

rather than the sum of abstract metrics and parameters. We long to be part

of a world that makes sense rather than accept the accidental alienation

imposed by market forces too large to grasp; to even contemplate.

Commerce is a natural part of human life but is has become increasingly

unnatural over the intervening centuries, gradually divorcing itself from the

very people on whom it depends, whether workers or customers. The result has

been to create a huge chasm between buyers and sellers.

Advertising's failure! Conventional advertising has failed the natural human need for social

interaction. We have created a media society during the last 30 or 40 years

where there is an extraordinary reduction in interaction because of the one-way

and more passive form of information that exists. People desire to be taken

account of, to affect change, learn and personalize their relationships with

their environment. These psychological and sociological factors are part of the

incentive to interact with advertising.

　

　

　

　

　

Do you agree with Mad Ave's 16-car pileup?

Clutter's not the only issue -- things like media multitasking and ad-skipping devices play roles. But it is the elephant in the room. Or maybe a more apt metaphor is a 16-car pileup that Madison Avenue's perfectly happy to rubberneck: pause just enough to recognise its existence without doing anything to fix it.

"We could discuss any topic in media and there would some room for debate," said Debbie Solomon, group research director at WPP Group's MindShare, and the author of the agency's annual study on increased commercial time in TV. "But not with clutter. Every study I've ever seen shows that it's a bad thing."

So if clutter's such a problem, why isn't there a clear, unified way of figuring out how to reduce it? A big reason is that clutter is usually viewed through the lenses of individual media, a way of looking that makes a bit of sense given that clutter affects each medium differently.

Research shows that a magazine reader looks at glossy ad pages rather favorably, as part of the editorial content, while a TV viewer is more likely to see 30-second spots as interruptions. Between those poles of acceptance and revulsion fall internet users, who are simultaneously hit with both scads of generic, untargeted ads and more finely tuned pitches that take into account behavior that gives some semblance of relevance to advertising.

Refocus on consumer, not media
A siloed way of thinking is fine if you're atop a media company or a trade association, but it falls short if managing a massive marketing budget is your bag. That lens effectively needs to be refocused not on media but on the consumer, who's cumulatively bludgeoned by commercial messages as he moves from medium to medium. "We just don't have a holistic approach yet," Mr. Barocci said.

Asked whether a more consumer-centric approach to clutter is needed, Bob Liodice, president-CEO at the Association of National Advertisers, said such an initiative "would have to be like what's going on with engagement," referring to a joint effort by his organization, the 4A's and the ARF to develop a new standard for measuring ad effectiveness. "That's something that seems to have universal support and intrigue. Ad clutter hasn't yet risen to that level. I don't want to dismiss it, though. The consumer is running away from some advertising."

Kate Sirkin, exec VP-global research director at Publicis Groupe's Starcom, said she's not counting on action from media companies, for whom clutter raises complicated questions of economics. "Media companies and associations won't look at it because they don't think in a multimedia way," she said. "It'll be up to advertisers to deal with."

What do you think is lacking in the advertising world of to-day?

Mainly we appear to lack ideas, strong ideas, competing ideas, confident

philosophies, angry dissent. Advertising people used to have ideas &

policies; they jostled to present their ideas. But what is alarming is

the impassivity of our advertising people & the idleness of advertising

debate, as we wait. There is a sense of vacuum.

Where to-day is the bold advocacy, the impatience to persuade, the urgency of

argument? Where are the shouts of "here's how!"? Where are the leading

actors, the big voices, the great thoughts?

Headlines about "Twitter", the Internet, "Facebook" et al, are these now the

only images we have of a once great advertising industry?

But perhaps the problem is simpler but just as scary, in a headline " Lack of

experience affects business" the Institute of Advertising had this to say, "The

nature of the business is such that in order to be cost efficient process gets

dumbed down and farmed out to more junior people. There is a tendency to

commodity and that can lead to work being de-skilled".

So there you have it technology and a dumbing down are affecting all aspect

of advertising...it is time to change or else advertising will become like the

Zimbabwe bird flying around in ever decreasing circles until it disappears up

its own orifice!

　

Do you agree that the function of effective interactive communication is to accurately convey a particular message?

that is clear and comprehended by the receiver. Communication is used to express emotion, transfer information or provide direction. The function of effective interactive communication can be best seen in the business world. If a company is able to effectively communicate with its workers, the workers will feel empowered, informed and appreciated.

Interactive communication is divided into two forms: verbal and nonverbal. Verbal and nonverbal communication must agree or else it can lead to confusion or misunderstanding. For example, if a boss verbally communicates you're doing a good job and then fires you the next day, there's an obvious breakdown in the communication. Nonverbal communication is gestures, vocal tone and facial expressions.

The effects of effective interactive communication are understanding, education, empowerment and respect. Effective communication provides people with information they need to become educated and enlightened.

When people feel like they are in the know, they feel respected and empowered, and are motivated to perform at their best level of productivity and performance. The role that effective communication plays can have a positive or negative affect. For example, in politics if a politician doesn't explain himself or herself clearly, there can be a lot of room The primary misconception about effective interactive communication is that it is simply saying what a person feels.

Simply expressing ideas, thoughts and emotions does not make communication effective. Effective interactive communication can only be considered effective when the listener accurately understands the message the individual is attempting to communicate. The role of effective communication is commonly seen only as the messages being sent, while it is both the sending and receiving that matter.

The benefits of effective interactive communication are successful business, rich relationships and the ability to accurately and comprehensively express thoughts, feelings and ideas. Effective communication is at the foundation of every successful action. A great example of how the role of effective communication benefits people in interpersonal relationship is marriage. A marriage that possesses effective interactive communication fosters love, trust and respect.

　

　

　

Game Playing and Marketing Games Offer you a Unique Way to Entertain...

-- and sell at the same time!

Whilst experimenting with social networks, user-generated content and on line video,

marketers appear content to view games as little more than another

class advertising platform. The untapped potential of game

playing lies in their ability to tell stories, thereby more closely linking

brand benefits with game play and blurring the lines between brand and

entertainment. Games, properly structured, fundamentally alter the customers

perception to the presentation and content of your marketing messages thus

making the advertisements themselves a source of meaningful information. Games allow Brands to

become engaging, and entertaining -- thereby providing something of value in exchange for

attention.

Brands such as Persil, Birds Eye and Quaker Oats have relied on game playing to create

narratives that consumers want to be a part of. In the process, they've done

more than just break through the clutter, or better position themselves in

consumer's minds. Games remain one of the biggest untapped

opportunities for marketers, for the simple fact that they are, indeed, engaging

interactive and entertaining. Well-conceived games require users' active

attention and enable them to drive the story line as they experience a world

that can be entirely of a brand's making. Games represent a unique opportunity

for brands to be the entertainment rather than just sponsor it.

So what do original games get you? If you're Quaker Oats,

you get year-over-year double-digit sales growth, as well as a

marketing program that has generated significant

revenue. So what does this mean for marketers? It

demonstrates that there's a burgeoning mainstream audience increasingly

receptive to branded entertainment in the form of original episodic games and

willing to grant brands their attention in exchange for enjoyable

experiences. Games need to be implemented strategically.

As with any marketing approach, objectives and performance expectations for

game-based marketing need to be considered upfront. Here are some things to keep

in mind: A game tends to work best as a component of an integrated campaign

rather than an afterthought. Original episodic games can

counteract this imbalance by delivering a high level of play and replay value to

consumers while putting the brand at the center of the experience.

So does a brand need to be interesting or provocative in order to make a

good game? Absolutely not. All our examples show that basic games deployed and

used well were effective at making a low-involvement category more interesting

and engaging. And implemented properly, games could address many of the

challenges facing financial-services companies -- building involvement,

generating a prospect , creating a sense of community, even delivering a positive brand halo.

　

You probably missed the 'Digital Life’

report from TNS .

Despite a major PR push from its authors, it barely made a dent in the Twittersphere or across traditional marketing and media channels. Which is odd when you consider that even the slightest news about social media usually garners a huge response in the marketing world. A small company launches a new app and headlines start flashing. A senior marketer announces a major investment in Facebook and 5,000 tweets are launched.

So one might expect that the biggest piece of empirical research ever conducted on consumers’ Digital behaviour and their attitudes to social media from the world’s biggest market research company would create quite a lot of buzz. After all, 72,000 consumers interviewed across 60 countries is quite a sample. Yet coverage of the report and its key findings was almost non-existent. Blink and you missed it.

One look inside the Digital Life report, however, explains the lack of attention. Unlike the overly optimistic and wildly out of touch proclamations of the social media industry and those that cover it, the TNS study was based on empirical data. And as a result, it presented a much more even-handed and objective view of the digital landscape than most marketers are comfortable accepting or forwarding to their peers.

For example, the report concludes that the majority of consumers in developed markets do not want to engage with brands via social media. In the UK, that proportion was at its highest with 61% of consumers stating they do not see social media as a place they want to interact with brands. That’s a bummer for every brand manager who spouts the usual crap about" Having a conversation with the consumer", because almost two-thirds of their consumers aren’t interested in talking to them.

The research also reveals that just a quarter of consumers in developed markets see social networks as a place to buy products. Again, that’s a blow both to those who have boldly predicted the commercialisation of social media as a retail space and to the likes of Facebook and Twitter, whose long-term business projections partly depend on monetising their impact on consumers.

But these facts and many more were probably not communicated to you because they do not fit the ideology that the marketing industry is attempting to propagate when it comes to social media. Like the Chinese government - which steadfastly refuses to describe Tibet as anything other than a part of China and which rarely covers any of the public outrages that take place there - the hegemonic forces of marketing prefer to tell a story of new apps and bold Facebook strategies rather than a more fair approach.


To the credit of TNS, it did just that in its report , and there was much to celebrate about the potential of digital as a vitally important medium for the people of the 21st century. But what also emerged from the data was clear evidence of the lack of credibility or engagement that most brands can expect from their forays into social media. As TNS chief development officer Matthew Froggatt put it: "many brands have recognised the vast potential audiences available to them on social networks; however, they are failing to understand that these spaces belong to the consumer and brand presence needs to be proportionate and justified."€

Bravo Mr Froggatt! Wise is the marketer who uses data to assess the situation. And he has a point, does he not? In all the hullabaloo, has anyone considered that the term social media has no place for brands within its definition? ’€Social media’€literally means the communication channels that exist between people. Not between brands.

But like every medium before it, brands try to invade that space anyway. And social media, like every other medium before it, is already suffering from clutter as a result. As more brands attempt to grab attention and start social media conversations with disinterested consumers, more of them will switch off. That’s probably why the sample in developing countries in the TNS research were more positive about brands on social media those in developed markets - they have yet to be switched off.

And clutter - as marketers should know from experience - does not eventually subside. The response of marketers to a cluttered media is to produce more clutter. As TNS notes: "Misguided digital strategies are generating mountains of digital waste, from friendless Facebook accounts to blogs no one reads"€・ The stark message from the TNS data is clear: it’s already hard to communicate with consumers via social media and it will only get harder as time goes on and more brands pile in.

The overall message from the TNS report is not one of complete hopelessness but of practical reality. Digital communications, and social media within it, is a genuinely world-changing development. But for those marketers who ’rank the Kool-Aid’€and spent all their money and attention on using it as their main communications focus, there’ a disappointing denouement ahead.

　

　

So Many Clicks, So Few Sales

Pay-per-click advertising seems like a dream. But up to 35% of

all the clicks you pay for may be fraudulent.

It didn't make any sense. Kevin Steele, co-owner of Karaoke Star, a Phoenix

retailer of karaoke equipment, noticed that the number of people clicking on his

paid search-engine ads had shot from 200 to 800 a day. But despite the apparent

jump in traffic, sales hadn't budged. Steele and his partner, Diana Frerick, had

built their business on Internet advertising, and more clicks almost always

meant more revenueâ€"which the pair had invested in a new office, more inventory, and a call center to field technical questions.

Steele thought he had pay-per-click advertising down to a science. Karaoke

Star spent about $2,000 a day on search-engine ads at Google and Overture, a

subsidiary of Yahoo focusing on keywords like "karaoke","karaoke player,"

"karaoke song"to generate about $6,000 a day in sales. Suddenly, it had to

budget the same amount just to get $3,000. With each keyword costing

anywhere between 40 cents and $3 a click, Karaoke Star found itself being

nickel-and-dimed to death. "One day we were doing great, says Steele, "and

the next it was as if someone had turned off the lights."

The problem was click fraud, which occurs when people click on paid search

ads with no intention of buying anything. In some cases, the clicker is a

competitor that wants to force a rival to burn through cash. Other times it's

someone from an affiliate site that hosts search-engine ads and receives a small

commission for every click. It could be a team of users clicking repeatedly on

an ad. Or, most commonly, the fraudulent clicks are automated by "hitbot"

software.

Experts estimate that 20% to 35% of all ad clicks may be bogus. Whatever the

number, it's as if thousands of people are charging you for window-shopping.

Steele says the fraudulent clicking has cost Karaoke Star nearly $400,000 over

the past two and a half years.

The paid search ad market is essentially a grand auction. Advertisers bid on

specific keywords; the terms with the highest demand fetch the highest prices,

and the advertisers that pay the most get the highest placement on the search

engine's webpage. Because affiliate sites earn commissions based on how many

clicks the ads receive, there's a lot of incentive to claim as many clicks as

possible. Paid online search is a nearly $3 billion business and it's easy to

see why. Popular keywords can get very expensive very fast.

The major search engines all acknowledge that click fraud is a problem. In a

recent SEC filing, for example, Google warned investors that "if fraudulent

clicks are not detected, the affected advertisers may experience a reduced

return on their investment which could lead to loss of advertisers and

revenue.

What's an advertiser to do? If you think you've been charged for bogus

clicks, you might be able to convince a search engine to credit your account.

The problem is, getting a search engine to hand over a record of your

advertising activity is no easy feat. Search engines treat such data as

proprietary and are loath to share it. Karaoke Star's Steele and Frerick, for

example, expressed their suspicions to Overture and were given some "token

refunds, Steele says. But Overture steadfastly refused to tell them who was

behind the bogus clicks. Nor would it give Karaoke Star the data it needed to

figure it out itself.

Fortunately, Karaoke Star as well as a number of other online karaoke

stores received an anonymous e-mail tip from someone claiming to be a former

employee of Ace Karaoke, a competitor in City of Industry, Calif. Attached to

the e-mail, according to Steele, was a video that showed an automated click

fraud program employed by Ace Karaoke to target the stores. Frerick and Steele

retained a lawyer who has contacted Ace Karaoke, as well as Google and Overture,

and informed them of his intention to sue. Why target the search engines?

"Because Google and Overture make the most money from click fraud and have

the least amount of incentive for taking simple precautions to prevent the fraud,

says C. Tab Turner, a plaintiffs' attorney in North Little Rock, Ark., who

represents Karaoke Star. Overture and Google declined to comment on the matter.

Ace Karaoke's owner, David Su, denies the charges. "At this stage, there is

no way for advertisers to prevent fraudulent clicks from being billed to their

accounts.

Unlike Karaoke Star, many advertisers are reluctant to complain out of fear

that the search engines, which provide most of their traffic, could blacklist

them. "At this stage, there is no way for advertisers to prevent fraudulent

clicks from being billed to their accounts,says Jessie Stricchiola, president

of Alchemist Media, a click fraud auditing firm in Hollywood.

Fortunately, there are alternatives to taking legal action. There are a

number of click fraud auditing tools available including Click Lab, Click

Defense, and Click Detective that are designed to alert you to suspicious

clicks. The cost can range from $29.95 to several thousand dollars a month,

depending on the amount of traffic your site receives. Or you could hire a

consultant like Stricchiola to analyze your traffic and broker a deal with the

search engines. But Stricchiola, who charges between $250 and $450 an hour,

warns that it often costs more in time and money to identify the problem than is

actually lost to click fraud. There are also alternative search engines, such as

Brooklyn-based BlowSearch, which guarantees that its advertisers will not

receive any automated clicks on their ads or they'll get their money back. Of

course, BlowSearch gets only a tiny fraction of the traffic of the big search

engines and offers less bang for the advertising buck.

In the end, you may have little option but to accept fraudulent clicks as a

cost of doing business and recalculate your expected advertising ROI

accordingly. That's what Karaoke Star is doing. Of course, it's also reserving

the right to sue.

　

Social Media Effect: "Barely Negligible"



　

If you're in the business of selling stuff, according to one big-time

research firm, social media marketing is a waste of your time and money.

Forrester Research has released a report recently that concludes...

"Social tactics are not meaningful sales drivers".

While the hype around social networks as a driver of influence in eCommerce

continues to capture the attention of online executives, the truth is that

social continues to struggle and registers as a barely negligible source of

sales for either new or repeat buyers. In fact, fewer than 1% of transactions

for both new and repeat shoppers could be traced back to trackable social

links. Now think about this for a minute. This study is about

the influence of social media on sales. If the influence on sales is "barely negligible" can you

imagine the influence on retail sales (which account for about 94% of

everything sold?) What's below barely negligible? Strongly negligible?

The study goes on to say...

The reality is that even the most popular social image-sharing sites (like Pinterest) have failed to

move the needle with respect to sales for most retail sites. To tell you the truth, even I

was a little shocked reading about this study. There aren't too many people in

the ad world who are more skeptical about the magical power of social media

marketing than I am. But I thought the truth probably fell somewhere between

"magic" and "barely negligible." !! However there is one technique that continues to move the

needle dramatically and that is Interactive Marketing Communication...properly executed for

course!

Even today, Einstein's ideas about gravity and the speed of light are still being tested and scrutinized.

Not so in advertising and marketing. If enough big mouths say the same things loud enough and often enough they quickly become facts.

As most readers know, I am highly skeptical of many of the claims made about the magical powers of digital advertising.

The other night it occurred to me that perhaps a good analogy for the effectiveness of digital communication in advertising is the effectiveness of digital communication in education. While there are obviously some huge differences, there are also some similarities.

Marketing experts have been warning us that unless we commit ourselves fully to digital technology, we will die. Similarly, education experts have been saying that digital communication technology is the only way to dig ourselves out of the education mess we have created.

In 1997, a committee appointed by then President Bill Clinton, which included Charles Vest, president of MIT and Charles Young, ceo of Hewlett-Packard, warned us that we had an urgent need to bring computer technology to our classrooms. The fact that there was inadequate research on the effectiveness of classroom computers didn't bother them. They concluded...
"The panel does not... recommend that the deployment of technology....be deferred pending the completion of such research."
They, too, were in a big "do or die" hurry.

In addition to issuing hysterical warnings about the dire consequences of not adopting their pet panaceas, educators and marketers also face challenges that are similar.

First, they have to decide what to do with a fixed and limited budget. Would a school district get better results for its money by hiring more teachers, putting computers in classrooms, paying for more teacher training, buying more books, or doing any number of other things with its budget?

Similarly, would a marketer get better results by hiring more sales people, buying a spot on the Super Bowl, doing trade incentives, creating an online advertising program, or doing something else with their money?

A second resemblance is that digital technology seems attractive in both cases because not only does it promise a new way of communicating, it also promises a more engaged participant. The undeniable allure of technology is assumed to create a more engaged individual -- whether that individual is a student or a consumer.

Finally, in both cases digital technology also presumably provides a more interactive experience -- an end to the one-way communication style of teacher-to-student or marketer-to-consumer.

With those parallels in mind I started to do some research to see how wired classrooms were doing. The results were enlightening.

From a paper called "No Access, No Use, No Impact: Snapshot by Shopping Sidekick Plugin issued jointly by researchers from the University of Michigan and The University of North Texas, we learn...
There is general agreement that computing technologies have not had a significant impact on teaching and learning in K-12 in the U.S., even though billions of dollars have been spent in purchasing, equipping, and supporting the technology.
From The New York Times piece entitled "Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops" we learn...
...the Liverpool Central School District, just outside Syracuse (NY), has decided to phase out laptops starting this fall, joining a handful of other schools around the country that adopted one-to-one computing programs and are now abandoning them as educationally empty — and worse...
"After seven years, there was literally no evidence it had any impact on student achievement — none," said Mark Lawson, the school board president...
...the United States Department of Education released a study showing no difference in academic achievement between students who used educational software programs for math and reading and those who did not...
In one of the largest ongoing studies, the Texas Center for Educational Research, a nonprofit group, has so far found no overall difference on state test scores between 21 middle schools where students received laptops in 2004, and 21 schools where they did not.
In a second NYTimes article called "In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores", we learn...
...the Kyrene School District (in Chandler, AZ) as a whole, offer what some see as a utopian vision of education’s future...
...the district’s use of technology has earned it widespread praise. It is upheld as a model of success by the National School Boards Association, which in 2008 organized a visit by 100 educators from 17 states who came to see how the district was innovating.
The digital push here aims to go far beyond gadgets to transform the very nature of the classroom, turning the teacher into a guide instead of a lecturer, wandering among students who learn at their own pace on Internet-connected devices.
Advocates for giving schools a major technological upgrade — which include powerful educators, Silicon Valley titans and White House appointees — say digital devices let students learn at their own pace, teach skills needed in a modern economy and hold the attention of a generation weaned on gadgets.
The techno-crowd in both the education and advertising industry have a lot in

common.

They are very strong in their assertions, and very weak on proof.

They continue to inflate the hysterical threat-of-not-accepting-their-solution language, despite

contradictory data.They think anecdotes are evidence.

When data does not support their position, they jump to false goals -- like

the dubious engagementargument.There is a lesson to be learned here. Whether you are

selling cheeseburgers, trying to lift the educational achievement of children, or

operating in any other field of endeavor, technology has so far proven to be no

substitute for strategy.

What is it, precisely, that we do so much better than any other country?

althought I must admit that all the trade magazines say at one time or another

that " American & British Advertising is the best in the world". Whatever

that means! This recession is not a failure of market economics. It is a

reassertion of market economics after a decade in which we paid ourselves more

than we were producing, and funded it precariously and temporarily, together

with a total lack of accountability so that it took a while for the market to

rumble. Now a prosperity that always baffled ordinary citizens has collapsed.

The collapse of confidence is not irrational; it's the correction to a long run

of irrational confidence. All that stuff about the emerging Asian giants wasn't

just phrasemaking for party conference speeches. It was true. We're falling

behind. We face a mountain of debt: the difference between the life we are able

to sustain and the life we were enjoying. Marketing people, having misled the

customers for so long must now explain a reduction in their standard of living.

The great task facing the next generation of Top-Down Management is to help the

country to recognise and embrace its fate: that we should get poorer, and slip

with as good a grace as possible into the world's second league. Yes, there is a

rebalancing required: a rebalancing of popular expectation.

　

Forget all the talk of post-recession rebuilding.

We are still advertising with no accountability and must now reduce our expectations. The

coming nonsense is that when this recession is over, countries such as America & Britain

should seek and find our salvation in (in what will become a buzz phrase of 2009-10) a "new

Marketing model".

Wrong. Actually we're just stuffed. Marketing & Advertising hit a

tree. There is no replacement advertising model for us to drive off in. We must

bash out the dents, clear the broken glass, remove the bumper from the front

wheel, and limp on as best we can. We should accommodate ourselves to that

prospect. Instead, as our prosperity sinks, the Marketing gurus rhetoric will

go skyward. "New challenges", "a new vision", "post-millennial economy",

"thinking outside the box" ... "new technology" how wearisome this inspirational

PowerPoint pap becomes.

Already I can hear the so-called great and the good of

the (failed) Marketing and Advertising community boasting of the next

generation of marketing thrust. Melancholy will be the spectacle of a range

of middle-aged-to-elderly marketing & advertising throwbacks burbling about

life changes and sea changes and gear changes and step changes for American

& British Marketing. "Post-recession Britain ... new age ... new marketing

dispensation ... recalibrate ... re-balance ... blah, blah, blah." Oh boy, is

this nonsense going to sound wise. The riff will be that Western Marketing, like

America & Britain's must reinvent themselves.Behind the curve, and

banging the table as ever, they all have not yet latched on to the rhetoric of

the "new economic model". They are still trying to kick life back into the old

one. So the talk until recently has been about "kick-starting" the old

economy. This mindless attempt to return to routine is an indication either of

the absence of imagination, or of panic. But as it becomes apparent even to the

Marketing & Advertising community that there is to be no return to that

golden decade of no hard choices and uninterrupted growth together with Top Down

Management techniques that have failed miserably.

Although (the argument will concede) the old rust-belt industries of the 20th century had to

go, the West turned its back on industry rather too readily. We were bedazzled by

Marketing services, fool's gold from Mad Ave ; Soho.We need (wait for it) a

new Marketing model. First, we must (argh) "rebalance" our economy.

Media Agencies must seek out (key words) "a new generation" of shiny new media

strengths, a second-wave advertising renaissance. What, then, are these

strengths? Our talent (runs the argument) for (key word) "innovation"; an "IT"

(key word) generation; the potential of our existing (key word) "creative"

agencies and (key words) "high added-value" marketing activity; and our (key

words) "genius for invention". Vital to all this will be (key words) "skills",

"training" and "education". We should remind ourselves, too, of that inestimable

resource to our economy: English as a (key words) "world language". And it will all be

just so much hot air. What is it, precisely, that we do so much better than any

other country, althought I must admit that all the trade magazines say at one

time or another that " American British Advertising is the best in the

world". Whatever that means!

　

　

Knowing your customers is especially useful at times of abrupt and unexpected change

- a recession, for example. Having a strong sense of why people buy from

you as well as what they buy can help you to avoid damaging knee-jerk responses.

Is everyone else in your sector rushing down-market in anticipation of a boom in

demand for cut-price 'value' offerings? If you stick it out at the top of the

market, you might be able to grab for yourself a big chunk of the tasty

high-margin business that remains.

Now, in future you must remember this, engaging your audience is key to your

future success< You should focus on "engagement", "relevance" and

"customization" to make an impact with consumers. Additionally the rise of

new media has ushered in the era of "performance marketing". Businesses

hoping to derive the maximum benefit from digital media must provide customers

with information tailored to their individual needs, be it

on the web, or analogue media. Communications should also take the form of a

two-way conversation, with consumers being able to customise the content they

receive in line with their personal preferences.

This means adopting a truly interactive communication mindset. The age of

push marketing is behind us. What counts now are dialogue, engagement and

relevance, Digital channels that can deliver consumers with established

interests can charge handsomely for that capability.

Customer focus is important, because it can help you to see beyond industry

orthodoxy and understand why people buy from you rather than go somewhere else.

It requires a different mindset and the ability to cast aside those cherished,

but often erroneous, shibboleths about what can and cannot be done, that all

businesses create for themselves.

Is Advertising all about Fraud?


　

It is said that Edward Bernays taught corporate America and the Federal Government to lie, his spirit lives on today!

It's about time that we had some straight talk about, what we call Fraudgate, because most advertising and marketing reporting is total BS!

A combination of wishful thinking, propaganda and deliberate deception. We've been trying to track accountability (or rather the lack of it) in advertising and marketing for over twenty years. The one constant that keeps returning is "How do these people get away with it"? Because the real mystery is how come that they are spending even more money on advertising in these days of economic deprivation.

Nobody seems to grasp the scope and depth of the dishonesty in advertising, in marketing, in Business Schools, in Government – in fact it's all over!

The first thing you need to know about advertising and marketing is that it is everywhere, but any attempt to construct any form of accountability is absurd and pointless – the fact is there just ain't none!

The main tool employed by advertising people is the mantra, totally untrue by the way, "Advertising works".

Amazingly. Marketing has got away with the perpetuation of complete and utter crap regarding the supposed benefits of advertising.

We now accept unquestioningly the supposed reality of what advertising and marketing people routinely present as "fact", despite the absence of any kind of evidence, of any kind, to support this "fact"!

There appears to be a kind of collective denial that kicks in when any discussion on Marketing and advertising commences and you cannot really register the fact that there really is no supporting evidence to substantiate the outlandish claims made on behalf of advertising.

We now routinely allow these people to get away with murder, killing off our free press, producing substandard television, providing us with an over-informed media. And the real frightening thing? We don't know where it's all going to end.

Be brutally honest, do you have any idea how advertising works?

How advertising got itself into its present mess. No? Perhaps you console yourself

with the thought that it doesn't matter that you don't have a clue because there

are plenty of smart marketing people out there who do. Well, here's the tricky

part. Yes, those smart marketing people do indeed have a shrewd

idea on how to steer the world out of marketing chaos. The bad news is, they're not

all the same prescription. In fact they are different prescriptions. Very

different.

We snigger at fortune-tellers yet continue to take seriously the word of advertising

and marketing people, professions definable as people who have found a way to retain professorial

tenure even when their predictions turn out to be entirely wrong. Read the rival

pronouncements of the world's top advertising people and you soon find yourself

agreeing that their guess is as good as anybody else's. Because in Marketing

and advertising nobody knows anything! Even more disturbing, the arguments

about Social Media and how to fix advertising that we hear today are but a

queasy echo of those we heard years ago regarding the introduction of Commercial

TV...and didn't that work out well? Similar arguments about involvement, The

Internet, Social Media et al are today being regurgitated over the current

crisis. So what should we be doing? I really don't know except that we should

really study the meaning of the word communication a little more urgently. My

only excuse is that the people we rely on to know don't have a common style either.

Advertising now has to go beyond "telling" people about products using mass media,



and advanced upon "listening" to customers through Interactive Marketing Communication programmes together with loyalty schemes and market research.

Advertising is now moving towards the third generation of true customer engagement, characterised by 'talking', by engaging in open-ended dialogue with customers. Through interactive programmes we can understand customers preferences and passions, we can identify consumers across brands and experiences. For marketing and advertising to be truly effective, operators need to have customer information that enables interactive targeted and relevant communications. Giving customers the choice to opt in or out of campaigns enables them to be user specific and ultimately provide more value. The widespread use of interactive communication messaging creates a far-reaching and significant marketing opportunity for brands.

By putting a reliable interactive communications infrastructure in place, and a means of controlling and measuring campaigns, Clients can deliver some of the most highly effective marketing initiatives through well structured and relevant interactive programmes. Lets face it, without improving the understanding and content of advertising and marketing all business must remain understandably concerned that advertisings' inflexibility inherent in the concept of creativity will act as a barrier to economic growth. It is also regrettable that these barriers come accompanied by rhetoric that still sounds as though agencies still believe the words "Advertising Works" because it doesn't! For advertising to enter 2011 the message must be sent that Advertising has demonstrably improved and that only the best and the brightest will not merely be tolerated, but are actively desired. Advertising people suffer from self-esteem enhanced but talent-deprived capabilities and, sad to say, advertising suffers from an inexhaustible supply of untalented people actively encouraged by indulgent clients who appear unable to criticise them! Unfortunately we are almost alone in our willingness to tell the hard truths, and it appears that there is a growing chorus of voices trying to convince these untalented people that hard work isn't necessary any more and they're entitled to a lengthening list of benefits paid for by others and that they don't have to accept the consequences of their actions when these consequences are bad. Advertising desperately needs the return of elder statesmen. Whilst the current fashion is to get rid of old advertising people, this should be stopped...immediately. Because advertising and marketing needs to listen to their advice, these wise old men who have already been through advertising downturns, marketing reviews and outlandish waste and who could spot all the tricks and bluffs as practised by to-days bumped up experts

　

Wake Up Marketing - Face the 21st Century

　

　

　

Your innovation-averse culture must go!

Marketing and advertising are on the slide. When will these once great

businesses confront reality and fight back? Because at the moment both

Advertising and Marketing have become innovation-averse cultures! Both

professions are risk-averse, innovation-averse and antipathetic to new

ideas.

Worse than that they are totally lacking in accountability because those

given responsibility do not have the requisite authority and knowledge to

discharge it.

So what's behind the decline and fall? Most certainly a sclerotic marketing

system that doesn't have the power to re-examine the need for massive

re-evaluation of the process of advertising and marketing. It's antiquated,

early 19th Century concepts do not work, (if they ever did!) they still do not

have any true accountability.

It may be that the future scholar identifies Advertising's sclerotic, twisted

concepts of communication as the biggest business weakness of all.Simply put.

An early 19th century concept cobbled together by a small number of

opportunistic men cannot properly function for the Western world at the

beginning of the 21st century. The current system of Advertising &

Marketing is an anachronism.

Among business people cynicism about advertising ability to deliver grow, now

with the advent of the Internet, this can only increase this cynicism.

The twin challenges to advertisings' 60-year old hegemony are enormous. The

first is a total misunderstanding of the word "communication" and a misplaced

belief that "creativity" is the sole criteria for the success or otherwise of

advertisings ability to sell products and services. Secondly there is a broad

global trend towards the internet together with the frightening inability of

advertising to be totally accountable, in the case of the latter just how long

can this stupidity last? Just when does Marketing dare to balance the

budget?

It could well be that the future business scholar will identify marketings

sclerotic, twisted business decision-making system as the biggest weakness of

all. Put simply an early 19th century business concept cobbled together by a

small number of business men cannot properly function for the West as the

number one business method for the 21st century. To-day it can be said that

Advertising and Marketing are an anachronism which is why so many articles

abound as to the way advertising is going. Nowadays some senior executives call

trust the scarcest resource of all and marketing enhances such an attitude!

It has been said that Marketers are stuck in a world between the old rules

and the new rules. To deal with the new rules of changing media, technology and

consumer behaviour, many marketers delegate emerging marketing solutions to a

handful of external partners or internal 'experts'. In doing so, they have

enabled the rest of the organisation to behave much like it did ten years ago,

clinging to the old rules!

Brands need to take notice of the amazing opportunities available to them
right now, opportunities that have laid dormant because of the strangle hold

ad agencies have had on the marketing communications process until very recently.

All advertising is a form of learning, education and game playing should

become the new promotion.

Consumers have a huge desire for brand knowledge and learning, and far prefer

facts and storytelling, this mean more to them than a celebrity spokesperson or

a catchy tag line.

This allows your customer to exercise their own "personal discovery" on their

chosen brand.

Another problem facing Brands is the fact that marketers tend to overestimate

the value of what they already have and have, as a result, become loss averse,

this makes them overestimate the value of what they have and support the status

quo together with stability! So marketers need to sharpen their act, check their

egos, open their minds and embrace new ways of marketing communication it will

be well worthwhile.

Internet Advertising will rapidly lose its value and its impact, for easily understood reasons. Pushing

a message at a potential customer when it has not been requested and when the customer is in

the middle of something else on the Net, will never work as a major source of revenue for most

internet sites.

The Internet is participatory, like exchanging stories around a camp fire.

The problem is not the medium, the problem is the message and the fact that

it is not trusted, not wanted, and not needed. There are vast amounts of

literature to support this.

Customers do not trust advertising. Research has shown that messages

attributed to a commercial source have a much lower impact. Research has also

show that advertising is the least-trusted source of information on products and

services. The fact is consumers do not want to view advertising, and mostly

consumers do not need advertising.

The internet is all about freedom. A free population will not be held captive

and forced to watch ads. Marketing must take its share of blame for the economic

crisis. Management's greatest concern should be what a company stands for, not

adding more services to sell to consumers.

Why are so many of our major industries in trouble, beyond the current

economic meltdown? And why is marketing not being blamed for its share of the

problem.

If you read the business press, you probably noticed the absence of any

discussion of marketing and marketing strategy as it relates to the economic crisis.

　

　

Lets Face it. There is no answer to the Advertising and Marketing Crisis!






Both Clients and advertising agencies are deluding themselves. Marketing has

to accept there is no way out of its decline.For one blood-curdling moment it

seemed that the marketing world had woken up to the fact that their preposterous

industry had finally been caught in the act.

Pepsi ,the world's leader in advocating and implementing new-age marketing

nonsense, and now paying the price for its foolish belief in the three-headed

marketing monsters: "branding," "engagement," and "conversation." (Here's a tip

for anyone left alive in the Pespi marketing department. There is one thing, and

one thing only, that advertising is about -- persuasion. All the rest is word

games and chit chat. Got it?

Last week it was reported that after years of fighting Coke for first place

in the soft drink category, Pepsi-Cola had fallen to third place.The L.A. Times

called it "...a stunning fall from grace."

Pepsi saw their U.S. sales volumes in 2010 fall sharply, by 4.8% and 5.2%, respectively... The

U.S. soft drink market is about 74 billion dollars. Therefore a 5% drop in Pepsi

market share (which is about 10%0 cost them well over $350 million on the Pepsi

brand alone!

The goal of advertising is to create a clear awareness of your company and

its Unique Selling Proposition. Unfortunately, most advertisers evaluate their

ads by the comments they hear from the people around them. The slickest,

clearest, funniest, most creative and most different ads are the ones most

likely to generate these comments. See the problem? When we confuse "response"

with "results" we create "attention getting ads" which say absolutely

nothing.

The business owner is uniquely unqualified to see his company or his product

objectively.He is on the inside, looking out, trying to describe himself to a

person on the outside looking in. It's hard to read the label when you're inside

the bottle. Too much product nowledge causes the business owner to answer

questions that no one is asking. This makes for extremely ineffective

advertising.

Marketing has to accept there is no way out of its decline. The rot began

when we chose never to take heed of Professor Ehrenberg's statements on

advertising effectiveness! Because nothing has changed despite all the ballyhoo about Social Media,

Facebook et al. Wherever ads appear, especially on Social Media, Ehrenberg's resolute focus on the

facts what data actually tells us led him to challenge many a marketing bandwagon

such as loyalty'. You may wish to improve the brand's performance by improving

customer retention', he observed, but without a higher market penetration it

just won't happen. His work on advertising effectiveness was equally

challenging. He argued convincingly that there was no evidence that advertising

persuades anybody to do anything; advertising can only ever be a weak' force

that improves brand recognition and/or jogs consumers'

memories.