Agencies and Change: Shifts and Whatnot

Frith-article1Piggybacking Sean’s comments on Charles’ article about what the future of the advertising agency holds, in which Charles essentially asserts is the combination of transmedia planning and the black swan theory, combined with a shitload of experimentation and the acceptance of failure.

(But first, a quick aside on failure. It seems like there are two ideas of what failure should be. First, there’s the shotgun approach with the hope that one actually hits the target and becomes the next big viral win. The second is a more scientific, iterative process. I think some people are little too quick to only push quantity at the possible sacrifice of quality, rather than using failure as a tool to increase future chances of success. It’s why strategic planning is becoming so much more important. Although in reality, good failure is probably a little of both)

As I wrote about in the AOC – I believe our collective fate lies in our ability to adapt. It’s the key to experimentation. If you only have a bunch of people used to making television, the likelihood of actual experimentation over just hedging is pretty low. It’s important that we fill up our agencies with people who easily adapt to new ideas, technologies, audiences, or at least have a pretty strong hunger for new information.

So – the new agency will do three things.

1) Shift from the single idea told multiple ways to broader cross media narratives. 
2) Get better at experimentation. 
3) Employ more adaptable people.

But I would also add a few trends that are forcing these changes:

First, we’re finally making the shift away from a consumer culture back to a more participatory one. Or better said, one of doing things rather than just consuming them.

Clay Shirky described this in his discussion of cognitive surplus (what you do when you have nothing to do). He cites a British historian who described the urbanization of society in London in the late 18th century due to the Industrial Revolution. Essentially, people couldn’t handle the shift, so they collectively chose to get shitfaced on gin for a few years instead. But when they adjusted, when they started to wake up from that stupor, that’s when they got all the good parts of the move to the cities. The public libraries, the museums, public education, etc.

Then we began to make our move away from a wholly manufacturing society. With the inception of the 5 day work week, we got something we had never dealt with before, free time. And television was our gin.

But now, the pendulum is swinging back. We’re going back to doing things with our hands, just this time there’s a keyboard and a mouse in between, not necessarily a shovel or a hammer. We’re waking back up. That’s the first shift.

Secondly, telling these broader transmedia narratives requires an audience that gives a shit. The entirety of the point of the tagline, the 360 degree branding, whatever your agency calls it, is the repetition of a single idea forcing its way into the subconscious of an unengaged receptacle. But now that this isn’t really working anymore, we’ve seen the rise of the very buzzy and very misunderstood engagement metric. Most equate this brief attention with caring, but we all know better.

So the second requirement of the new agency is defining purpose. And selling more of X product generally isn’t enough of a purpose. And there simply aren’t many products like iPod’s that have caring already in the bag, so we have to find ways to make this so. And, gasp, this could actually mean using our influence and our money as a force for social good. Dove is a great example of this. It’s brands finding a rallying cry that makes them matter.

And last thing is the shift from brands as a monolithic thing to brands as a more human entity. I think this is mostly an offshoot of number 2, combined with the growth of corporate blogging, the changing nature of customer service, etc. Either way, we expect brands to behave more human, whether that’s by taking on simple human characteristics like empathy and nuance, or by being defined by the sum of the people who represent it.

So that’s it my sort of long winded version of Charles’ future for agencies.

Brands will begin to get better at transmedia narratives and experimentation by becoming more adaptable. And, I believe these changes are happening because the pendulum is swinging back towards participation, the need to make people care and the requirement of brands to have a few manners.

Deep Thoughts

Mediaspending2008As we adjust the definition of what advertising is from saying things to doing things, do charts like these tell us anything of any use?

Most of these charts include some combination of display, search, sponsorships and email. Obviously all valid, but we're also disincluding just about anything remotely interesting that's happening on the web. I'd also take issue with using an "internet" bucket, anyway, but still. Seems like we're tying the entirety of the fate of the digital industry to whether or not we can sell a friggin' banner. No thanks.

On the other hand, your guess is as good as mine on how to measure all the rest of it.

If You Wrote This: You May Be Fired Tomorrow

I've got this image of some semi-washed-up copywriter. He quit giving a shit a couple decades ago while scribbling notes on a sheet of paper after being asked to write the most generic, waste-of-money spot of all time. Just like the day before, and the day before that. His spirit seemingly broken, this genero-scribe, proudly wearing jorts and a grateful dead t-shirt, delivered this to a client that probably deserved it.

At that moment, he won. Under his breath he mumbled to himself, "makes my taco pop, I can't believe those assholes bought it." He grinned, placed his pencil sharpener back into his pocket, and walked briskly into the sunset...

I am a Bucket and So are You.

DanielpatrickmoynihanFrom all the Tim Russert eulogizing that's happened over the past few days, my favorite anecdote was told by Mike Barnicle today. Russert went to work for Pat Moynihan's senate campaign back in 1976. A product of Ohio colleges surrounded by a sea ivy league hot shots, Russert must have felt understandably intimidated. Sensing this, Moynihan told him, "Tim, what they know, you can learn. What you know, they can never learn."

A beautifully familiar sounding quote, and one with lessons for the rest of us. After all the research, after all the time spent observing, after all the focus groups and conjecture, many of the biggest ad blunders come from misunderstanding this simple truth. There are things we just don't know and can't understand about other people. We are different for so many reasons, very few of which can be defined within any segmented target definitions. We are far too irrational to fit into nice little marketing buckets.

A few tips for people trying to sell me shit:

1. What I do tomorrow won't be defined by what I did yesterday.

2. What I say out loud is only sometimes what I'm actually thinking.

3. My 27 year-old white neighbor in about the same income bracket as me doesn't like, nor buy the same stuff. That guy's a douchebag.

4. I don't always do what I plan to do.

5. I don't really give a shit if what you have does everything that an iPhone does for less money. I want an iPhone.

6. Sometimes I eat breakfast at dinner for no apparent reason.

7. I would be offended if you talked like some of my friends do.

8. I might get bored by you if you don't.

9. I might forgive you for lying to me if you do it in a clever way. But I'll thrash you endlessly if you don't.

Well, you get the point, I think. We're not created to fit snuggly and easily into a pre-defined bucket. And the second we stop trying to make it so will be the second we can have a more meaningful conversation. Brands don't choose me, I choose them.

Related articles

Zemanta Pixie

The Cycle of iPhone

Apple announces cheaper 3G iPhone

Image by Daniel Voyager from TSL via Flickr

And the iPhone cycle of advertising continues down the same masturbatory path.

Step 1: Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god, Mankind will never be the same. This won't only be a cool phone that let's you do some cool stuff, but it will change your life forever! It'll probably save lives, too! If you thought you were cool before, you weren't! Because you didn't have an iPhone!

Step 2: Back to being good ol' Apple. Not self congratulatory. Not over the top. Just, "hey, we've got some cool stuff you'll probably like."

Step 3G: Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god Oh my god, you thought the original iPhone turned men into gods and gods into something even cooler, something that never existed before and you can't even talk about. The only thing almost as cool as the iPhone 3G was the iPhone, and that thing is an obsolete piece of shit you sucker! You won't even believe how amazing we are. In fact, praise us. If you don't get down on your loser knees and kiss my sweet, flush headphone jack then you can't even have one, loser!

Jeez, I'm ready to just get on with the good advertising. Let's all keep in mind that the coolest guy in the room probably isn't the one shouting about how cool he is. But I have faith, they'll be back to the good stuff by July.

Zemanta Pixie

Without Attention, there is No Brand.

With a time-starved audience and attention-starved brands fighting for a fewseconds of consideration, does bringing an overt brand message to the forefront really matter? Probably not when paid intrusion and actual attention become closer to mutually exclusive. Great content doesn't matter for shit if your audience is too busy making a sandwich to care.

We already know that the audience won’t trust our ads. Does it make a difference how many times you say that "we make whites the whitest" or "every kiss begins with kay" or any other questionable statement of position. If no one is likely to believe you, why waste your time saying it when you could be spending your money showing it.

Which brings us back to content. Rather than spend your time attempting to prove bullshit, you can find out what your audience likes, and work to be that, to make them feel understood or listened to. Take these "ads" from Zach Galifianakis, Tim and Eric commissioned by Absolut.

Have I watched those and thought "hmmm, Absolut is the smoothest vodka," or "Absolut is so clear, it must be good," or whatever else you may be able to say about the generic "vodka" brand? Well no, but even if they did set out to make me believe that, I probably wouldn't have given them the pleasure of my time.

Same goes for this Levis viral. There is no logo, no obvious branding message. And if there were, I doubt if it'd have 2.4+ million views on YouTube alone.

The same could be said for Cadbury’s Gorilla ad, or the Diet Coke/Mentos experiment (though not brand created). They didn't waste time proving out a positioning that probably wouldn't have been believed or watched.

I’m not sure where exactly this leaves us. It isn’t time for us to throw out things like marketplace positioning, but we need to prove it in different places. I doubt if television ad breaks are the place for a rational sale anymore. It’s just easier to be whatever you would have said you are. Google didn’t prove their mission statement by making it a tagline. They just went out and did it. And for anyone that says that doesn’t work for companies like yours, you’re probably just making excuses.

More More More Ads for the ABC Player

Cs_abc2I've mentioned this inevitable end for online network television viewing a couple times, but it seems those advertising gluttons just couldn't resist another minute. Remember those nice one-ad breaks during your favorite prime-time television shows like Lost and well, Lost? They've heard we liked 'em so much that they'd add another.

Albert Cheng, executive vice president at Disney-ABC Television told The Reporter:

It would be premature for us to say people only want one ad. It’s a likely sort of thinking, but we want to push it a little bit to see how it would go.

Did he just say that we WANT one ad? No, we tolerate one ad. And rightfully so. We all understand that ABC has to pay the bills, but you'd hope not at the expense of something that's working for them (and us). Or maybe they'll just make a Dancing with the Stars spin-off. Like Dancing with the Stars on Ice. That'll make up the lost income from all of us spending our time with Hulu, or NBC, or YouTube, or Revision3, or whatever of thousands of shows all across the web rather than wasting our time with longer ad breaks.

Jackass...

via NewTeeVee

DR vs. Branding, Again.

Purchase_funnelThe theme of this years ad:tech San Francisco was "Brand Strategy and the Expanding World of Digital Marketing," which served as somewhat of a guidepost for the content of the talks, but also to highlight the spreading divide that's happening across the digital advertising industry. A quick stroll through exhibitors alley will give you booth after booth of lead generation, affiliate and CPA technology services looking to fulfill your direct response needs, but far less products to make your branding efforts really sing.

On the other side of the floor, there were still plenty of conversations dealing with the a direct response, heavily metrics driven world that is the most pervasive method on the web, but also more clearly showed the shift that's happening now. As I said in this post, the internet really began as a beacon for advanced metrics, a fantasy world for brands who thought they could know the exact return for every dollar spent.

But finally, as more brands and agencies begin to understand that the web is also a marketplace for interaction and attention, we've seen marketers move beyond just the final step at the end of a purchase funnel. And as director of marketing for ask.com, Sean X, said (at least roughly), ignore the top of the funnel at your peril.

So you won't see some long winded post summarizing each panel or speaker on the event, mainly because Cam and Ryan have done it better than I can. But there's clearly change happening in the industry. It reflects not only a new sense of realism about what the net provides, but also the possibilities of what it could provide.

That said, the highlight was the time spent with my blogger social and madison avenue journal cohorts Cam, Ryan, Sean and Katie. I get the feeling we all need more conversations (or an arguments) about change in the industry because most people out there are struggling enough to just do what they do every day. It's more than a little humbling to spend that much time with that much brain power. Truly a pleasure boys and girls.

photo by stebbi