If you’ve been part of this industry for a significant period of time, you no doubt recognize (and groan at) the ongoing circular debate about whether this medium is in fact a branding or
response-driven medium. At some stage, the more intelligent members of this community declared, “It’s both.” The term “branded response” emerged to describe a dual objective, which could be achieved
with any online campaign. Today, I’m telling you that no one is correct. First of all, this is not a medium. We’ve done ourselves a major disservice by comparing the Internet to other media and
illustrating how quickly the Web amassed 50 million viewers. I believe in changing the frame of reference. Try comparing the Web to steam power, electricity, and computers, with penetration as the
yardstick. Using the widely accepted critical mass adoption rate of 50%, we see that the respective time frames to reach 50% were just over 100 years for steam power, 40 years for electricity, 30 for
computers, and seven years for the Internet. The time required to reach 50% is how long it takes for tangible effects on productivity to be felt. In the Web’s case, the super-short time might actually
be too quick for us to fully realize what we’re dealing with here. Can you spot the common thread throughout this comparison? It’s connectivity. The ability to fundamentally transform — and forever
change — the way we live our lives, the way we work, and the way we communicate. In truth, the Web is whatever you, I, and the millions of consumers out there want it to be. It is part medium, part
distribution channel, part tool, part connector, part friend. Now let’s segue to the branding-or-DR part. When I once worked at an agency on a rather large global technology client, I remember the
endless debate over whether the upcoming campaign was a branding or lead-generation campaign. Almost every time, we would ask the question, the client would agree that it was a branding campaign, and
then as soon as the campaign ended, the client would ask us, “How many leads did we generate?” Does it surprise you that I’m referring to a traditional piece of business, and not online? It is so
important to enter into any project with a clear, singular objective. Whenever there are too many goals, the focus becomes diluted and a “jack of all trades, master of none” scenario ensues. Now
let’s address the DR folk, who, if you think about it, are why we’re still debating the value of branding on the Web. I’m pretty tired of allowing these bullies to take control of conversations by
bragging about their hard numbers and, in doing so, attempting to refute the support for branding. These so-called DR gurus are simply glorified cataloguers, using the Web (quite well, I might add)
for only one of its multitude of uses. It’s like celebrating when a baby takes its first step and excluding the possibility that it will grow up to become president, compose a concerto, or take home
gold in the Olympics. The case for branding today has never been more defined. When there is too much clutter, consumers turn to brands; when there are too many choices, consumers look for
differentiation. To deny branding on the web is to deny branding. Period.
Joseph Jaffe is director of interactive media at TBWA/Chiat/Day in New York. Email him at joseph.jaffe@tbwachiat.com.