Commentary
Why Advertise At All?
- by Joe Marchese , June 30, 2009
It's been eye-opening to have conversations with thought leaders in advertising and marketing regarding the future of the industry. The conversations always start on how one could advertise effectively in social media, but more often than not it turns into a discussion of the bigger question: What's the purpose of advertising/marketing?
It's as if the new social media reality is forcing marketers and agencies to reevaluate the reasons for advertising in the first place. As a very good friend (who's a very smart media guy) asked me, "Where is the leverage in this industry?" (referring to media and advertising). We aren't talking about a small shift, but hundreds of billions of dollars spent on advertising and marketing. Marketers are being forced to ask themselves what the role of advertising is in the marketing mix.
If you make a product that sucks, you can't get by on advertising alone. Even if it's possible to build initial demand, word of mouth spreads so fast today, advertising can no longer be leaned on as the key to product success -- or can it? I guess it all depends on what the purpose of advertising really is, what return advertisers truly expect -- and, perhaps most important, when advertisers expect to receive that return.
advertisement
advertisement
The question is, is advertising's role to sell product -- or to sell product at a certain price? If Coke wanted to sell more soda, it could drop the price, or pull other levers in the marketing mix, but Coke, and thousands of other brands, are not simply looking to sell more product, they are looking to sell more product at a particular price.
The truth is, an incredible amount of parity among products exists in today's world in almost any product category. But brands mean more to people than a set of product functionality. Brand attributes occupy a place in people's minds -- while products can be functional or not, brands can be expressive, compassionate, funny, edgy, entertaining or trendy. The role of advertising has been to help a brand define and maintain its position in culture, most recently through message delivery in mass media. But today, when the brand can no longer simply define and distribute a message, what is the role of advertising?
I would argue that for marketers, finding a way to interact with consumer and strengthen brand perception is as important as ever. In fact, as production of perfectly functional, and higher and higher quality substitutes continues, it is a brand's perception by consumers that protects its economic value.
But it's not enough in today's media landscape to tell people what your brand values are merely by broadcasting them. Marketers must find a way to allow people to experience and share a brand's values. Brands found a way, through advertising, to be a part of people's cultural experience using broadcast media. The task is the same for social media, and it is an important one.
It is a brand's job to allow people to express themselves and to help people make purchase decisions in a world with endless selections. It is advertising's job to help shape a brand's story.
The form advertising takes to maintain relevance in media's latest evolution, has yet to be totally unlocked. And it may be that advertising makes up a smaller share of the media mix or (shockingly) a larger share, given that advertising's new role will be to create conversations, which can drive product insights, which can lead to maintaining a leadership position in product innovation.
It may be that the lines separating advertising, research and other marketing functions will simply blur, and elements of each be present in all brand communications. "Why" is always a good question to ask before starting any marketing or advertising initiative -- but how honest are we with our answers?
Why advertise at all? Drop me a line on twitter @ www.twitter.com/joemarchese and leave a comment on this post to keep the dialogue going.
Joe, I struggle with the notions that "it is a brand's job to allow people to express themselves and to help people make purchase decisions in a world with endless selections", and "it's advertising's job to help shape a brand's story".
That's part of the job, but it's the esoteric tip of the practical iceberg. At the most basic, practical level, the question of "Why Advertise At All? is that without it manufacturers can't generate the awareness, preference, purchase, trial and loyalty that they need to remain in business.
While the internet and social media are powerful parts of any marketing mix, on their own they can't deliver what a mass consumer marketer needs: an engaged audience of sufficient scale to drive fast turns at mass retail.
For more on this, read my guest blog on Danny Brown's site: http://dannybrown.me/2009/03/12/the-continuum-theory-of-social-media/
I will, however, readily agree that "the lines separating advertising, research and other marketing functions will simply blur, and elements of each be present in all brand communications."
That's already happening, whether the owners of the individual departments or fighting it or embracing it.
Digital, inescapably, makes things blurry.
If a client is seriously asking why advertising/marketing/PR, it just may be the opportunity to get out of a unproductive relationship and it may be the first clue of how hard it will be to get paid.
Tom makes the point I thought of when reading this - advertising is less about trying to sell at a certain price, and more often about awareness and market position. Coke is not trying to sell a can for a buck. It's trying to be cool and associate with sports and stars, so young people want to buy it. Or trying to remind older people of their childhood, or its taste.
I also agree about the line blurring with advertising and other marketing functions. Going a step further, the line will start to blur between advertising and content. To achieve its goals, marketing campaigns will need to become entertaining. In a fight against DVR and attention for online multi-taskers, ads must be compelling or nobody will watch.
Social network interaction continues to reshape today's marketing messages - recently I purchased a product I'd never heard of before but one recommended by a trusted individual in my social network - it's highly unlikely that I would have ever been aware of this brand via traditional advertising. A sale resulted without traditional marketing - hard to beat WOMM - Word of Mouth Marketing enabled by social networks
One of the best examples of brand differentiation in this respect is RedBull. The "No Name" energy drink today is just a good a quality product as RedBull, but RedBull consumers are happy to pay 4X to price for RedBull because they really identify with the brands values.
As advertising moves away from one way communication towards 2 way dialog, I expect RedBull will continue to innovate ways to create brand value in a relatively commoditised field.
Joe,
I think "Why Advertise at All" is a valid question because traditional advertising rarely was able to measure ROI, web 1.0 did a little better, and now that we're moving into conversational marketing, probably less so again. Plus most clients are terrified and not familiar with social. In addition, there is a huge unspoken initiative to keep those billions of dollars in traditional advertising at the risk of providing clients with beneficial brand awareness. There's too many livelihoods in traditional at stake between the agencies, media, and network organizations. Overall it can work if done the right way by putting the client and their consumers first and customizing a solution and for the right reasons. You last line speaks to this.
Emerson summed up your second paragraph with the statement, "What you are shouts so loudly I cannot hear what you are saying." A brand is a promise and a promise cannot be hidden indefinitely. It doesn't matter how good your "creative" is, sooner or later, the people find out the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes, and once they do, nothing you can say will change their perception of the "promise."
Fact is, there *are* people who know what advertising does. They work in the field of "Direct." And, though I don't know who said it, I am fond of the statement: "The purpose of advertising is to sell. It has no other function worthy of discussion." And finally, Raymond Chandler's remark after doing time in this business: "Chess is as great a waste of human intelligence as you will ever find outside of an advertising agency."
One of the best examples of brand differentiation in this respect is RedBull. The "No Name" energy drink today is just a good a quality product as RedBull, but RedBull consumers are happy to pay 4X to price for RedBull because they really identify with the brands values.
<a href="http://www.legalx.net/directory/category/attorneys">Attorneys</a>
One of the best examples of brand differentiation in this respect is RedBull. The "No Name" energy drink today is just a good a quality product as RedBull, but RedBull consumers are happy to pay 4X to price for RedBull because they really identify with the brands values.
[url=http://www.legalx.net/directory/category/attorneys]Attorneys[url]
<<But it's not enough in today's media landscape to tell people what your brand values are merely by broadcasting them. Marketers must find a way to allow people to experience and share a brand's values.>>
Hasn't this ALWAYS been the case? That's sure how I learned it in Marketing 101.
@Barth - how exactly did you "share and experience" television comercials in your marketing 101 class? I am sure brands always wanted people to interact with their brands and have first hand experiences, but not as sure that through media this has ever been possible before, never the less required.
@Mike Red Bull is a perfect example.
@Tom I don't disagree, but the question is will there be a different share of awareness, preference, purchase and trial that will be driven through what people have considered "advertising", or will advertising take a new form but maintain it's current role.
Joe -- great article.
I am very tired of folks saying that advertising is dying, adds no value and is intrusive. The advertising/marketing ecosystem is certainly evolving, not dying and if done right can add value to the consumer and not be annoying.
Cheers
@Joe -- I've always approached advertising as part of a larger whole. Taken individually, I'll admit that a single TV spot normally doesn't provide its own feedback loop. But used as part of a larger integrated strategy, opportunities for audience interaction, feedback and involvement can be and frequently are included.
Going about building a brand by simply running some ads is folly on multiple fronts. Brands are EXPERIENCED. Yes, the social media present opportunities for audience interaction and involvement in a way that TV spots don't. But the best brand strategies involve advertising AND experiential components, whether social media are involved or not.