by mark June 20th, 2008
in Daily Thoughts.
So far I’ve heard from three readers in response to my last post/poll. Not exactly a groundswell of support, but heartfelt all the same. Consensus would seem to be, as Pam Morrell put it: “If you are talking to ad creatives like me, you are preaching to the already converted.” (Already converted and not too inclined to put much in the collection plate, I might add.) But then she goes on to say: “I wish you could infiltrate the ranks of the client community.” (From your lips to God’s ear, Pam, as long as I don’t have to dress the way they do.)
Gloria Quigley was kind enough to pass along this definition of quixotic: “caught up in the romance of noble deeds and the pursuit of unreachable goals; idealistic without regard to practicality.” So, in other words, I’m trying to throw horseshoes with my tongue is what I believe Gloria is trying to tell me. However, she also made reference to an article in People magazine she’d read a while back reporting on a study that showed “people who don’t have a clue don’t have a clue that they don’t have a clue.” Not what this particular Professor Plum was hoping to hear, but probably an accurate assessment of at least some portion of the advertising/marketing community.
And Jim Bosha went so far as to post his rather post-Apocalyptic take on things here where you can read it at your leisure.
So where do I come out? Right now, I’m just hoping the volume of e-mail cures me of this tendency to act like CNN, where the length of the report is often inversely proportionate to the amount of news contained therein.
by mark June 16th, 2008
in Daily Thoughts.
Back when I was finishing college in San Francisco and trying to figure out what exactly one was supposed to do with a BFA (besides turning it into an MFA), I used to take these endless walks and would occasionally find myself in a little tunnel that ran between the Marina district and the beach. A tunnel I sometimes discovered was also occupied by a young violinist whose musical selections and skill combined with that chamber’s unnatural acoustics to produce a hauntingly beautiful effect. Now, since the open violin case at her feet never contained more than MUNI fare and I was often the only other person in the tunnel with her, I have to assume she wasn’t performing for the money or the crowds. It was just a nice place to practice, I guess, and obviously something she loved doing.
Well, (and I’m sure you could see this coming from a mile off), I’m beginning to think I may be just like that girl in the tunnel. I love doing this, too. Not for the money, that’s for sure. Or to gather a crowd. But I do wonder if it’s serving any other purpose besides my own enjoyment. Initially, I hoped it might supply ammunition that people could use to persuade recalcitrant clients to accept more extraordinary advertising. Or maybe persuade more agencies to do advertising of that caliber to begin with. And perhaps serve as a general reminder that the principles of persuasive communication haven’t dramatically changed in the last 10,000 years, never mind since the Internet burst upon the scene. Continue reading ‘“Girl In A Tunnel”’
by mark June 2nd, 2008
in Daily Thoughts.
Some droll economist (an admittedly rare combination) once made the observation that statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is intriguing, but what they conceal is vital. Which is exactly how I felt about a New York Times article I read a few weeks ago. Why will become obvious momentarily, but before I get into that I should probably remind any readers who aren’t already aware of it that I’ve had serious reservations about the Internet’s value as a vehicle for extraordinary advertising for some time now. Yet I’ve been singularly unsuccessful in coming up with any statistical evidence to support this concern. Driven by the growth of search advertising–which has about as much to do with extraordinary advertising as a Yellow Pages campaign–the Internet has persisted in appearing to be the veritable Golconda of ad venues that so many clients think it is (or fervently wish it would be).
So you can imagine the look on my face when I turned to the Business Day section of the Times on Monday, May 19th, and saw this headline: “Online Search Ads Faring Better Than Expensive Displays”, followed shortly thereafter by the statement: “While search advertising remains strong, there are signs that the growth in online advertising–particularly in more elaborate display ads–is slowing down. Mirabile dictu, says I, especially at the parade of statistics that came next: “The prices paid for online ads bought through ad networks dropped 23 percent from March to April, according to PubMatic, an advertising-technology company in Palo Alto, CA that runs an online pricing index.” Continue reading ‘Beats A Maillot I Guess’
