![]() | ![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
My profile........My blog........My articles........My galleries........License my content........
Like this story?
This author is available |
I’ve noticed an interesting dichotomy in the marketplace recently. When businesses talk about advertising, there are those who complain about the ineffectiveness, lack of measurable results, intrusive media, and extraordinary barrier to entry. On the other hand, there are those who point to relatively recent, creatively implemented methods that are quantifiable, relatively passive, and affordable.
Some marketers seem to “get it.” They see the modal shift, embrace new ideas and techniques, and readily evaluate their success in terms of consumer experience. They understand our frustration with constant advertising and try to strike a balance, to somehow link the message to benefits, and deliver it effectively, without undue intrusion on our personal lives.
Then there are the die-hard, mass-media types, those who seem to think they can continue to interrupt people's lives with commercial, virtually at will. They see no reason not to use the methods they've used for decades, only more of it, backed with more money and massive bandwidth. Perhaps they are heavily invested in these values. More likely, they sincerely believe what worked in years past will work again and again, and even better bigger resources behind it. Whatever their motives, there is a clear disconnect between what advertisers are doing and what audiences demand.
Commercial-Free Television
Commercial-Free Radio
Commercial-Free Internet News
Newspaper Advertisers Defecting to the Web
Print Newspapers Losing Subscribers
Web Surfers Don’t Want Your Ads
Even Subscription Email Gets Dumped
Cold Calling Is Dead, Part 1
Cold Calling Is Dead, Part 2
These are only some examples of consumers taking control over the advertising that reaches them. They’re demanding less intrusion and more control; less glitz, more substance; less special effects, more clearly defined benefits.
You might be surprised, given my career as a marketer, that I am squarely in the consumers’ corner in matters of personal privacy and choice. In fact, a primary reason for my decision to build a new marketing agency was my observation of emerging trends years ago. I observed the very real adversarial relationship between clients and agencies, and conflict between profits and service. I saw agencies with a culture built on billing excess hours, regardless of the clients’ actual project needs. I saw the power weilded by agency executives over their clients. To our amazement, my colleagues and I had become part of a racket that clashed with our values. We were surprised to find we identified more with consumers than with the agencies and clients for whom we worked.
We decided to form our own agency, one with values that contrasted sharply with those we were working under. In our new agency, we always bill services by the project, so that clients are in control of their costs. We create advertising that aspires to the highest ideals of design and production, but we will not distort or exaggerate, or substitute lies for real value. We advocate for consumer privacy and choice, supporting their right to control the messages that reach them. Quite simply, we consider every stakeholder (not just shareholders) when we do business—it’s not merely company policy; it’s who we are.
What about you? As a consumer, how do you exercise control over the advertising that hits you every day? And for you business people out there, how do you feel about the advertising that represents your company? Post a comment, or drop me a line and let me know. (Trade names mentioned are for reference only and are property of their respective owners.) |
DeBellis Communications ....... Leadership ....... About ....... Colophon ....... Contact










