It’s a curious thing that whereas many media people of my generation find it essential to learn as much as we can about the digital world, many digital natives currently populating the media world do not seem to consider it in any way relevant to learn anything from or about the past.
Every so often I feel the need to remind you why this is called The Cog Blog. Although I do use cogs on this site as an illustration of what happens when you “join the dots” in thinking, more relevantly perhaps Cog stands for Cynical Old Git; and it’s certainly true that over the years I have become more cynical than I used to be about the advertising and media businesses. It’s also true that I’m getting pretty old – at least by the standards of the advertising and media businesses.
The major benefit my advanced years brings (beyond increasingly finding carpet slippers and a pipe strangely attractive items) is experience; the sense that many of the concepts, the issues, the debates that occupy the pages of the trade press these days have indeed been there before.
It’s easy to say that each generation finds the past an irrelevance – but actually it isn’t true. When I was learning my trade in the old full service ad agencies I could have bored for England with my knowledge of the great men of the industry and the issues of the day. I could have told you all about Bill Bernbach and Rosser Reeves, David Ogilvy and Leo Burnett. I made it my business to understand what USP’s were all about, and I did my best to understand the theories of Simon Broadbent and John Philip Jones. Being interested in stuff outside of your particular job function wasn’t particularly unusual – there were groups to go to and conferences to attend. Nowadays too many groups and conferences are excuses for sales pitches by sponsors – which is why I generally don’t bother going.
Does this lack of interest in the past, this narrowness in thinking only about the immediate present matter? Well, when it comes to the core theories on how advertising works I think it does.
Nowadays there is an understandable interest in short-term advertising effects. Fair enough; times are hard, Boards demand results, and the digitization of media channels means that it is more possible than ever before to track results. Attention spans are short (and I’m talking about professional attention spans, not just how long the average consumer can focus on one thing before casting around for something on which to multi-task), and so as a result we expect the model to be spend the money, count the return.
But as those who’ve been around a bit know, brands aren’t built like that. Brands are built over time; in Jeremy Bullmore’s words, “people build brands as birds build nests, from scraps and straws we chance upon.” Some of those scraps are of course via short-term activities such as what used to be referred to as direct response ads, but to stretch Jeremy’s analogy to breaking point, it would be a pretty poor nest built only out of one size or one type of scrap.
Many people in advertising agencies understand this well and are well-versed in communicating the benefits to a business of long-term brand building. Yet it is fairly unusual to come across digital media agency managers well informed as to how different media strategies can help build healthy brands.
Certainly they can explain very well how digital works and what programmatic buying means (actually that’s a lie, no one can explain what “programmatic” means as it mutates to mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean). But they often struggle to understand the role that their particular specialism plays within what used to be called “the marketing mix.”
Many commentators, including this one, have pointed out that what consumers do and have always done is use a variety of channels and devices to fulfil different needs. So it is with communication planning – advertisers need and use a variety of channels and techniques to build their brands.
It would be smart of the digital generation to understand that this isn’t about throwing rocks at each other (“my channel’s bigger than your channel”) but rather it’s about collaborating and combining to meet the advertiser’s strategic objectives. And an understanding and appreciation of where we’ve come from can help when it comes to deciding where to go.
Brian Jacobs spent over 35 years in advertising, media and research agencies including spells atLeo Burnett (UK, EMEA, International Media Director), Carat International (Managing Director), Universal McCann (EMEA Director) and Millward Brown (EVP, Global Media). He has worked in the UK, EMEA and globally out of the USA. His experience covers shifts from full-service ad agencies to media agencies; from traditional single-commercial-channel TV to multi-faceted digital channels; and from media planning to multi-disciplinary communication planning. Brian can be reached at email@example.com.
Read all Brian Jacobs' MediaBizBloggers commentaries at The Cog Blog.
Check us out on Facebook at MediaBizBloggers.com
Follow our Twitter updates at @MediaBizBlogger
The opinions and points of view expressed in this commentary are exclusively the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of MediaBizBloggers.com management or associated bloggers. MediaBizBloggers is an open thought leadership platform and readers may share their comments and opinions in response to all commentaries.