Just thought I would take another quick look at that fauxionary idea about how Brands should now be operating as media companies and what it means for Brands in an increasingly mobile world.
As I have said before Brands always were and always will be in the media business. However the only difference today perhaps is the simple fact this old media reality has become a new media hyper-realty simply because on the web Brands no longer need the help of intermediaries to help them deliver the message to their customers.
We know that Brands have failed to comprehend this quantum shift in how the media game is played online simply because they continue to place online bets around huge aggregations of traffic with leading online destinations like Facebook and Google.
The question the leading Brands they face today isn’t really about “should we become a media company?” it is “what are the lessons we can learn from the media?” and more specifically “what works online today?”
One of the better “what works for old media in a new media world” presentations I have reviewed recently is this one published a week ago on collaborative Media.
The first dozen or so pages succinctly demonstrate what is in the head space of media executives around the world today.
The simple idea that while the old world was closed and standalone the new world is now open and connected.
I have said before that the challenges facing the media and advertising industries online are largely symbiotic. This of course, at least at first glance, would appear to be contrary to the argument that the advertiser no longer requires intermediaries to assist them in the broadcasting of their message. The symbiotic nature of the two industries centres around the fact both industries are in the business of profiting either directly or indirectly from the creative activity of constructing and broadcasting messages.
They are in the business of constructing meaning in the marketplace. The challenge they face online is of course in a media landscape constructed entirely of a network of databases they are now operating in an environment where the message no longer has meaning.
The challenge then for both Media and Brands is to discover what actually does provide meaning online.
The harsh reality is that 15 years into the trying to come to terms with the challenge very few media outlets or their advertisers have come to terms with even defining the challenge, never mind finding any workable solutions. Close your eyes and think of the web and you do not see the success of the old expressed in the new. Your mind wanders to new more successful players. You think of Google, Amazon, Facebook and eBay and you immediately see just how big the challenge is for the old ways of media and advertising. Then you wonder: Can they ever bridge the ever-widening chasm and the disconnect between the old (Closed and Standalone) and the new (Open and Connected)?
In retrospect you may wonder if the industry has been in denial or was it simply a complete failure of the imagination?
Despite all the So.Me hype in the marketplace today it would appear to be self-evident that if Brands are to evolve and prosper – online at least – they don’t need to become media properties they need to become software and/or telecommunications properties. They need to start designing and implementing campaigns that look and feel like cutting edge So.Me and Mobile start-ups.
Of course this message is not new. You would have heard it in the late 1990′s when eBusiness was the buzz word. The key point is that 10 to 15 years on it is now becoming apparent that very few if any of the global Brands have figured out how to make this work for them.
Why? because if they had they wouldn’t be in the business of chasing expressions or impressions. They would however understand implicitly that Brands no longer need intermediaries (e.g. Media, Telcos or Software) between them and the customer. They would also embraced the “Browse with us, Buy from Us” mantra that drives commercial success online, and equally importantly they ould have recognised by now that the success online is really all about providing a better Crtl OCVZXS experience than any of your competitors.
10 to 15 years on and the big difference today of course is the barriers to entry are negligible. The only real barrier to entry is the industry mind-set that prevents advertisers making the quantum leap in understanding that today investing in a technology start-up and creating a successful online advertising campaign amount to one of the same thing.
Take a look across the Freemium landscape and there is any number of branding opportunities in play for the creative advertiser. Why? because if you examine the fledgling business models of the vast majority of these start-ups you don’t have to look very hard to discover that most of them are not in the business of solving problems in the market. They are in the main just cheap and largely unimaginative software offerings designed to deliver to the market a quick “zeitgeist fix”. In reality they are little more than short-term “interactive marketing campaigns” and “investor hooks” primarily designed to attract attention to themselves.
They are in effect “interactive commercials” in search of a revenue stream and/or a buyer with deep pockets… and this is why, I would suggest, Brands can learn so much about how to build an online Brand from all those innovative start-ups hunting and farming for eyeballs on the web and on the mobile phones today.
Put very simply, if they are going to spend money advertising online, they should be thinking along the lines of launching engaging campaigns based around funding “disruptive start-ups” rather than wasting money buying disengaged eyeballs from online media aggregators, search engines and social media platforms.
Posted on April 27, 2011
0