I just happened upon an article that is not only written by a company whose logo bears a striking resemblance to a slice of our own, but contains some well articulated truths about one of the ways marketing is being affected by the digital cultural shift we find ourselves in.
In the recent past, as the article suggests, it was the norm for marketers to tell consumers stories about themselves. When life was about keeping up with the Jones's, telling us that the Jones's want what they sold and we should, too, was basically enough. But, as the article asserts, we are increasingly less concerned with what the masses have and more concerned with niche products and services that fit our unique wants. This shift is powerfully supported by our present ability to get information about niche interests and needs like never before, via the Internet. Within the vast community of the World Wide Web, we find others using the same products or services we're interested in, so we can find out about them and research them in unprecedented ways. But as we've turned to virtual communities for information about these niche interests, we've come to trust them immensely, often more than the marketers themselves. I'm pretty sure I've blogged here before about the rising percentage of consumers who consistently research significant purchases online instead of in person — like reading several user reviews of a Toyota Camry before ever considering an actual test drive. Thus, when we hear advertising messages from marketers, our instinct is increasingly to go corroborate what we've heard with stories from consumers like us. The article puts it pretty well:
As more brands (have to) go niche and therefore tell stories that aren't known to the masses, and as experiences and non-consumption-related expenditures take over from physical (and more visible) status symbols, consumers will increasingly have to tell each other stories to achieve a status dividend from their purchases. Expect a shift from brands telling a story, to brands helping consumers tell status-yielding stories to other consumers.
What a fascinating thing to say: "Expect a shift... to brands helping consumers tell status-yielding stories to other consumers." But I'd argue the shift isn't just in who's delivering the message, but it's also in the content of the message itself. As consumers, we're moving from a sales-pitch mentality to a narrative mentality. So if you're an awesome Milwaukee ad agency like Meyer & Wallis, you see double opportunity here. I'll explain.
First, we excel at telling stories. That's what much of the best advertising has always done — given the consumer a narrative picture of what their world would be like with you in it. I'd argue that, given our vast experience and exemplary creative department, we get this better than virtually any full service advertising agency our size.
But second, our understanding of interactive media and online advertising strategies are second to none. Our VP of Interactive is one of the most forward thinkers when it comes to utilizing digital media, and I'm not just talking about websites. Several of our recent campaigns demonstrate there are plenty of ways to use digital media to get your message out, including, in more than one instance, giving consumers a chance to tell their stories on behalf of clients.
And when these two competencies are married into one integrated campaign, our results are consistently remarkable and measurable.
So check out the article linked above. The trend they're talking about is very real. If you have the slightest suspicion that your ad agency doesn't get how to use digital media for all it's worth, maybe you should give us a call.
Posted by: Mark on Sunday, January 18, 2009
Dear Content Correspondent, You make some good points stimulated from the Trend Watching article you reference in this blog. The trend to brands helping consumers tell 'status-yielding' stories makes a lot of sense in the marketplace, even on a personal level. For example, last week I emailed a few of my marketing colleagues to check out my recent discovery of a Milwaukee agency through an adword campaign. I mentioned I was impressed with the blog articles and caliber of writing, and even posted a response to the Jan 5 article. Here was a consumer (me) mentioning in a positive (status-yielding) way about an agency (your brand) to my social network community. My friends, naturally, checked out your site. Some of the feedback: "Clean graphics, interesting flash intro, stimulating articles, where's your blog response to the article?" I couldn't answer the last question. Perhaps my blog comment was vetted by a committee and deemed inappropriate. Maybe the content manager thought it spammy. Perhaps it takes a few weeks before comments are posted. Don't know. Now comes the interesting part. My 'community' started talking about this issue, which made for some interesting discussions on our blogs. E.g. Is a corporate blog a monologue or a dialogue, and does it really matter. Do we create/respond to blogs because of vanity? Is blogging merely a way to build links? If we claim to have an understanding of interactive, and building online communities, how do we prove it? As you might expect, Meyer and Wallis figured prominently in the discussion. So thank you for germinating the seed. May I suggest, as a future topic, a discussion on the purpose and value of online communities and company blogs. I look forward to joining the discussion. So does the community. A faithful reader, Mark