January 1, 2006

disrupt or die

bizcard9876.png
A suc­cess­ful adver­ti­sing crea­tive asked me this ques­tion a few months ago:

TV clearly is not the magic bullet it once was for adver­ti­sers. It’s been on the wane for quite some time now.
And people’s atten­tion is splin­te­ring in many dif­fe­rent direc­tions. The online world being the big­gest bene­fi­ciary of BIG TV’s demise. No argu­ment there. But as an award-winning Super­bowl ad wri­ting type, can someone tell me how blog­ging spe­ci­fi­cally could help let’s say, the likes of Bud­wei­ser who need to reach a mass audience? 

My res­ponse at the time (to the industry as a whole, not to him per se) was my usual, “Have a nice death, Dino­saur”.
But having some time to think about it, here’s another thought.
As I’ve said before, in terms of mar­ke­ting, blogs are not selling chan­nels, they are dis­rup­tion chan­nels.
And when I talk about dis­rup­tion, I’m tal­king about the dis­rup­tion of the com­pany, not the dis­rup­tion of the poten­tial cus­to­mers’ purcha­sing beha­vior.
So to Madi­son Ave­nue, let me ask the ques­tion:
So you want to build a blog for your client. What part of their com­pany are you trying to dis­rupt? And what makes you think they’re going to let you?
If you don’t know the ans­wer, your client doesn’t need you to build them a blog.
[UPDATE:] Euan Sem­ple adds a thought:

What Hugh says applies just as much IMHO to the use of blogs inside orga­ni­sa­tions. If you don’t face dis­rup­tion, don’t see the bene­fits of dis­rup­tion or don’t think you can handle dis­rup­tion then don’t go near social com­pu­ting tools in your busi­ness.
I have had a num­ber of con­ver­sa­tions recently with peo­ple along the lines of “Why should we get into social com­pu­ting when we already know what we do, know what needs to be done and know how to do it”. I don’t know what world they are living in but it is cer­tainly one which I have never experienced.

11 Responses to “disrupt or die”

  1. Chan­ging times?

    From Hugh, gapingvoid.com — dis­rupt or die,
    Hugh… when I talk about dis­rup­tion, I’m tal­king about the dis­rup­tion
    of the com­pany, not the dis­rup­tion of the poten­tial cus­to­mers’
    purcha­sing behavior.

  2. The Obvious? says:

    Dis­rupt or Die

    Hugh Mac­leod has a great post today about mar­ke­ting using blogs: As I’ve said before, in terms of mar­ke­ting, blogs are not selling chan­nels, they are dis­rup­tion chan­nels. And when I talk about dis­rup­tion, I’m tal­king about the dis­rup­tion of

  3. john says:

    Does Bud­wei­ser need to reach a mass audience (except to jus­tify itself to its major trade cus­to­mers)?
    Or does it need to reach a series of sma­ller audien­ces (one of which might be its trade customers)?

  4. Not trying to be con­trary, but TV vie­wing figu­res for 2005 appear to be actually on the up, and con­si­de­rably so.
    No link to online sour­ces (and too lazy right now to dig), this is info given to me by a media buyer acquain­tance. And no, he doesn’t make any money off fee­ding me misin­for­ma­tion. :)

  5. David Burn says:

    You hel­ped dou­ble Stormhoek’s sales by going to the blog. Yet, blogs aren’t sales chan­nels. I’m confused.

  6. hugh macleod says:

    Dave, advertising’s main pro­blem is that it is both expen­sive and anno­ying. And get­ting worse on both fronts.
    Sure, folk in the biz can argue that there are little niches where that is not the case, but for the most part the industry is a dis­grace to chi­valry.
    Andreas, just because peo­ple are watching more TV doesn’t mean Madi­son Avenue’s busi­ness models are suc­king less.
    Can you say Tivo?

  7. Can you say Goo­gle and SEM?

  8. Aye Hugh, I agree with you and the suc­king busi­ness model. As I’ve said, I am not trying to be con­trary.
    I’m just saying that the man­tra ‘TV is on it’s way out’ doesn’t appear to be hol­ding water any­more. The net­works had some con­si­de­ra­ble suc­ces­ses with a cou­ple of water coo­ler shows last year. ‘Lost’ comes to mind, ‘Des­pe­rate Hou­se­wi­ves’ is another. The result? Vie­wer figu­res on the rise — and not every­body has a TIVO, espe­cially outside the US.
    TV and the online world serve two dif­fe­rent pur­po­ses. When I want to be enter­tai­ned without inte­rac­tion then TV is still the way to go. And watching a cou­ple of com­mer­cials is, for most vie­wers, a fair price to pay. Allows for a bath­room break, to get another beer from the fridge. As long as we have a TV industry that is paid for by adver­ti­sing dollars we’ll have Madi­son Ave­nue pushing com­mer­cials.
    My own com­pany is build around a dif­fe­rent busi­ness model. We charge for the idea, not a 15% com­mis­sion on the media buy. We do that because it allows us to do two things: We give value to ideas. and we can be impartial.

  9. alannah says:

    Umm, as an Aus­tra­lian, I would like to ask “What’s a Tivo?”.
    At least I know what a blog is. There’s hope yet.

  10. Alan­nah: Tivo is a ser­vice that lets you save shows to your Tivo pla­yer (a per­so­nal video recor­der with a large hard drive), then replay them later. The option of zap­ping com­mer­cials auto­ma­ti­cally makes Tivo an ad killer. This dif­fers from the VCR in ease of use, abi­lity to auto­mate some func­tions, and volume of shows you can copy. We don’t have it in Canada, but I hear a lot about it from Ame­ri­can friends, etc.

  11. Neal Romanek says:

    “in terms of mar­ke­ting, blogs are not selling chan­nels, they are dis­rup­tion chan­nels”
    This makes the hairs on the back of my neck do a little dance!
    Thank you!