I’m still annoyed at
having read an article posted by one of the new-school marketing gurus who keep discovering what they think are new principles and trashing old ones.
In a lengthy sales pitch
for his instructional course in “inbound marketing,” this one dismisses
traditional advertising as “crap,” and “yelling at the customers.” Would that David Ogilvy were around to wash
this puppy’s mouth out with soap! In other places I’ve seen advertising
called other uncomplimentary things, including “dead.”
The reason is that cool
marketers today don’t advertise to prospective customers; they “engage” with
them. This involves the popular “content
marketing” and (according to the writer cited above) its huskier cousin, “inbound
marketing.” Both may make use of
“storytelling.”
In theory, the “content”
thus provided is of such value to the prospect that he or she becomes a fan of the organization
and, it’s hoped, eventually buys from it and even proselytizes for it. .It’s
all laid out in a neat schedule, with acronyms for the stages: “Top Of
Funnel” to “Call To Action.” Ideally, the
process will be so customer-oriented that if your competitor has “content” that
supplements your own, you'll refer readers to that competitor’s site. The
precedent cited is the instance in “Miracle On 34th Street” where,
in the original version, Macy’s does tell Gimbel’s. It’s a
children’s movie.
All of it implies a
long-range campaign, and one capable of posting information readers will
continue to find valuable over that long range. You’ve probably noticed (clears throat discreetly) that with the exception of this blog, not a lot of the
stuff on the Internet meets that standard.
There’s a scenario that
plays out in my mind and intrigues the hell out of me: Some old-school marketer
advertising the benefits of using his product (“yelling at the customers” -- remember? ) instead of “engaging”
with them, swoops in, asks for the order like we used to do before advertising
died -- and makes the sale, while the Thought Leaders are still cozening their
readers. Wouldn’t that be fun? I like to think David Ogilvy would have approved.
[Awful lot of quote
marks for a short piece, but I can't help myself; it's hard to be serious about some of this
stuff.]
