Search results matching tag 'accountability'

Working in digital media

2627152 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:55:11 GMT

The demand for digital skills and roles in the media remains high - unlike other disciplines - print for example!

And there's lots of people out there keen to find out how to get their foot in the virtual door yet are still struggling.

So how can you improve your chances?

I'd say making sure your online reputation is clean is very important. Don't be leaving a snail trail of negativity across the net that employers can use against you.

Also, do you have a presense online? To prove you want to be a part of and belong to the digital media industry, you should be active and have a presence on the net.

I'm not talking expensive websites but certainly blogs, interesting and relevant Twitter accounts, be active in the forums.

A panel of creative executives and recruitment specialists working in digital media will be joining the Guardian Careers forums this Thursday, 1-4pm

Question the experts here: http://tiny.cc/BIDUe

Re: The attraction of The Internet and Social Media like Twitter ...

1792681 — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:14:22 GMT

mjam, I have come lately, being an older than you ad man,to accept that the Internet is a most exciting medium, some aspect of it works and others don't, I have been developing networking on twitter and frankly I feel that it is losing its' appeal, however there are far deeper problems for the marketing community, these are:

Just what is the problem with Social Media?

Once “The Ad Man” gatecrashes the party and corporate marketers are inevitably a long way down the adoption curve – the kudos rapidly evaporates.
This explains why the assumed valuations of social media companies are often built on greater financial chicanery that Bernie Madoff’s tax return.
In to-day’s market whatever supposed “next big thing” our digital culture favors in any moment faces an ever more accelerated journey to oblivion!

Because ad agencies still don’t understand it – we will not take delivery of your commercial messages – we never have and never will!

However we have created programs where your advertisement becomes a valuable source of information – with surprising ROI results - & there’s more.

Read "Television Killed Advertising" it will show you how advertising has failed us and more...much more.

Re: Task no 1. For business: Reinvent Advertising & Marketing!

1792681 — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 08:33:02 GMT

Thanks for the response and you have raised a very interesting point. And this is the fact that, in my opinion,creativity will be the death of advertising agencies in the near future, the quest for creativity has led ad agencies up the wrong path. Again, in my opinion, creativity is NOT the criterian for the success, or otherwise, of an advertising campaign.

Again, in my opinion, a better understanding of the word "communication" would have served the advertising world far better! I can guarantee that armed with a better understanding of the process of communication you can, today, guarantee clients that you can halve their marketing budgets and be 50% more effective plus a whole lot more!

I feel that there is an air of desperation in the rush to Web 2.0, the fact is that "Old" Media could be made far more effective, with far less clutter and with total accountability. Unless agencies come to grips with the word "communication" advertising on the Social Media (or wherever) will become as discredited as commercial television is today!

Re: The suits come to Social Media. Now that’s the kiss of death!

1792681 — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:56:28 GMT

Do your lips move when you read?

Have the courage of your convictions and give a name together with a photograph!

Task no 1. For business: Reinvent Advertising & Marketing!

1792681 — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:29:30 GMT

Hopefully lessons will been learnt from the financial crisis, do not try to rebuild business on the principle that Marketing & Advertising are always right!
The words "60% of all advertising, globally is wasted" were splashed yesterday across the marketing papers. This kind of unanimity in the trade press is not coincidental. And if the likes of Unilever persist in praising “Social Media” similar losses will still be shown in the years to come!
To have any hope of repairing the damage left behind by the highly dishonest and incompetent banks, big business must first convince the majority of the population that they are really capable of fixing the problems. Not only are we trapped in the worst recession in living memory. But behind all this lurks a horror even more shocking; the entire marketing/advertising-economic model of free enterprise, rugged individualism, creative advertising and marketing is broken beyond all hope of repair.
Marketing/Advertising on which the Western world built its seeming success seems to have completely broken down. How else can one describes a situation in which all of the country's main financial institutions and many of its biggest industrial companies are effectively bankrupt and on government life-support?
The crisis triggered by September's Credit Crisis appears to have discredited many of the assumptions on which our prosperity and democracy was founded. In 1989 the world, from China and Russia to South Africa, India and Brazil, concluded that there was no serious alternative to market forces as a means of organizing productive activity. In 2009 the whole world seems to have reached the opposite conclusion — that free markets and financial incentives together with marketing & advertising, lead even the richest and most sophisticated societies to disaster.
The question we must ask today is not whether Marketing & Advertising is too big or too small, but whether it works at all.
Undoubtedly the crisis could well be the cause of an idea whose time has come, for the new model of Marketing & Advertising that we must now invent. More generally, financial regulation and macroeconomic management will surely now recognize that naive theories about "efficient" advertising/ marketing and the highly dubious claim they spawned "advertising works" were a major cause of the entire financial disaster. It will still be capitalism, but Marketing/Advertising will not try to rebuild business on the principle that "marketing and advertising are always right".
Already it appears that the Advertising industry, ably supported by Marketing, is already placing their faith on so called “Social Media”. The Internet is NOT a medium conducive to effective, accountable, advertising.
This hysteria about Social Media again reflects the problems faced by Old Advertising & Old Media, a total lack of understanding as to the real meaning of the word “Communication”.
As to Unilever we have already offered Simon Clifts a free copy of our book “Television Killed Advertising” for there he will discover ways of saving a fortune in Marketing monies as well as to how he could advertising on the Internet and elsewhere most effectively! And by the way Simon the offer still stands!
Our TAG program with $10m of research behind it is the way forward, TAG creates a “Social Media for Business” where your customers willingly become the very center of your business with stunning ROI! Interested? Contact me on paul.ashby@yahoo.com

Re: Just what is the problem with Social Media?

1792681 — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:54:59 GMT

Hi Karl, upon re-reading your post I thought that we should perhaps have a "conversation" as I feel that we might have areas of mutual self-interest to explore. I'll start the ball rolling by including my email address here: paul.ashby@yahoo.com I really look forward to "talking" with you. We have a proven concept that is media neutral that does all the things you set out above: "..if brands were to listen to conversations..." excellent and boy does it work!

Regards

Paul

Re: Just what is the problem with Social Media?

1792681 — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:13:09 GMT

Karl thank you for responding, I really feel that this subject needs to be discussed, I now see that Unilever is coming over to the side of "Social Media", obviously some glib fancy talking New Media guy has done a hell of a selling job...based on NOTHING!

The suits come to Social Media. Now that’s the kiss of death!
Advertising Agencies, having all but destroyed a perfectly good Old Media are set to do the same with Social Media!
In the fickle world of online chatter, yesterday’s achingly fashionable meeting points are rapidly acquiring the appearance of the Royal Bank of Scotland’s’ headquarters.
Already Twitter, becoming bogged down with fake PR tweets as well as fake advertising tweets, so much so that already the kids dismiss it as tired! And are moving on.
As soon as the buzz of innovation starts to fade the “cool” but influential people move on quicker than you can send a tweet.
Take Commercial Television,agencies were salivating at the prospect of commercial television and couldn't wait to get in on the act! Advertising Agencies are loath to change a medium that is to them, a money-spinner. Despite the fact that it was non-accountable.
And now Agencies are rushing onto Social Media ignoring the fact that, as in the past, people don’t want their advertising in whatever form. The difference here is that they can easily move away from advertising, you have only to look at the experience of Second Life, that was to be advertising’s salvation. That’s why the early adopters have moved on! And be warned, they still don't know how to monitize the Internet..but we do!
It's all in my book "Television Killed Advertising" plus how clients can make their own "Social Media" environment and become very successful on the Internet. Together with the fact that you learn the real meaning of the word "communication".

Re: RE: Understanding why we shouldn't advertising on the Web!

1792681 — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:49:41 GMT

Thanks for the response and yes I agree. The question of how effective any advertising is should be paramount. My regret with this new medium is that, whilst it had the opportunity to avoid the traps of conventional media, it has become like the rest where there is little or no accountability of advertising or measure of effectiveness. And we all know there have been many questions raised concerning click through and the manipulation of such.

I do not deny that there are many niche websites that work well and of course the web and the opportunities it affords is a long term delivery vehicle that will undoubtedly outlive and outgrow the fading media norms. However, my concern is that all media, Broadcast TV, Web, Newspapers and Magazines, can all be made highly effective if only agencies and the clients, who are paying, really understood the meaning of "communication".

Having said this, watch this space because a new communications technique is about to do just that. It will be accountable and independent research will determine just how effective it is in real terms, an impressive ROI.

I am publishing a book towards the end of this month titled "Television Killed Advertising". It details where, in my opinion, the advertising industry has gone wrong together with many examples as to the efficiency and efficacy of advertising with communication included. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned therein, that will ensure the Web does not fall into the same decline.

Brands are looking more and more at Live Brand Experiences as it is the leading platform to connect directly with consumers

1914250 — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 21:54:50 GMT

Over the next few years brands will up their marketing spend on experiential marketing due to the mass audiences declining to respond to TV advertising. Digital is always on the rise due to new technology, digital plays a significant role in the live brand experience as it amplifies further channels which will gain maximum reach for campaigns. What are your thoughts about the above integration and what the future holds? Marvin

BARB research...totally meaningless?

1792681 — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 16:13:05 GMT

Pigs might fly!

Wow are the powers that be in the Television broadcast industry, regressing? It is sad to witness the delight they evidence when some totally meaningless research comes out reflecting, or rather appearing to, confirm increased TV viewing and, more importantly, increases in the number of ads watched as per the latest offering from BARB.

Are they really expecting us to waste even more money on a medium that bases its very existence on the highly questionable research issued by BARB?

The key surely, is what viewers do once they see a marketer's advertisement. Anyone can add up every time a screen is on and do a head count of how many people are around but that doesn't constitute a viewer and it certainly doesn't constitute a viewer who can then be measured to see if their viewing behaviour correlates to sales.

One idea that could save the day, is measuring viewer behaviour over a long period of time. By monitoring viewers with hand-held devices that track their consumption of content, buyers and sellers might have a more reliable picture of how and when a message makes an impression.

However, some agencies still adopt the mantra that Clients need to back off the "quantify everything" and accept that intuition and gut feeling are a form of measurement, too. Talentless Advertising!

Glaciers are melting more speedily than the ability of advertising to become accountable. However, we live in hope, as some within the advertising industry admit that new models of marketing communications are needed. According to Laura Desmond, world-wide C.E.O. of Starcom MediaVest Group: "We already know consumers behave differently when interacting with different media, so we have to move away from old models."

In the past British advertising was based on protecting and looking after Client interests as well as their own. Advertising agencies should not be ashamed to return to these principals.

Consumers are complex. Therefore, persuading said consumers to do things is complicated involving psychology, neuroscience, discrete choice and much more if you want customers to trust and value your messages.

And most certainly we have to look at these highly questionable BARB figures and ask ourselves, why do we still rely on these highly questionable research statements?