Wednesday, September 10, 2008

OnlineSpin: What Does The Future Look Like? Or, What I Read On My Summer Vacation

Last week Cory wrote "The Music Industry And Digital Media Continue To Confuse Each Other."

Dave Allen wrote in response, "It seems simple to me. Music blogs are the new radio.

Record companies always gave away music via radio and terrestrial radio has always been free.

So if the labels provide a free MP3 for the fans to share, they are letting music fans and the web do the work for them just as radio has served them in the past.

Lil' Wayne is one example of an artist using the internet wisely, another is Santogold who pretty much had every track from her album released to the internet as remixes at least 6 months before she released her album...."

Richard Dysinger wrote, "So much to say so little time. The Music Industry basically screwed the pooch in its early confusion over the digital revolution.

It embraced digital when it meant bringing production costs down, but then reacted in horror when digital meant that the free reproduction and distribution of their product was easy.

Not sure what the solution would have looked like. Early adoption of a digital distribution strategy at a reasonable price point might have won the day, [or] adoption of a performance rights protocol to cover free digital downloads, [or] early unification of a digital format that might have created consumer acceptance.

Music has become such a tertiary part of our lives it is difficult for artists to claim the same importance as they did back in the '60s, '70s and even the 80s. Not sure what the new model is. Giving it away is not it unless you want to reduce musicians to amateur status. . .."

Wednesday, September 10, 2008
What Does The Future Look Like? Or, What I Read On My Summer Vacation
By Cory Treffiletti

This past Monday I had the pleasure of listening to a gentlemen named Jonathan Zittrain (author of a book called "The Future of the Internet: And How To Stop It") speak about his vision for the future. In listening to his conceptualizations, I focused on one component that was of interest to me in my marketing persona: that of the potential conflict facing marketers as they attempt to balance the two extremes of consumer behavior.


Of course I must caveat this point of view; it is rarely proper or effective to break the world into two extreme points of view and I'm not suggesting that Zittrain was doing so in his discussion. I am exaggerating to make a point. The world is not black and white, it is more closely representative of an infinite grey scale, but in order to see opportunities in the marketplace, I find it can be useful to simplify the world using this technique.

On one side of the equation lies the over-eager media audience, which engages with its passions in a participatory manner that borders on fanaticism -- but is skeptical in its views of all messaging pointed in its direction (let's call its members the "Participants"). This refers to Wikipedians and all forms of user-generated content contributors (bloggers, picture-posters, etc.) that create, distribute, police and maintain the content of the Internet. On the flip side of this coin we have average, every-day consumers, who are myopic in their focus as the direct result of a constant barrage and the desensitization of their attention span (let's call them the "Desensitized"). The Participants are the potential brand advocates if we can battle past their innate distrust and tap into their loyalties, while the Desensitized are some of our best consumers, if we could just find some way to break through the perimeter of their defenses.

The task for any true marketer is finding the way to do this -- and the answer seems to be in a number of ways other than standard advertising. For the Participants to trust a brand, the message must come from a peer or a colleague or someone they inherently trust. This is the area of social media and product placement. For the Desensitized to trust a brand, you need only demonstrate to them the value of your brand in a way that merges rhythmically with their attention (ever notice how, when you are in the market for a new car, you "notice" the car ads, but you don't notice them when you aren't). In the world of the Participant, word-of-mouth and implied endorsements are effective, whereas the Desensitized need to be in a similar-veined mindset for marketing effectiveness to be achieved.

In both of these models, there is a future where paid media is a secondary option for the conveyance of a message, and non-paid or distributed forms of media are more effective. Non-paid media is the typical term, but I've started referring to it as "distributed media": the use of marketing dollars to facilitate the distribution of content, and the implied endorsement that comes along with that relationship. Distributed media actually uses marketing dollars as a conduit and a means to an end, rather than as an interruption. In the traditional model, an ad is an interruption, but consumers are either distrustful of the message because of the interruption, or they don't notice it because they are numb to these interruptions. Behavioral targeting attempts to make the ad more resonant with the consumer, but it is still an interruption. What about using marketing dollars to create conduits for the distribution of content, and acquiring the implied endorsement of the audience during that process?

We see these models taking shape already in social media tools like Facebook and in the application space. Branded applications attempt to provide news, entertainment and other useful experience to the audience, in the hopes that the association with a positive experience will rub off on the brand. If consumers enjoy the experience, they tell other consumers and the message spreads. If they don't, then it stays still.

The concept is still young, and it may be an over-complication of a much simpler fact that many brands these days are finding ways to build their brands without spending against paid media, but it was an intriguing concept nonetheless. A friend of mine, Renny Gleeson, wrote an article about how  "Advertising is Dead" -- but that fact made him happy , and I tend to agree!

Advertising is dead, or at least becoming less important than strategic marketing. The easy way to build a brand was to buy an ad, but the more effective, and infinitely more interesting, way, is by balancing your knowledge of the behaviors of the audience you are targeting with a strategic way to distribute a message in a new and interesting fashion; hence, distributed media.

Check out Jonathan Zittrain's book, read Renny Gleeson's article, and make your own assumptions.

Cory is president and managing partner for Catalyst SF.

Online Spin for Wednesday, September 10, 2008:

You are receiving this newsletter at as part of your free membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - - and click on [subscribe] in the e-newsletter box.
For advertising opportunities see our online media kit.

If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here.
email powered by eROIWe welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution.
(c) 2008 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001

No comments:

Blog Archive