This is more of a point for debate, rather than insightful post. Just read some interesting thoughts, primarily from Chris Brogan (again) on Jess Jarvis’ book ‘What would Google do?’ where he muses over a world where advertising stops working. The original post is here, it looks fascinating
Some have argued that the desire to entertain has meant that advertising has fotgotten to do what it should; inform.
I’m not sure I agree, but in a world so obsessed with providing value through entertainment (in an advertising context) are we forgetting about the need to use advertising to communicate a positive message about a product or service, a message based on informing the pubic on why the product or service has value? Is this why the iPhone ads are so good? Or is this becuase there are not many iPhones out there to inform about….
Love it Chungaiz, love it
Ok, a riposte..
I agree, no one talks about the iPhone adverts – but everyone talks about the iPhone.
Is that because the product is great? Yeah, sure it is. But isn’t that advertising’s job? To create WoM about a product and service, and not the advert itself? Surely discussing the success of an advert through it’s ability to create WoM about istelf is a much better definition of Ivory Towers…(although I totally appreciate the Brand association angle)
I’m not necesserily disagreeing with your argument, this is simply a muse. But there seems to be a leap in logic which says brand ownership, and as such WoM, can only be driven by entertainment. Are we creating entertaining content to sell an idea through the process you described to the detriment of a product or service itself? Or the core value of that product or service? The one that, actually, if we are honest, is the only thing of real value?
Again, I’m not disagreeing with you.. just musing whether our blinkered approach to 100% entertainment may sometimes need a certain level of balancing.