Home›Blog› Media Planning & Buying

Media Planning & Buying

The End of Digital Marketing

Posted by Adam Broitman on May 07, 2009 at 04:56 PM PDT

7 comments, Latest by amit sharan

Does the term "digital marketing" ultimately hurt the marketing industry at large? Earlier today I watched a video in which BBDO CEO Andrew Robertson discussed the importance of digital marketing, and how he was attempting to ensure that everyone in the massive organization that he oversees is thinking about digital. Robertson states:

"Everything has a digital component to it...Everyone is having to learn about the ways in which digital can enhance the quality of the programs we create...it is not optional"

If digital is a component of all efforts, and everyone is required to possess digital marketing skills; what then is a digital marketer? Ultimately, aren't we all just marketers with a variety of tools at our disposal? Unfortunately this is not a new conversation and there is no easy answer. That said, I am not sure that large ad agencies are working fast enough to help solve this conundrum. Some agencies have begun to take a more integrated approach in organizing their workforce, but is it enough? We still see campaigns that begin telling a story that leverages out of home tactics, with little, to no digital follow up. In my opinion, such campaigns are incomplete; and no matter however creative the "creative" is, the campaign will ultimately fail-as more and more consumers have come to expect that the next chapter of the story will occur online. So what is the answer? Let's look at the pro's and cons to moving toward a model where we are all simply play the role of marketer;
Pros

Easier to ensure that strategy is central to all marketing efforts, as the strategic vision would come from one "nerve center"
All marketers would be held accountable for attaining a base knowledge of all channels

Cons

Difficult to decide who is going to focus on what areas of execution, of a campaign
Many marketers are still not savvy when it comes to digital, and if they were forced to manage any piece of the digital portion of the campaign, things could get messy

There are obvious benefits to each way of thinking. Ultimately, I do not think we are ready to switch to a model where all marketers are responsible for all media types. That being said, what will happen in 5 years, when recent college graduates will have digital media in their DNA? Will we then be ready for the type of change that I am proposing? I would love to hear some thought from you.

Stop Stressing Strategy ... Champion Ideas (t4w.blogs.com)
The Dramatic Shift In Marketing Reality (viralblog.com)
Digital Media -....and almost scary search engine capabilites (activerain.com)

Return to the top.

Marketing White Papers

More White Papers »

RELEVANT POSTS

Feeling Lucky? 3 Marketing Lessons From Chat Roulette(14 days ago)
The Only Online Metric You Need To Focus On(41 days ago, 1 comment)
6 New Insights on Media Usage(48 days ago, 2 comments)
Just what are you measuring anyway?(65 days ago)
joojoo and the kitchen sync – Digital marketing direct to home(93 days ago)
Analyzing eMarketer's 2010 Online Media Predictions(94 days ago)
5 Tips for Selling-In Digital Services(97 days ago, 1 comment)
TrackSimple and AdHachery debut at iMedia Agency Summit(104 days ago)
Friends, Survivors Gather at iMedia Agency Summit in Scottsdale(105 days ago)
Audience Discovery at the Heart of the Future of Digital(118 days ago)

7 Comments

May 08, 2009 at 07:35 AM EST

By Rich Nadworny

Adam, I think the difference in "digital" marketer and "marketer" isn't only an understanding of the channels or banner functionality but rather an approach to solving the marketing problem through a two-way dialogue rather than a one-way monologue. That's the difference between out of home without digital and with it. That's one part of the issue. The other, with BBDO and other agencies, is who gets to decide. Right now, the digital people probably get little say in what's happening. When Robertson describes his issue, he's describing agency power struggles, struggles that have little to do with furthering the clients' businesses.

May 08, 2009 at 07:52 AM EST

By Patrick Denis

To the point!! More than the end, its about making the convergence happen. The day will arrive when we drop the 'e' from e-marketing and all prefixes so as recuperate some sort of full-flavored marketing as such....but who's going to wait for that to happen. Engaging customers and stakeholders online is perhaps far too important, for it to be in the hands of 'marketing' today. Goodbye Marketing and hello digital.

May 08, 2009 at 09:41 AM EST

By Adam Broitman

Rich Great points. I think it is largely an internal power struggle as opposed to a philosophical battle. I don't blame the individuals involved for not "getting it", I blame the framework under which they operate.

May 08, 2009 at 10:58 AM EST

By Anthony Power

If we're in the business of aligning our solutions with people's needs - we're marketers. If we are primarily concerned with a channel/category of tools - we prepend an adjective to create a badge for our specialty. Think cell biologist vs. evolutionary biologist. The confounding issue is that we have a habit of creating adjectives to isolate technical inventions as being different. The phone became the digital phone then the cell phone. The airplane became the jet airplane. The TV became plasma or LCD TV. New categories emerge on the fringes of the mainstream where at first they must be different. It then takes a lot of time and effort to make them standard and just part of the mix. Because companies have an ingrained process it probably takes longer than individuals to internalize and adapt. I tend to drop the adjective with clients, they care about more important things - results. I do tend to use it in planning to ensure we think about everything.

May 09, 2009 at 09:22 AM EST

By Pete Codella, APR

A good discussion. Thank you. I agree that the ‘digital' qualifier helps clients and organizations understand what type of approach you will take. I also agree that the time is now for a holistic marketing approach that encompasses digital. And I think there are way too many agencies and companies that still don't get why digital channels are so important and how they can be best utilized. Just like TV didn't replace radio, analog channels won't go away. But I believe digital channels will be, and perhaps already are, much more effective.

May 09, 2009 at 10:35 AM EST

By Adam Broitman

thanks Pete. Let's try and keep the dialog going, and move towards the holistic panacea of which you speak!

amit sharan's headshot

May 11, 2009 at 10:46 AM EST

By amit sharan

One thing you hit on is that schools aren't teaching this (yet) in traditional marketing programs. Marketers are learning on-the-job, at seminars, or by brining in a consultant or going to a "guru's" workshop. Still, they are learning in pieces... schools are now starting to create digital marketing degrees but working professionals aren't going back for a full time degree program. If the picture you paint above "college grads with digital media in their DNA" becomes a reality, the "functional specialist" marketers (and thier companies) who do not have a base knowledge of all channels can only survive through comprehensive training programs. I'd recommend the program put together by USF- http://www.InteractiveMarketingTraining.com

Media Planning & Buying