Traditional media not dead yet? Neither is new media
Posted by Bill Gaffney | July 18th, 2008A recent study conducted by Yankelovich titled “When Advertising Works” has hit the web sparking a debate between the effectiveness of traditional media in stimulating word-of-mouth or conversations with that of digital media.
That aspect of the study has few debating the comparison on a general basis by which I mean television, radio, magazine, newspaper, and billboard, versus email messages, Internet banner ads, social networking, but on an individual basis the conversation is “spirited.”
Our good friend Bob Hoffman, The Ad Contrarian, sees this as an opportunity to single out social media (blogs, MySpace, Facebook, etc) for their deficiency in statistically backing up claims of reaching a higher quality of audience. I too firmly believe in following the metrics, but from what I can see there is no segmented data to back him up either.
I’m not a fanatic blinded by the idea that new media can or should replace traditional media, but I do believe in its capacity to reach audiences in a more effective manner in its capacity to:
- Stimulate and facilitate a conversation
- Provide cost effectiveness in flighting a campaign
- Target in a tremendously granular manner
- Deliver transparency in reporting
With all due respect for Bob, studies based on recall are hardly analytical. Further those who are forwarding this agenda that there’s a competition between traditional and new media are missing the point entirely. Client are best served by media companies, agencies and marketers understanding the efficiencies of each of these varied channels and leveraging our expertise in suggesting the most appropriate.
Related articles by Zemanta
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b2e4b654-c1ac-4103-a111-d7547d7b00d3)
Filed under: Advertising, Blogging, Magazines, Marketing, Media, Newspapers, Social Networking
Hi Bill,
You are correct in pointing out that the Yankelovich study contends that digital media (not simply social media) underperform traditional media in generating “conversations.”
You are also correct in asserting that this study is far from definitive (a point I also made in a post on July 10.)
Nonetheless, when you add this study to the Deloitte study reported in The Wall Street Journal (”Why Most Online Communities Fail”, July 16) we are starting to get a picture that tells us that a lot of the assertions made on behalf of social media marketing may have little or no factual basis to them and are, in fact, the opinions of advocates, not the results of unbiased observation.
It is now the responsibility of these advocates to demonstrate that their assertions about the unique attributes of social media have some basis in the real world and are not just the overly zealous boosterism of the infatuated.
For those of you following the conversation, Bob is referring to his post titled It’s the Heavy User, Stupid from July 10. Obviously the speaking tour of the Midwest has left me behind in the conversation and I am anxious to catch up on all its new threads.
Bob is correct though. This particular segment of digital marketing has somehow escaped the more rigid expectations of others included in the Yankelovich definition of new media. Given the infancy (comparatively speaking) of new media as an advertising medium, transparency in reporting has been one of the key vehicles in its adoption. It needs to be integrated in.
There are however those who would contend that the metrics aren’t there to back up buying billboard, magazine or radio, as the conversion statistics are more commonly based on recall rather that action. Admittedly there are some means of tracking (eg: unique phone numbers) and perhaps as social media advertising becomes more mature its advocates should look to the more established mediums for tips on its effect use.
At the end of the day, Bob is CEO of one of the leading independent ad agencies and not an enemy of online. He and others in agencies (look at his comments) are asking the question that we should be asking ourselves:
Its our responsibility to provide clarity in choice through proven results. Look to this conversation as an opportunity to reassess our own preconceptions, re-evalute strategies for implementation and redeploy campaigns with the sole goal of addressing these three questions.