Recently, an esteemed colleague, someone with many years of blue chip advertising experience, decried the propensity of industry pundits, observers and bloggers to make "absolute" statements, as if everything was purely black and white. No shading, no nuance, no opposing points of view. You know, statements like, "The Internet changes everything." (Of course, that sort of happened…at least in the media and marketing industry.) "Radio will kill newspapers." (Didn’t happen.) "TV will make radio obsolete." (Not yet.) And, the more recent, "Digital is killing all other media." (Again, not yet, but it’s sure hurting those media organizations that have been slow to adapt to the new digital realities.)

So, I guess my friend was right…many commentators (me included, on occasion) are too quick to put out blanket statements as if they are the tablets of truth from on high. In the political realm, you might recall comments like, "They’ll never elect a woman president in my lifetime. (Hillary Clinton is now the odds on favorite to win the White House in ‘08.) Or, "Rudy is a social liberal from New York, with an Italian last name, a train wreck of a family life and he likes to dress in drag. He will never be embraced by the Republican base." (As inexplicable as it may be, Rudy Giuliani continues to hold the lead in the ‘08 Republican presidential primary. Go figure!)

All of which serves to remind us that the conventional wisdom is frequently wrong. Of course, it can be maddening accurate, too. Like my ad industry friend noted, you really have to be careful about absolutes. They can be absolutely off, and grossly misleading.

It is with that as background that I read the recent "Small Agency Diary" blog on www.adage.com. Written by Noelle Weaver, one of Ad Age’s regular Small Agency bloggers, this new post essentially asked the question, "Are ad agencies becoming obsolete in this new media/digitally driven world?" Good question. Sometimes I think so. Other times I believe fervently that the rumor of the death or decline of ad agencies (even traditional ones) is greatly exaggerated.

Last I checked, big agencies (and small/medium-sized ones, too) are still cranking out a lot of TV spots (too many), print ads, FSIs, direct mail pieces, outdoor boards, brand positioning statements, research, press releases and clip reports, radio spots, and the list goes on and on. Those same agencies are also building websites, creating online viral campaigns, uploading web videos, pitching bloggers, creating MySpace pages for their clients, looking into building widgets for Facebook, launching banners on Yahoo’s homepage (somebody has to keep Yahoo in business), buying key words on Google, and even running ads on cellphones (please, no!!).

I guess there is still plenty for agencies to do, and clients willing to pay the bill. That must mean that those agencies are delivering something of value. That many clients can’t be totally wrong.

Ms. Weaver’s Ad Age post also quoted from Lee Clow’s (the Chiat/Day advertising creative legend) keynote speech at the recent Creative Conference "Mashup" in which he said that he no longer defines what he does as "advertising." Clow is now calling it "media arts." He even created a Media Arts Studio at TBWA Chiat/Day.

I sort of bought that. First, because I am such an admirer of Lee Clow and his brilliant ad career. Secondly, because I also believe strongly that content really is king today, and that we ad/marketing people need to think of ourselves even more as content creators and deliverers, and not just as marketers and communicators.

What I didn’t and won’t buy, however, was the notion suggested by another industry "expert" quoted in Ms. Weaver’s blog that what we are doing is not marketing any more. Them’s fightin’ words for me!

This creeping notion that somehow "marketing is dead" in a digitally-driven world, or that marketing is some kind of disreputable or defunct concept, is just ridiculous. It is yet another absolute statement that has about as much veracity as some of the others that I mentioned earlier (like how TV would put radio out of business in the 50s and 60s). I would agree with Lee Clow and others that marketing needs help today…that ad/marketing agencies need to become more relevant. And, that we are all trying to figure out how to help clients sell more stuff, more profitably in a multi-media world where the consumer/customer really does have much more power and control. So much more that it frequently scares us.

All true. But, none of that means that marketing is no longer relevant or needed. Far from it. Good marketing is more important and necessary than ever. But, it needs help, which is a big focus of this blog. I certainly don’t have all the answers for how to navigate the rocky shoals of the fast changing new media environment, but I know for a fact that clients have not just abandoned agencies as important, even trusted partners and advisor’s in the ongoing challenge to target, engage and sell more effectively to consumers and customers.

As I’ve previously suggested on this blog, the worst thing we can do as marketing/ad agencies is to make knee-jerk moves that don’t really make sense — for us or our clients.  As such, we shouldn’t just put our clients on Second Life because that is the thing to do this month. (It may very well be the right strategy for your client in the long run, but don’t go there just because you read about it in Business Week. You never want to confuse spin with real marketing strategy.) 

Now more than ever, we agency types (the estimable Lee Clow, included) should be embracing the foundation values of effective marketing. The more we do that, the more we will avoid obsolescence in a media and marketing world that seemingly is metamorphosing every day.

Please stay tuned. This is a vital topic, one that this blog will be returning to frequently.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS