COMMENTS
Maybe you are right, Carol! But do you think Don would use PowerPoint? ;-)
Yes - times have changed, but I must also disagree. In the two seasons I've seen so far, Don's character - and the other characters - really dig deep into the products they are trying to sell, looking for the emotional connections which tie consumers to the product they are trying to sell. Times are quite different, but any digital/traditional agency should be looking to create that emotional connection.
@NathanRKing
I beg to differ. Yes, yes, the tools and techniques, blah-blah-blah, have changed and there are more media channels than there are braincells in the heads of a lot of people today. But the questions put to clients by Don Draper, the uber marketeer, are incisively bang-on. I love to watch the looks on those client's faces ("uh, duh, gee, we didn't think of THAT!"). Some things don't change, and that's one. He goes straight to the heart of the value proposition of what's being offered. And the value prop becomes the cornerstone of the marketing. The media you choose is just a function of this, not a driver.
I completely disagree. The stunt Peggy pulled in the last episode with the ham fight would have been something that would have been picked up by blogs around the country not to mention youtube if anyone with a cell phone was around to capture it.
Advertising may take advantage of different mediums, but messages that appeal to, intrigue, and pique the curiosity of people will always get noticed. And isn't that what Don Draper does in all of his campaigns?
Just because it's not in print anymore doesn't mean advertising has completely changed. There seems to be some kind of digital exceptionalism happening here that's devoid of historical context or deeper thinking.
Thanks for your comments, Mindy, Stan and Nathan! I agree that creativity and innovation do not emerge only from new digital technologies but are a product of one's experiences and intelligence. And as we know, the master mind of Don Draper can produce cutting-edge ideas.
Yet the 1960s style of advertising will be seriously challenged today. It is worth thinking about how mediums and formats can shape messages. The mediums are fundamentally different now and they define new marketing strategies.
As one of those "old school" marketing strategists, trained by David Ogilvy (Ogilvy & Mather) and a former management supervisor for J. Walter Thompson USA, I couldn't disagree more. Advertising strategy is a process, and the process of understanding your audience, your competitive frame, the demographics and psychographics of your target, and evaluating the effectiveness of the media choices to deliver your message is the sam today as it was years ago. Certainly, there were ad "men" then -- and now - who opt for shortcuts and copycat strategies because they are too lazy to do the research and upfront thinking. The character Mel Gibson played in "What Women Want" is a much better example of ad folks basing the ads they create on their own paradigm rather than research.
The only thing that has changed in the last 30 years is the media options to deliever advertising messages, and the impact of that change has been enormous. However, it has been this change in MEDIA that has caused the market dynamics you acurately describe, not the people or the marketing process.
Oh, and believe it or not,I had one of those orange-globe ashtrays on my office desk back then. True.
thank you for your helpful info
Thanks for your comment, Don! Great to hear from someone who has had the "oldschool" training and can compare it to today's digital environment.
I agree that there is an invaluable process of understanding your audience, learning the competitive frame, etc. But when you point out that media (and not necessarily people)have changed today, don't you think there is a two-way relationship? The digital space is often compared to an ecosystem because it affects us as much as we shape it. What are your thoughts?
I think MadMen in part is about the rise of concept in advertising. Suddenly art and artifice multiplied spend -- and drove relationship with the client.
Today we're often fixated on execution across 40 media types. There's a lot to think about beyond concept, and so bland but omnipresent campaigns (McDonald's I'm lovin' it) are born.
Great post!
Dave
Absolutely. The evolution of media since the 1960's -- actually since everything started "going cable" in the early 70's -- provided choices to consumers. They were no longer limited to watching the "big 3" networks (yes, back before FOX); they had oodles of cable channels to surf. "Zapping" became the word of the 1980's. How do advertisers create "zap-proof" commercials? That is when advertisers started to invite the audience into their decision process. Or, more accurately, be more open and honest out it. Consumer research and feedback was nothing new but now advertisers were telling consumers they were doing it and asking for their help in identifying the right messages and media. Thus, two-way communication between advertisers and consumers began to evolve to what we have today. Today's media is highly interactive and symbiotic. Neither of us can live without the other.
Today, when an advertiser comes to me asking for help with their company website, or their social networking strategies, or the audiences they are trying to reach and how best to do that, it's back to Square One -- the marketing process.
The biggest differences with today's marketing plans are: 1) Because of the breadth of media choices, audiences are highly-fragmented and, as such, messages must be finely-tuned to those fragments, and 2) Advertisers must have cat-like quickness to respond to emerging opportunities while at the same time never take their eye off their long-term goals.
That is a great overview, Don! I cannot agree more with your two suggestions for today's marketers--know what (and where) you audience is and be quick to adapt to the rapidly changing digital landscape. If you don't follow latest trends and leverage the opportunities they offer, there will be tons of catching up to do...
Wow, this is really a lively debate! Thanks Magdalena for creating this conversation...
I believe that the reasons why people "buy" is the same now as back in the 60's or the 20's for that matter - and they will always
be the same.
What changed everything, of course, is technology - for without the ability to get in touch with people across the country and across the world, things wouldn't have changed so
radically at all.
I also believe that the "guys" from Mad Men would adapt quite well to the new technologies.
Great post - thanks for the fun!
Great discussion and sharing of ideas. That said, the initial premise of the post leads one to believe that 1960's era consumers were mindless zombies who easily believed whatever was written in an ad, and allowed it to define their buying behavior. That simply was not the case. Messaging has certainly evolved, but the need to identify with the customer – whether B2C or B2B has always been a critical element of marketing and key to driving the sale.
It’s fair to say however, that in some industries the buzz, trendiness and ‘must-have’ craze around products happen much faster. But they still sometimes happen today without the customer-controlled substance & message suggested. Witness the recent near-manic frenzy to own an iPhone 4 despite problems with the antenna and applications spilling private information to the public.
Bringing the discussion back to the show for a minute -- One area that applies today for every marketer trying to get companies and clients to understand and apply cutting edge technologies and mediums is the emergence of television and broadcast commercials on the show. They don’t spend a great deal of time on it, but watching Richard Sommer’s character Harry Crane grapple with the new and evolving medium, sell clients on it, and get his peers to understand is almost like being in on the joke as it applies to social media. Try watching the show with that in mind, and you’ll laugh even more!
One last point: Ultimately, customers then and now have defined the company-to-consumer relationship with their wallet. If the marketing is top notch and delivers the buyer to a product that fails to match the hype, repeat business dies.
Alan, you are SO right re: " ... watching Richard Sommer’s character Harry Crane grapple with the new and evolving medium, sell clients on it, and get his peers to understand is almost like being in on the joke as it applies to social media."
Today, one of the greatest challenges those of us (even those of us with grey hair!) face is getting "the grey hairs" to see the potential of internet marketing and social networking sites. Unfortunately, too many company CEOs have remained "tech-free," unfamiliar with the internet, e-mail and even cell phones.
Too many of my generation have "danced with what brung them" and have not seen the cheese move, partly because, in the beginning, techno-language was nearly indecipherable ... and scary to those higher-ups who were busy running companies.
The advertising or marketing person who has the ability to communicate the opportunities internet marketing presents without trying to describe whizbangs and gidgy-gadgets sill be succesful in bridging the learning gap between our technology-driven generations and us "old school grey hairs."
Tons of fun and a great read! You guys are awesome! Thank you!
I think the key word distinguishing 60's era marketing versus marketing in the new millenium is "sustainability." Up until the 90's, this term was basically irrelevant. Previously marketing was all about pushing your shouted message out to the the willing masses who had yet to be slammed by the onslaught of information from the internet age or had the opportunity to change to 500+ cable or sattelite channels, go to Blockbuster/RedBox, download from Netflix, or hit YouTube or Hulu. Furthermore, ROMI (return on marketing investment) was an unheard of term.
In the 60's marketing was about controlling the message both in terms of content and distribution. There were plenty of "green fields" where advertising hadn't been overused and customers hadn't formed opinions, and the number of new products wasn't as numbing as it is today.
Clearly this form of marketing was not sustainable, and the current recession has pretty much wiped out the last remnants of advertising/marketing's "golden age" of big budget, highly creative, difficult to measure, easily delivered campaigns. In the past people chose the programs they wanted to watch and the papers and magazines they wanted to read and the advertising went along for the ride. In our new era of unlimited choices people also have much more influence over when and how they are marketed to, and a much louder voice when they don't like what they're getting.
As far as whether Mad Men would make it today, I'm sure they'd do just fine, they'd just shift their creative energy and abundant talent to defining microsegmentation strategies, social media, mobile apps, marketing analytics, and ROMI calculation. Now whether or not that would make good TV, that's another question.
Thought provoking blog.
I still think that people look to advertising and media to "tell them" what to like. Fashion magazine sales still soar...
Thanks to all of the other "old school" folks who disagree with the author's statement. I am also a student of David Olgivy and got my chops on Madison Avenue. The one thing that never changes is human nature and Don Draper has the gift as many ad men did and still do to appeal to that nature when SELLING the product. Advertising is all about SALES and that will never change.
Yes, Pablo, although I wasn’t in the advertising business till the mid-70’s, there was still enough residual Mad Men panache left to make for some unforgettable memories. It wasn’t uncommon to gather my account team together in my office, suck down a few cold ones from my mini-fridge and munch on pretzel rods while divining our client’s next snappy slogan. In today’s cautious corporate environment, I wonder how many mini-fridges still exist. Anyone? Anyone?
But Eric hits the nail on the head in his “sustainability” argument. “Push marketing” worked because consumers were a captive audience, drawn to the new technology of television like moths to a flame. In the 60’s, consumers had only 3 television networks to choose from, Dick Clark on Saturday morning and Wolfman Jack and Larry Lujack on radio.
As media choices evolved, smart agencies and advertisers recognized that shouting, pushing and hard-selling did more harm than good. They realized advertising messages needed to be more seductive and entertaining, targeted to the now-fragmented audience and based on solid research. Smart agencies kept their ears to the ground and responded to consumers’ shift in media choices and consumers’ sensitivity to the message and its delivery.
Smart agencies knew that in order to keep their audience from channel surfing when the A-Team cut to commercial, they must instantly capture the hearts and minds of their viewers. Shouting was not only not “sustainable,” it was downright annoying, and it succumbed to high-concept, zap-proof messages.
The evolution of advertising over the past 30 years shows a very consistent pattern of increasing sensitivity to consumers’ media choices and the need for an exceptional creative product to get your message through to consumers.
What David Ogilvy said over 30 years ago holds true more than ever today: “You cannot bore someone into buying your product.” The sustainability of advertising, its agencies and advertisers, depends on their ability to anticipate and respond to consumers’ movements in media and message, whether on television, the internet or social networking.
I think Dan Draper would be way ahead of the game. But yes, it was a fun time, Pablo …
I totally agree with this, then and now are very different. The audience are very important and what they say are what companies listen to unlike before that they dictate what we purchase because of nifty ideas from Ad agencies.
We disagree. People want to believe they are making individual choices and being treated personally, but marketing is about creating that feeling on a mass scale. "You're different and special" ...just like everyone else on the mailing list.