Advertising has no future, says big ad agency CEO. From DMNews,
"Embed marketing in products":
http://www.dmnews.com/cms/dm-news/ad-agencies/38759.html
> The future of advertising is that there isn’t any. Yes, that’s
> coming from an agency, which created memorable ads for clients
> like Burger King, Volkswagen and Miller Brewing. "We think the
> future of advertising is great products that have marketing
> embedded in them," Mr. Hicks said.
Mark Cuban’s recent post (October 28th) entitled “Is the Internet A Long Tail Ghetto” is quite interesting in how it shows one person’s view of what the long tail actually is. Mark introduces the concept of “the vert ramp”, a phrase borrowed from skateboarding, to represent the head of the tail, and states that, in his opinion, no one wants to be on the long tail, and all are interested in getting into the head, or further up the vert ramp.
He goes on to add that there is an “imaginary” barrier between the vert ramp and the tail called the Content Ceiling, which prevents content or creators who are in the tail from getting up the ramp, securing more views/hits/downloads/whatever and becoming a success.
His analogy works on the principle that the sole purpose of everyone in the long tail is to become a hit, get to the head, and become a star/success in the traditional way.
But what many people point out in the comments on the post, and something I also believe, is that this isn’t necessarily the point of being in the tail in the first place, or even the reason why the tail exists, and many content creators are not even looking to become hits or stars and are never expecting to be one.
Take the examples that Chris Anderson uses a lot in his book – Amazon. The online book seller enables the long tail of books in both new and second hand areas by reducing costs in a way that is so effective that it can hold so many more books than the typical Waterstones on the high street, that it creates a long tail market for all the books it can get, and thus gives sales of perhaps on a few dozen a year at most to those which otherwise won’t get noticed at all. The long tail means that content which is interesting to only a few people gets distributed, whilst the Steven Kings of the world continue to sell millions of books as they always have done. Thus, the benefit of the long tail goes straight into Amazon itself, not necessarily into the pocket of Joe Bloggs who wrote a book on fly fishing in outer Mongolia.
I think this is the whole crux of the long tail, and no doubt why Chris used it in the first place. Whilst the internet allows content providers of all shapes and sizes to distribute their work, whatever that may be, for next to nothing to a potential audience of millions, the reality is that most people won’t get to become the next Mark Cuban with millions of dollars in the bank. Most people will sell a few things a year. Most people will have a blog readership in the 20’s rather than the 20,000’s. But that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
Mark goes on to add that in order for items in the tail to break onto the vert, they’ll need the support of “big money” to do so, and then goes on to describe, almost at a tangent, that the more you go up the tail, the more big money becomes involved, and the more the need for the tail is reduced. I can see this being almost certainly true – and it makes sense that with big money, and therefore the ability to advertise and market a product in more areas than the tail would normally allow, you’re going to get noticed all the more and probably become more of a success. Everyone knows that you need money to make money.
If you’re a content creator, and you’re looking to make serious money with the work you produce, then a long tail isn’t really a ghetto, but more a route to distribute without risk to a certain extent. You may need big money, you may not, YouTube has only just hit big money but if you think about it, websites themselves have a long tail, and YouTube just happened to hit on something that allowed them to jump out of the tail in a very effective way – but they didn’t need big money to get there, even though that is now what they have.
As I see it, the long tail as represented by Chris Anderson’s book is intrinsically tailored to be a money making opportunity for the people doing the distribution, like amazon, ebay or iTunes, rather than being a get rich quick scheme for the people who make the work in the first place, and that point remains with me as something I find it hard to get my head around. Why will people make content if they’re not making loads of money from it?
But then, that’s probably the point. If you’re an artist, and you’re making content because you love doing what you do, then you’re going to keep doing it no matter what the outcome – and if you make some money along the way, well, that’s probably nothing but a bonus addition to your day job. If you’re looking to be the next Steven Spielberg, then the long tail probably helps you to being with, but once you have your hit, big money steps in and away you go (to work on Cuban’s example). But you’ll be happy with this as well. And, if you truly want to make the money, you’ll setup the next YouTube or Amazon, and distribute the content, taking a slice from everyone along the way, using the long tail for what it’s actually about and be very happy with it no doubt.
So, is the long tail a ghetto? I think that depends on your perspective (ok – obvious to say) but, at the end of the day, if you’re making money off it no matter how small, and some content in the tail spikes, you’ll probably be quite happy, but you’ll also be happy if it just keeps ticking over like the long tail does.
What’s still of interest to me, and not something I’ve seen done even now is how do we turn this to our advantage as advertisers and marketers? Perhaps we can’t. Perhaps the long tail isn’t something we’ll be able to tap into in order to radically affect sales or ROI or whatever metric it is that we’re looking to achieve from our marketing campaigns. Perhaps social networking ecosystems like YouTube and MySpace will create their own longtails. Google Adwords is itself a long tail system, and a lot of people, not just those who can afford massive PPC spends, reap the benefits of this system put in place by the big “G”. Similarly, Google itself takes its cut in a big way, just as Amazon does with books, and they therefore take the benefit of the long tail.
Perhaps that’s it. Maybe Google Adwords, and therefore YouTube, is a democratising force in advertising and whilst it may not be much of a difference for those of us with millions of dollars of media spend each year it puts the long tail to work for those small business and that’s how we utilise it?
As an aside, Mark touches a bit on advertisers using the long tail in an interview with Steve Rubel over at Micro Persuasion, and makes the following comment:
Q) Finally, how should advertisers be adopting to the Long Tail? What’s missing from the equation right now?
MC: Advertisers have to stop falling for hype and focus on what moves the meter that drives their business… …They also have to look forward rather than backwards… …does anyone really think that highdef is not going to happen? That 30m people will buy HDTVs in 2007 and be happy to get ads in standard definition, or will they expect HD? That all those LCDs hanging on walls will be connected to computers anytime soon or show Internet video? They won’t.
Will TVs be connected to PCs? No, I don’t think so – you’re probably right. But will TV be delivered over the Internet, and therefore be internet video? Of course!
Howard
–
OgillvyOne have published a very useful glossary of digital terms over on the site for their 2006 Verge Digital Summit.
It covers a LOT of items, some of which are pretty run of the mill, some of them perhaps only seen so far in sci-fi movies (attentive billboards? Minority Report anyone?) but it makes for an interesting read and a good resource should you want to point anyone in it’s direction rather than explain it yourself.
Thanks to Vincent for the link.
Howard
–
The Guardian this weekend had a superb article, entitled A Bigger Bang, in it’s Weekend magazine discussing the Web2.0 explosion, and interviewing a huge chunk of what must be considered major players in anyone’s view when you talk about web2.0 or social software etc.
The massive list covers Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia), Michael and Xochi Birch (Bebo), Evan Williams (Blogger/Odeo),Craig Newmark and Jim Buckmaster (Craigslist),Kevin Rose (Digg), Joshua Schachter (del.icio.us), Martin Stiksel (netvibes), Dick Costolo (Feedburner), David L. Sifry (Technorati), Sam Schillace (Writely), Matt Mullenweg (Wordpress) and last, but certainly not least, Caterina Fake and Stewart Butterfield (Flickr).
Phew!
See what I mean! Well worth the read if you’ve got the time :D And, if you don’t have the print version, check it out online over at Guardian Unlimited, where they’ve got enhanced content in the form of podcasts with a selection of the interviewees (which is nice).
Howard
–
Link: Avenue A | Razorfish - philosophy.
From Wednesday I will be contracting at DNA. To get a bit of insight into DNA I’ve been going through their website and that of their american partner Avenue A Razorfish - no relation to the muppets from Avenue Q 
I really like the Philosophy section:
1. The Internet is essential.
The online channel is the most flexible and influential medium in which to reach your customers through every stage of the Customer Experience Journey.
2. Channels must be integrated.
Our multi-channel world demands an integrated approach to digital marketing.
3. Understanding is key to success.
Fully understanding the needs of your target audience is critical to building effective digital solutions.
4. Users rule.
The most successful online solutions are created from the perspective of the people who will actually use them.
5. Creativity and technology must work together.
Only integrated teams can enable solution design and architecture to work in harmony.
6. There is always room for improvement.
Digital marketing solutions should be measurable and provide potential for optimization.
Jon
Things I like about working in a bubble economy:
Excitement - few people make it big - but in a super-excited bubble economy everyone believes they can hit the jackpot. For every MySpace or Facebook there are a million SuperHero AlterEgos started up by a friend - play around it’s fun 
The general buzz encourages people to get up off their arse and create
interesting projects. There is a can do attitude inside the bubble.
Creativity - inside the bubble
live some very creative people. Nearly all of them - those over 24 -
have already been through one dot com bubble and survived. These people
are doing what they love AND changing the world. How cool is that! The
geeks won - now everybody is a wannabe geek and Le Geek est chic.
Things I hate about living in a bubble:
Greed - so many people chasing
after money. Although web greed is nothing like you would find in any
good investment bank - those guys are proper sharks.
Time pressure - so many things to do - so little time. In Internet time everything needs to be done yesterday.
Me too, me too: They do say
that immitiation is the sincerest form of flattery but I’m not
convinced. If you create something truly original on the web you will
be copied by a million little webmonkeys. Others will argue that if you
create something original it will sink without trace for 10 years until
people finally recognise it’s brilliance. By this time the market will
have decided that one of the me-too’s is a whole lot cooler than the
original.
See Wikipedia for a whole lot more on economic bubbles
This Flick User Model Diagram is one of my favourite things. It is a little complex but just packed with so much info. There are 3 versions of this diagram created by Bryce Glass - here is the first version and here is Bryce’s blog.
Jon
jonathan | 
11 7th, 2006| 
