Google vs. live media representatives
Every week I get a few pokes from Google inviting me to become more proficient with their ever expanding suite of self-serving media optimization tools. Every few months I get a nice direct mail package, and a few times a year they call me. They’ve even paid me to attend their focus groups here in Toronto. I feel loved.
Google makes it incredibly easy for today’s agency media teams to look smart + informed when in fact Google has dumbed them down, blinding them to the virtues that exist in the wider world of media that Google does not own or operate.
Until online advertising came along agency media buyers and planners spent a lot of time with live media representatives (at the agency or in bars). I used to love going across Canada on local media buying trips where I would meet with all of the local TV, Radio and Newspaper sales representatives for at least five reasons:
- to learn all about the pros + cons of the media that they sell,
- to get the representative’s perspective on the other, competing and non-competing media,
- to find out what it’s like to live in the market – in general and as a user of the brand I was caring for,
- to find out what the people in thecommunity thought about the brands that I was buying media for, and
- to gather some (public domain) information about the competition’s marketing + advertising activities.
Despite the bias that each media rep brought to the table, I ended up with a pretty good feel for the market's dynamics when I compared my notes (for the 10 – 20 media sessions) at the end of the day. Those in-market-buying-trips also introduced me to a wonderful network of people that I could call anytime, and rely on for a professional perspective on their medium, the market and the local business climate in general. My network used to cover Canada and the N.E. United States.
My clients were always amazed at how much I knew about their business at the grass roots level. That local + national knowledge made my job FAR easier and enabled me to get away from the mundane “price” discussions and get them to focus on . . .
HOW TO MAKE YOUR ADVERTISING PROGRAM BETTER.
"BETTER" as in "more effective", not cheaper!
I find doing business in today’s marcom climate VERY frustrating because 98% of those I speak to regularly confuse cheaper with better. Getting a dozen ads “cheaper” might be better for your budget, but it does not follow that it’s a “better” – or more effective advertisement or a more effective media buy. And if the ads run in cheapest, rather than the most appropriate medium, more ads in the lower priced medium will not save your brand, build your sales or save your skin.
Google is great at telling you (frequently) that you’re doing well and could do better. But they’ll NEVER tell you:
- that you shouldn't use one or more of their media,
- how well you’re doing compared to your direct or oblique competitors + why,
- how their media options perform (locally or globally) by SIC.
Their non-disclosure excuse is always the same: "privacy", when in fact it our "ignorance" is their financial "bliss".
THE LESSON GOOGLE DOESN'T WANT YOU LEARN:
That they use a combination of online + traditional offline media to keep their marketing funnel + pipelines full. Here's the first three lines of this post . . . sothat you don't have to scroll up:
Every week I get a few e-mails from Google inviting me to become more proficient with their ever expanding suite of self-serving media optimization tools. Every few months I get a nice direct mail package, and a few times a year they call me. Ocasionally they pay me to attend their focus groups.
If Google use a combination of online + traditional offline media to keep their marketing funnel + pipelines full, shouldn't you?