Lire mes billets

Écouter mes podcasts

Conversations capitales: natif du ouèbe vs immigrant

Suite à la série de questions qu’Eric Alper de Conversational Capital m’avait envoyé, je lui avais retourné quelques questions de mon propre cru. Vous trouverez ci-joint ses réponses auxquelles je réagirai très bientôt ici même et sur son blogue. Si vous avez des points à ajouter, n’hésitez pas à vous joindre à cette conversation capitale ;-)

Normand Tu es un natif de la chose digitale, alors que moi, je ne suis et n’en serai toujours qu’un immigrant – même si j’en ai rapidement adopté les us et coutumes. En quoi selon toi se distingue la perception d’un marketer traditionnel de ta réalité intrinsèque?

Eric I wouldn’t really describe myself as a digital marketer, though I did grow up in the digital age. My view is that we’re trying to pave the return of traditional marketing — not the kind that talks at customers, but the kind that takes into account that there are truly 4Ps. The distinction then between a “traditional marketer” and that of the people at Sid Lee is that we believe in more than promotion. A lot of people seem to think that digital is a panacea to whatever ails them. “Don’t have buzz around your product? Seed it to people and write a blog.” To me that’s just lazy and it demonstrates a lack of intellectual curiosity. It demonstrates that sometimes people didn’t bother to question the worth and meaning of that which they market. So to me, the current marketing age is about returning to the basic understanding of what marketing consists of — identifying the intersection of needs, wants and a product. Digital is certainly one channel in which to express that message; indeed, it is a very powerful channel. But so it remains, a tool in a toolkit.

N Quel serait le pourcentage d’activités de communications digitales qui ne servent absolument à rien, sinon qu’à satisfaire l’ego de marketers qui veulent pouvoir dire qu’ils ont fait du ouèbe (comme ils disent qu’ils ont fait un spot télé)?

E That’s a good question Normand and I wish I had the answer to it. Which is why I’m going to commission a study on the subject. But here’s my hypothesis: digital marketing transcends the old 50-50 wasted/well-spent cliché far in the favor of wasted. So many brands seem to be talking to themselves in the digital age. So in the digital age, necessity is less about inspiring invention than it is about doing stuff for the sake of doing stuff. Which isn’t to say that there aren’t people doing good stuff…

N On entend parler de plus en plus parler de tribalisme. Seth Godin en parle dans son dernier bouquin Tribes et vous-même adressez la chose dans Conversational Capital. Outre l’évident lien qu’on peut faire entre cette résurgence de l’importance de la tribu et la popularité du 2.0, en quoi cette notion peut-elle affecter la publicité dite-traditionnelle?

E Tribes have always been important; from pre-historic tribes to modern social networks, choice is influenced by peers. For the savvy marketer, the implication is simple but profound: the consumer is the medium, the product is the message.

N Peut-on sauver la bannière? Si oui, comment?

E I didn’t realize they were in danger of dying.

2017-03-26T14:41:12+00:00 Jan 8, 2009 @ 20:44|Categories: blog|Tags: |0 Comments

Leave A Comment