[imageframe lightbox=”no” style_type=”none” bordercolor=”” bordersize=”0px” stylecolor=”” align=”right” animation_type=”0″ animation_direction=”down” animation_speed=”0.1″ class=”” id=””][/imageframe]
Okay, that might seem like an odd question to be coming from someone who has been involved in advertising and marketing communications for more than 40 years. The perspective that my long tenure provides, however, is what brings the query to mind.

On February 1st I reposted a blog I wrote in 2009 that contrasted marketing-driven McDonald’s to the Waffle House chain that dots the Southern United States, and which refrains from doing anything that remotely resembles modern marketing. I submitted that Waffle House has succeeded by offering genuine experience rather than a systematized merchandizing process, and that this would be a good thing to keep in mind when building brands in our increasingly digital future.

That repost was good timing on my part, as the March 2013 issue of Harvard Business Review features an article titled Advertising’s New Medium: Human Experience. The author, Jeffrey F. Rayport, points out that we are constantly being assaulted with largely irrelevant messages that come from a constantly expanding array of media and devices. He goes on to say that, “advertising strategies built on persuading through interruption, repetition, and brute ubiquity are increasingly ineffective.” While this isn’t really news to anyone who’s ever zapped through a commercial or clicked off a pop-up ad without even looking at it, I found author’s suggestions for a different kind of advertising strategy to be very interesting.

I won’t attempt to go into his article in detail, but I do strongly recommend it to anyone whose professional future is invested in advertising or marketing. Its basic premise is that we all experience life in four domains: the public sphere, where we move from place to place; the social sphere that involves our relationships with others; the tribal sphere defined by our group affiliations; and the psychological sphere in which we connect language with specific thoughts and feelings. It goes without saying that in today’s society the experience can be accessed either online or offline.

To be effective, an “advertisement” must become a relevant element in one or more of these domains of experience, offer consumers value, and generate trust. Rayport provides insights and examples of how to communicate relevantly and successfully in each of these spheres, and I have no intention of regurgitating all of them here (again, read the article). What I would like to discuss is the fundamental change in what advertising has been and what it is in the process of becoming.

Traditionally, advertising has been based on a quid-pro-quo relationship between advertiser and consumer: they will subsidize our need for news or entertainment in exchange for the opportunity to direct their product or service messages to us. It all worked pretty well when number of available media options was fairly limited. As that number increased, the individual effectiveness of any one media option decreased. This led to the integrated campaign strategy that, simply put, meant pushing a consistent message out through a proliferating number of media outlets in hopes of achieving a synergistic result. The underlying model remained the same: advertisers pay to put passive messages in places where consumers will encounter them.

What I see as changing is the fundamental relationship between consumers and media. The “media” were once channels of communication that we chose to experience; a diversion that was ancillary to the course of our lives. Today, interactive digital media have become an integral element of our experience, and woven into the fabric of daily life. The difference is as profound as watching a magician levitate an assistant on stage, versus actually being levitated yourself: one is an entertaining illusion while the other would be a life-altering experience. I’m not being facetious here; consider how such things as GPS, Skype, and Facebook have altered the day-to-day reality for so many of us. Intrusive advertisements on any of those platforms would be as welcoming as having commercial interruption during a telephone call (“This call is being brought to you by…”).

So, what is advertising…or more appropriately, what is advertising becoming? As the traditional quid-pro-quo relationship continues to erode, and the separation between media and experience becomes less distinct, advertising messages will have to change as well. They will need to be more relevant to the way consumers live, provide genuine value for their attention, and approach them when they will be most receptive. Rather than being an intruder, it will need to be a welcome guest that enhances a consumer’s experience.

This is what Rayport is talking about with his domains of human experience. He offers a broad range of examples, the first of which involves a Brazilian-market whiskey that distributed special labeling for Father’s Day. Each bottle came with a unique scan code that enabled the giver to upload a video message that “Dad” could later scan and view on his mobile device. The promotion becomes part of the social sphere by reinforcing the parent-child relationship while it also reinforces brand awareness and builds loyalty.

Is this something new? Outside of the technology being used, not really. Interactive promotions have long been part of the spirit-marketing model. They were always, however, ancillary to the larger media campaigns and the brand message. The difference today is that the separation between media and daily life is evaporating, and along with it any distinction between “advertising” and “promotion.” And if Rayport is correct, marketing strategies that depend on intruding into the lives of consumers will need to give way to ones focused on becoming part of it.

Read the original article in Harvard Business Review online:
www.hbr.org/2013/03/advertisings-new-medium-human-experience/ar/