Advertising on the Edge – The Economist

This is interesting.

Some people are posting this presentation, but I want to add some words on.

When you first see it you immediately think it’s a good material about marketing and business investments during recession periods. And, the first slides are really about it.

A clear and well written point (not to mention the beautiful graphics) on why brands need to keep investing – how this leads to market share gains, how you can beat competitors in the long term, the golden opportunity for brand building.

But, then, it kind of reveals the real intent.

You just feel uncomfortable when reading a chart that says: “New media are less effective at brand building” (strange, isn’t it?)

The reason is that this presentation is not a conceptual piece about advertising, but a selling effort from a magazine.

And the thinking reveals a fallacy in order to sell ad spaces.

Anyways, I think it’s a shame.

The Economist could have stand the voice on how deeply they understand about brand building during hard recessive times, positioning as a reference. But, instead, they just tried to push something and lost credibility.

Just feels like a missed opportunity to make a broader connection.

Look at Nike and Red Bull

Everyday new powerful creative ideas emerge on the marketing field trying to empower the brands behind it. A lot of them make me feel very pleasant on the way some companies and agencies are walking the walk, by the way.

But nothing makes me feel so enthusiast as when I see brands doing differently on its strategy to connect and engage with consumers as a result of its inner belief on how to be more meaningful for them.

Two brands that I believe do differently because of their beliefs and behaviors are Red Bull and Nike.

Red Bull has always had its own particular way to build the brand. It ever knew what it was all about. And to communicate its values and spirit, there was no best way than to focus on the targets’ lifestyles, promote the integration between the brand and communities and offer incredible experiences only reached via Red Bull.

You can say that events, athlete sponsorships and PR coverage were the main pillars to deliver the Red Bull experience. But if we look more carefully, we see that digital marketing, and even advertising, were also important to complete the whole brand experience (delivering different messages as well).

Nike is another brand that has also always created its own culture, but is now putting more importance on the experience with the brand. What is most interesting about Nike today is how it is changing its marketing approach to connect with consumers.

The brand that once used tv ads to be at the top and to immaculate a bunch of sports stars is now more concerned on creating bonds with real people. Doing that through programs and strategies anchored on an idea of how the brand could provide experiences and services that are more useful. Moreover, using the power of its own brand and products combined (e.g.: Nike ID and Nike Plus).

For me, it’s the perfect example of a brand that understood that the age of brand image has passed away (as John Grant defends with Brand Innovation). Relevance and differentiation today have more to do with the way you connect linking brand experiences to what consumers can take from it.