Today I received an article that talks about the branding machine whore and how marketing, and now with viral publicity, expose us constantly to the bad taste routine that the masses so desperately want.
Below a few quotes from the article, you can read it here.
“For the record, my top 4 marketing naff list is:
- Consumer generated content, otherwise known as a promotion or cheap stunt. Otherwise known as a bribe for eyeballs.
- Viral films. It’s not a film it’s an ad. Calling it a film doesn’t make it any more effective.
- Branded content. A long ad.
- Online magazines. It’s not a magazine. It’s a cut and paste sales brochure or another blog banging on about Lady Gaga.
In an online world dominated by fast and free mediocrity, the purpose and role of a brand is more important that ever. And while the decision to charge or not to charge is still uncharted territory, is not charging a sign of insecurity about what makes one brands output better than another? And I purposefully mean better not different. That line on a creative brief that says, ‘What makes the brand different?’ It should read ‘What makes the brand better.’
Can we please move on from the online democracy age (the hall of naff), and into an era of online quality and closed walls (‘gasp, stone her!’ they cried), where discerning people value the extra-ordinary and the only thing that is democratic, is that quality gets a meaningful paycheck. There’s a reason why HBO is consistently brilliant and why the BBC is the most revered news and entertainment media brand in the world. People pay for it.”