Scott’s proposal “The Old Rules of Marketing and PR Are Ineffective in an Online World” has obvious merit, but like anything else, is subjective. He states “Guys watching football on TV drink a lot of beer, so perhaps it makes sense for mass-marketer Budweiser to advertise on NFL broadcasts (but not for small microbrews that appeals to a small niche customer base).” (Scott, 2013, p. 16) I feel this is a fairly obvious point. For one, Budweiser can afford to mass market and sustain their vast outreach. Microbrewers tend to work with smaller budgets so they must ensure their marketing campaign is directed towards the exact demographic. This is when it would make sense for them to use social media, as it is much cheaper than a national outreach campaign. Not to mention they’re in a niche market.
I don’t believe we can simply say the old rules are “ineffective.” We can use the old principles to learn from the past and apply them to the ever-changing marketplace. If we simply threw out everything from the past, history would not exist. Mr. Scott raises many great points, but as he is promoting himself and his brand through his writings, he also chose to publish these findings in print, which could be perceived as ‘old practice’ and borderline hypocritical.
The old rule of marketing I believe we should throw out is “Advertising and PR were separate disciplines run by different people with separate goals, strategies, and measurement criteria.” (Scott, 2013, p. 18) I believe this can be omitted because as we have learned, and continue to do so, this process should be integrated. It makes for a clearer and consistent message while enabling everyone in the respective company to be on the same page. When Scott (2013) states “Advertising was based on campaigns that had a limited life,” I believe we could consider keeping this. It varies on your product/service but I believe most campaigns have a limited life. Creativity is important, so continuing with the same type campaign can become stale and boring to a consumer causing them to look elsewhere.
The old rule of PR that can be thrown out is “The only way to get ink and airtime was through the media.” (Scott, 2013, p. 22) As we know, along with traditional media, we have various other platforms to spread messages now. (Social media, blogs, etc.) One rule I believe we could keep is “Companies communicated to journalists via press releases.” (Scott, 2013, p.22) I know there are plenty of other outlets now to reach journalists, however, a press release will always have that professional luster that will make us pay attention. Not to say a company should strictly communicate via press release, but again is subjective to the brand itself. In some cases a press release will work regardless. As Scott (2013) proves by stating “These name-brand people and companies may be big enough, and their news just so compelling, that no effort is required of them.” (p. 23)
No comments:
Post a Comment