The suggestion that human beings are changing is a favorite hook of presenters and authors. For example, in his book BRANDchild, Martin Lindstrom makes that claim that “Almost every aspect of today’s tween-ager is different from what we have seen among past generations.” And last Saturday, those in attendance at the ANA Masters of Marketing Conference heard from Cammie Dunaway (the CMO of Yahoo!) about a brand new breed of consumer: Consumer 2.0.
Though I wasn’t at the conference, I’ve read accounts of it in the news and on blogs, and watched video excerpts on Ad Age. One of the underlying messages of Ms. Dunaway’s talk was that new methods are needed to market to a new type of consumer.
But, the problem is—I don’t believe that there is a new breed of consumer, because I don’t believe that human beings are really changing. Every time I hear someone touting another change in human behavior, I think of the lyric of a song by Barenaked Ladies:
Everything old is new again
Everything under the sun
All of our fears come true again
And I believe that fear—fear of being out of touch—is what drives the marketing world’s fascination with the latest new thing. But the truth is that most “new” things are not new. Rather, they are old behaviors expressed in new ways, with the help of new technology.
To illustrate my view, I will focus on one aspect of Ms. Dunaway’s presentation. She described four “pillars” which underlie the marketing strategy of Yahoo!: Search, Content, Community, and Personalization. Undoubtedly these pillars do represent important factors in determining the success of marketing online but—are they really new? New enough for Consumer 2.0?
Let’s examine these four pillars. Did they exist offline before they became factors online? Did they in fact exist before advertising? I think you will agree that they did.
Consider search. An age-old behavior, search is the means by which we satisfy our needs and desires. While our ancestors searched for food in fields and forests, we search for food in supermarkets. When our ancestors needed to know something, they asked members of their tribe or village. We search for information in books, or on the Internet. While searching for information online, we may use a new tool, such a Google, but searching itself is not a new behavior.
Content Content has been king for years. The names Confucius, Geoffrey Chaucer and Mark Twain live on because they created great, memorable content. Salon.com and YouTube may not be in the same league, but they provide content, and people still value content that is informative, interesting and challenging.
Community If humankind were a bunch of loners, we would not have gotten past beta version. The mammoths, moas and dodos would still be strutting their stuff. Online or off, community is the essence of what it is to be human. The new content-sharing technologies simply mean that people can share stuff easily, not just with members of their immediate family, but also with complete strangers.
Personalization The lack of customization – never mind personalization - that has characterized the Web to date flies in the face of the age-old human desire to express individuality and be recognized for who we are. The desire for personalization is not unique to Consumer 2.0; rather, it’s central to Person 1.0.
So the four pillars are not new. People are not changing. As I pointed out to Martin Lindstrom, the fact that tweens today create their own web sites does not make them different from previous generations. Go back in time, and the grandparents of those kids spent their time building crystal radio sets, much to the amazement of their parents.
So next time you hear someone claim that everything under the sun is changing ask yourself: how will the new technology or trend help people to express their inherent needs and desires? Once you have done that, you can figure out what it means for your brand and marketing plan.
(21 votes, average: 3.52 out of 5)
Loading ...
October 13th, 2006 at 9:52 am
Nigel, I never had you down as a Bare Naked Ladies fan….have you been hanging out with the interns again?
For once I am entirely in agreement, the proliferation, availability, cost and sophistication of tools is different, but human nature hasn’t changed.
What has changed is the media consumption landscape and the sophistication/marketing savvy of the consumer (and the media planner/marketeer)…there is (and always has been) a constant need to leverage novelty and innovation to generate consumer engegement.
Research companies are perfectly equipped to guage the impact of these new forms of media, but clients have to be prepared to ’shell out’ for more complex designs and analytics and not try to cram everything into a 20 minute brand tracker.
October 13th, 2006 at 10:45 am
The fact that I am a Barenaked Ladies fan supports the point that human nature has not changed.
Back in the mid-90s a group of us on a sea kayack trip on the West Coast of Canada were discussing music. The trip leader - ex-actor and very genuine, funny guy - recommended Barenaked Ladies. When I got back I bought “Maybe You Should Drive”, then “Gordon”, etc. So, the power of WOM and personal recommendation was just as strong on a wet, rainy beach in the Johnstone Strait a decade ago as it is online now.
October 14th, 2006 at 8:31 am
Nigel,
I think you are both right and wrong.
A lot of this is plain old marketing as it has always been.
However, there has been a fundamental shift in context and the environment.
Companies could succeed for a time if they just beat people over the head with GRPs, it was hard for consumers to seek out masses of opinions and they didn’t have the technological tools to voice those opinions.
The internet has also given rise to new business models that challenge the old school incumbents who used to be able to rely on the security of their footprint or distribution agreements.
Amazon
E-Bay
Google
Netflix
You Tube
Yahoo
Skype
Expedia
Apple’s -iTunes
etc………
These companies and brands existed 10 years ago and in their short history have changed the rules of marketing and business. Skype has millions of users, but they didn’t spend any money on advertising to get them. Ask people at Wal-Mart who they fear most and they will tell you Google.
The qualities of good marketing and branding have stayed the same, it’s just how you do it that’s changed.
October 16th, 2006 at 7:54 am
Hi Edward, thanks for the comment.
I think we actually agree. My point was that the basic drivers of human behavior have not changed, I was not suggesting that business models are not changing. In fact, technology and business models are impacting the way we do business every day, witness the shift of advertising and market research to the web, but the way people react to our efforts remains basically the same. So yes, the principles of good marketing and branding stay the same (because the fundamental drivers of human behavior remain the same), but how you put that into effect does change.