We’re a couple of days late with this, but we wanted to point you to a piece in this Sunday’s New York Times Magazine: Walter Kirn’s essay about the increasingly aggressive tactics marketers use to put their messages in front of consumers. Prompted by the Cartoon Network’s recent guerrilla marketing stunt that went astray, he writes, “I think marketers are playing with fire by ambushing people at every turn. The more varied the places in which their ads appear, the more diverse the human situations in which they’ll be received. A result may turn out to be anger, not a sale.” Kirn describes finding a Rolodex ad printed on the bottom of an airport security tub and wonders why a company would choose to associate its product with such an experience.
Such feelings are fuel for the argument that events may be a better use of marketing dollars than display advertising, no matter how unusual or provocative the location. The piece also hints at the power and delicate nature of the whole concept of experiential marketing—that an experience can send a powerful message but not necessarily a good one. That’s something to consider at the next meeting with event sponsors looking to paste their logos on everything in sight.
Posted 02.13.07
Such feelings are fuel for the argument that events may be a better use of marketing dollars than display advertising, no matter how unusual or provocative the location. The piece also hints at the power and delicate nature of the whole concept of experiential marketing—that an experience can send a powerful message but not necessarily a good one. That’s something to consider at the next meeting with event sponsors looking to paste their logos on everything in sight.
Posted 02.13.07
