Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth

Scroll down ↓

It’s become vogue to declare traditional marketing dead…

We hear, “People don’t want to be interrupted by messages they didn’t ask to see. Now, they’re pushing back.”

And, you know what, with thousands of advertising messages bombarding our eyeballs and brains every day, we ARE tuning out most of what we see and hear. It IS considered an intrusion. And, In 10 or 20 years, traditional display ads, banner ads, direct mail, TV commercials, radio ads may all be dead.

Conversations may well be the future of marketing.

Tribes, relationships, content, attention, permission and engagement may, in fact, be the only possible path to long-term success. And, anyone pursuing old school, in your face, response-driven, blast-oriented campaigns may well be shunned, laughed out of the room for even suggesting such clearly failed tactics…and maybe even shot.

Here’s the problem, those claims may be right or not 10 or 20 years from now. But, I’ve got to run a business TODAY! And, many of those allegedly “dead” techniques still work like a charm TODAY!

In particular, variations of the dreaded “direct response” and “lead generation” funnels DONE RIGHT just plain work.

  • Direct mail done right still kicks ass.
  • Pay per click done right drives billions in revenue every day.
  • Promotional joint ventures sell boatloads of product and service, both on and offline.
  • Affiliate marketing has the potential to move truckloads of stuff.
  • Radio, done well, can build platforms and prosperity
  • Cooperative direct response done right can leverage tremendous economies of scale
  • Guerilla/street marketing with a hypercreative flair can crush it,
  • TV…okay, I still don’t get why anyone spends money on that, beyond infomercials that essentially turn TV into direct-response.

And, the reason I kept saying “done right” is because there is a way to tap direct response channels without feeling like you have to shower every 10 minutes.

Copy doesn’t have to be sickly aggressive to drive sales. Design doesn’t have to boast a cacaphony of yellow higlighter, pictures of Lamborghinis and mountains of thousand dollar bills. Scripts don’t have to be insanely aggressive, upsell useless add-ons or shame people into spending money on things they don’t need and will resent buying seconds later.

So, if I can do direct response in a way that meshes well with my considerable conversation, tribe-building and content driven efforts, makes me feel good about having my name on the message and drives substantially more revenue in a fraction of the time…why would I leave that on the table?

Why would I cut something that’s still working so well from my mix?

Sure, I care where marketing is going in the next two decades, because I plan being in business then. Both online and off.

  • I love content-marketing,
  • I love tribe-building,
  • I love engaging,
  • I love interacting with, leading and learning from the various communities I’ve built online and offline.


  • I also love growing my business ventures as rapidly as intelligence permits,
  • I love having the chance to impact as many peoples’ lives as possible,
  • I love exploring and leveraging ALL the tools available to me to do so, and…
  • I love making enough money to live well in the world and support my family.

Sometimes, though, I feel a bit like I have to apologize for not sticking to the 100% certified organic conversation marketing script.

That’s not cool.

And, here’s something else nobody’s really talking about.

This is really going to piss you off if you’re a conversation purist…

Those making the most money with social media marketing today are doing so by turning it into direct-response 2.0.

There, I said it.

You may not like that. You may think it’s a complete bastardization of what social media is about. But, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s exactly what’s happening.

And, it’s working like a charm for a growing cadre of small businesses and content creators who see the potential.

More and more small businesses have moved chunks of their services and marketing online in the last few years. Some are blogging, facebooking or straight-up advertising, but a more recent phenomenon is tweeting. Of those businesses tweeting, a smallish handful are starting to realize the revenue-generating power of twitter. But, they are doing so largely by turning twitter into a 2.0 version of direct-response.

And, if you’ve never done list-driven direct response, and done it well, this may open your eyes a bit.

Here’s how really good direct response works. You set up a funnel.

  • Step one is you use a wide variety of strategies to find likeminded people who have a problem you can solve. You may buy lists, run ads, do JV promotions, reach out to people in communities and more
  • Next, you drive people to a lead generation offer, you give away something with a high perceived value for free in exchange for joining your list.
  • Then, you “warm” your list by sending out regular, non-monetized, high-value, offer-free messages. If you’re a really savvy marketer, you even promote other peoples’ non-commercial high-value content, solutions and ideas.
  • Finally, every once in a while, you mix in a commercial offer. In classic direct response, it was YOUR offer. Taken online, affiliate marketers have adapted the model and mixed in affiliate offers.

People and businesses make billions every year, yes even today, with this approach.

Small businesses and individuals who are revenue-rocking twitter and social media are doing the very same thing every day by leveraging social media with a direct response sensibility.

  • First, they use a variety of strategies to get people to their twitter pages, blogs and facebook fan pages and become followers. Sometimes, they leverage content to attract folks or search for people with relevant interests and follow them. Local businesses are getting creative, some restaurants are adding calls to action on menus compelling diners to follow them (the direct response equivalent of finding a list of affinity buyers and emailing/mailing a lead-gen offer).
  • More and more, local businesses and content creators are incentivizing the follow (on blogs and facebook fan pages, incentivizing subscriptions and fans is very common now)
  • Then they mix in a healthy dose of non-commercial tweets, posts or updates (the functional equivalent of direct-response list warming).
  • Finally, after building a bit of a relationship, showing a little personality, establishing value and spending a bit of time leveraging the reciprocity impulse, they then mix in…a purely commercial, response-driven offer.

Social media savvy pizza places like Naked Pizza and restaurants like AJ Bombers say, “C’mon over today for X% off your order or get a free beer with 3 slices.” Snowboard stores offer one-day discounts on boards. Soup carts reveal their hidden locations and offer discounts. Bloggers say, “buy my stuff.” Affiliates push merchant offers. And, so on.

See the parallels?

So, maybe it’s time for some folks to climb down off the content/engagement marketing high-horse and call it what it really is…direct response 2.0.

And, before you tear my head off…

Yes, I get that’s not it’s only value, not by a longshot. And, yes, I get there is a ton of additional value in building relationships, asking questions, gathering information and building community. I do it all day long. Partly because I love doing it and partly because I know it’ll be good for business down the road.I get that. Really, I get it.

But you can’t get around the fact that direct response 2.0 IS one use of social media. It’s what most people really mean when they use the term social media marketing…and it’s very effective when tapped this way for a lot of small businesses, online and off.

And, newsflash, the best direct response marketers have been doing the same thing with their lists FOR YEARS. They’ve been treating their “lists” like tribes.

Social media just makes that process faster, easier and more transparent.

Okay, rant over, lol.

Let the comment games begin…

Join our Email List for Weekly Updates

And join this amazing community of makers and doers. You know you wanna...

61 responses

61 responses to “Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth”

  1. Debbie Ferm says:

    I agree with you 100%, and here’s why.

    It works on me, and I’m ok with that. When I have a problem that needs solving and can find someone who will not only provide what I’m looking for, PLUS a boatload of other stuff for free, I’m all over it.

    And I am remarkably average:)

  2. Jonathan, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Traditional marketing is not dead by any means.

    And the reality is, in our businesses, while we might all enjoy having conversations with customers and the world (and see GREAT value in building relationships), at the end of the day we’re also responsible to our families, our employees and our service providers to run our businesses profitably. We must live up to our commitments to them. That means we must make sales in the here and now, not just converse and build long-term relationships.

    I totally see your point. There’s no reason that social media and traditional direct response marketing can’t co-exist and work together.

    I love your term, too: Direct Response 2.0. (With a social media twist!)

    – Anita

  3. Jeffrey Luke says:

    Nice common-sense post. Ultimately marketing needs to drive revenue, and we do that with both “old” and “new” school strategies.

    Social media is a wonderful way to touch customers in a very unique way, but we still need them to buy our stuff. Done right, as you suggest, it can work both ways.

  4. Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by jonathanfields: Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth – http://is.gd/85tmd

  5. Sean Platt says:

    “Those making the most money with social media marketing today are doing so by turning it into direct-response 2.0.”


    That is all.

  6. Brian Clark says:

    We’ve been teaching (and using) Direct Response 2.0 on Copyblogger since day one. The fact that a lot of people don’t realize that’s what we’re doing is proof that it *is* a modified version, and it does work. 😉

    • That’s a big ol’ bingo, Brian (and a Lateral Arabesque Bingo to Jonathan, of course.)

      Here’s something that I don’t see laid on the table often enough: while the 3rd tribe is a continuum, it does NOT contain folks who consider money immoral.

      Those of us who rail against the yellow highlighters and plaid polyester sports coats are NOT railing against business and finance—but, y’know, we often forget to say so, out loud and in English.

      So, I’m sayin’ it.

      I want business to be ‘more human’ (it was so totally overused when I started saying it ages ago.) I want to connect, have relationships, all that.

      But, man, I wanna make a living too. I wanna blog from my riverfront home in Co. Kerry, Ireland, and have the funds to give other aspiring entrepreneurs a leg up. I wanna fund the lifestyle to which I intend to become accustomed.

      So, Jonathan, you’re dead bang right. They’re all tools, and in the wrong hands they’re deadly. In the right hands, they’re gold.

      • *wasn’t* so totally overused [edit button, where are you?]

        • caitlyn says:

          Joel D Canfield,

          I’m finding you & your plaid-coated salesman everywhere, today. Nice on the Lateral Arabesque bingo … folks, with a comment like that I hope you tracked this guy down.

          Meanwhile, Jonathan, for a neophyte like myself who doesn’t even really know this is an argument, I can say that it takes me a looong time to decide to pay someone for something. When I do, I have window-shopped, I have tried on most of the store, I have checked to see if I can get it at the library or borrowed it from my friend, and then, something happens. It is time for me to act.

          As far as I can tell, the impulse to act is independent of any direct attempt on the part of a marketer (in the broadest sense of the word) but is, obviously, an indirect connection to the many pleas for my funds that I get daily. Maybe the impulse comes from an inspiring movie, or tension with my family, but whatever the genesis I will now buy from the place I believe I can trust … the place where they’ve brought me a different size, put the clothes back on the hangers for me, and remembered that I like purple.

          I don’t think it’s an either/or – and neither do you. Thanks for putting things back on the hangers for me, today. I’ll be back.

  7. Wayne Bisset says:

    I shall be watching you! :}

  8. RJ Weiss says:

    Wow! Great article.

    Love the new term, “Direct Response 2.0” Sounds a lot better than social media marketing.

  9. Derek H says:

    I’m with Sean. WOW.

    Great article man. I always knew you were a good writer and savvy entrepreneur, but today, you just summed up the truth about successful social media marketing in one sentence.

    Now when can we expect a product about it? 😀

  10. Traditional marketing is no more dead than blogging is dead either.

  11. James Hipkin says:

    Love it. A point of view on Social Media that doesn’t suggest that if one is good the other is bad.

    But, and isn’t there always a but, while I love direct response, it’s been my business for over 20 years, don’t forget about demand creation. Direct response is much more efficient when there is a demand creation umbrella covering it. Much of “traditional marketing” is focused on demand creation. This is less measurable but no less important. For example, running a TV campaign at the same time as a direct mail effort will improve response rates significantly.

    Experienced Search marketers talk about the demand fulfillment “ceiling.” This is where the next lead becomes twice as expensive as the previous lead. Without an effort to create demand this ceiling gets lower.

    • Lori Taylor says:

      Love your point on this. One thing I find with larger clients is they are running multiple channels independently. For example, email is not really supporting direct mail or connected correctly. Many times they cancel each other out. Too many communications with various outcomes confuse end users and makes a brand feel spammy. The left and and right hand don’t talk enough–social media supported by direct response can transform your business offline and online.

  12. Adam King says:

    “But you can’t get around the fact that direct response 2.0 IS one use of social media.”

    If you refuse to see this or can’t see this, then you clearly are in denial. It’s true. I love that it’s true. It makes the road to my audience so much shorter and allows for easier and much more genuine engagement that say direct mail.

    But the philosophies and core tactics still reign.

    Great article.

  13. Great Post. I just wrote a post regarding the Social Media Hype Cycle. I fully believe that while Social Media is a great marketing tool there lies a danger in too much of it on a continual basis contributing to increased noise and loss of value.


  14. You can’t have a conversation with a company.

    People don’t want “relationships” with brands.

    SMM for companies and brands is about driving behavior, not conversation. People have specifically said their preference is to receive notification of specials, discounts, new arrivals, etc.

    When you’re a one-person company, conversation definitely comes into the mix… but it’s the mix that matters.

    Part of that mix is (loved this) “direct response 2.0.”

    • “it’s the mix that matters”

      darnit; I come to the party late, and everyone’s already said what I was gonna say.

      if you’re gonna survive as an entrepreneur in whatever it is that’s coming, you darn well better be MacGyver, folks; use the tools however they appropriately further your proper ends (and if, like Richard Dean Anderson, ya use a picnic bench to open your sliding glass door once in a while, just know what you’re doing and why, learn the lesson and move on.)

  15. Dov Gordon says:

    Hi Jonathan,

    Just discovered your blog and this is the first post I’ve read. Well said.

    I forget who observed that “Bureaucracy is the triumph of the means over the end” but that’s what comes to mind when I read or listen to most social media “experts.” Way too many are hopelessly entangled in a similar triumph of technology.

    And just as bureaucrats defend red tape and claim it’s in society’s best interest, social media zealots get caught up in their own idealism (or just plain excitement) and forget the goal.

    Dov Gordon

  16. […] See the article here: Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth […]

  17. Lindsey says:

    Totally agree. My most savvy 2.0 friend has been saying this for a while, and bemoaning it, frankly, because it does (done poorly) dilute what twitter and its ilk used to be. But I think you are right that it’s a spectrum and there are ways to do it right. I love the notion of marketing yourself in such a way that you don’t feel like you have to take a shower. I’m still trying to find that way!

  18. zane aveton says:

    Hi Jonathan,
    I recently discovered you and you have quickly become one of my favorites blogs in my RSS reader. I just wanted to say hello, kudos and thank you for sharing — and, thank you for how you share it.

    Another Great Post that as soon as i click “submit coment” I’ll be clicking “share” w/ our online community.

    I appreciate you,


  19. Sean Aiken says:

    Ha, nice rant Jonathan – must feel nice to get that off your chest!

    Now that the intentions of Direct Response 2.0 have been exposed, we’ll see if it becomes less effective 😉

  20. Zoe Winters says:

    This post is pretty damn brilliant. Thank you for sharing it!

  21. JC Hewitt says:

    Thanks for contributing your necessary perspective, Jonathan.

    Social media is a great way to get access to the individuals who use it. Without Twitter, I wouldn’t be able to harass Hugh McLeod or compliment your Tribal Author PDF nearly as efficiently.

    Social media is just one method among many to initiate a conversation with someone. The medium only has a minor bearing on that connection itself.

  22. Evan says:

    I don’t really know how to maintain a thousand friendships.

    Those who claim to do this must like pretty superficial friendships – they must be social media marketers or something.

    On line I think is the old tacky direct response marketing humanised by adding value. Thanks for saying what needed to be said.

  23. blogjunkie says:

    Sonia from Copyblogger has talked about the ‘Kumbaya blogger’ before i.e. the kind who’s super idealistic and loves *conversation*. Those who have not read the post can find it here http://www.copyblogger.com/kumbaya-blogging/

    Jonathan, you’ve boiled down the concept of (Direct Response 2.0) perfectly with the funnel concept. Thanks for sharing.

  24. Mike says:

    I agree with you almost completely.

    Damn fine view, don’t let fools that can’t sell ice water in hell change your thoughts one iota.

    Thanks for creating good stuff.

  25. Richard says:

    Beautiful. I love it when people just tell it like it is. While I also truly enjoy meeting people and having conversations with people, I also know a huge part of social media is all about the benjamins… When I am able to effectively transform my experience into words, I too plan on trying to monetize social media in the right way.

    Thanks for the post Jonathan!

  26. Your writing really challenges me to think outside the box Jonathan.

    I think the best point I can take away from here is to do what you do… both.

    I think at the moment there are quite a few IM guys (highlighter folks) making big bucks without having the conversations.

    I’m not convinced they’ll still be doing it that way in 5 years.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that the marketers who don’t participate in conversation end up targeting and selling to suckers and the naive.

    If you want to sell to a more discerning market, conversation is required.

    Great post.

    – Pete

  27. Dov Gordon says:

    Hi Jonathan,

    Just discovered your blog and this is the first post I’ve read. Well said.

    I forget who observed that “Bureaucracy is the triumph of the means over the end” but that’s what comes to mind when I read or listen to many social media “experts.” Way too many are hopelessly entangled in a similar triumph of technology.

    Dov Gordon

  28. Steve Wolfson says:

    Of course it depends on what your selling, hey I may be a friends of Pizza Hut on face book but if another chain or local place sends me a coupon for pizzas that are 1/2 the price I’m probably going to give it a try. But am I going to get consulting service deals if I send a tech manager a coupon for “Server Installs” 1/2 price!! ” Might be amusing enough to get me a call if I do it right but it will require a conversation. Of course any of the Social Media like the web there will be technical ways to block ads and unwanted conversations just as was done with the Web and even TV’s. Actually (assuming the post office stays in biz) “snail mail ” in some ways is becoming “special” again as its not he default way we communicate, I don’t get bills in the mail much anymore. So certainly an interesting tangible thing from someone I have a relationship with may peak my interest.

  29. Mick Morris says:

    G’day Jonathon, I have made some previous comments here regarding some advertising related things…. this post has mad me re-think my position a bit…

    That’s why I love coming here…. always a challenge to the thinking process, a real issue told the way you see it.


  30. Spot on! The key is to drive revenue. In whatever means possible and in whatever way works. Some avenues work better than others, and that changes depending on the business type.

    I did the direct mailing thing a year or so ago and it didn’t really produce for me. I have better results with twitter and facebook.

    You just have to try different marketing strategies before finding what works.

  31. Shh, of course marketing is dead in all mediums except on-line. Yes, go out and pioneer the new fronter because everything “traditional” doesn’t work.

    Meanwhile me and my clients can such up market share while others spend volumes figuring it all out. Great article, your right properly managed direct response works in all mediums.



  32. Great article; enjoyed the read. I shudder when I hear social media “experts” say – drop all your current stuff that’s working and put all your risk into social media…uh huh.

    “conversation” marketing will take an increasingly larger role, but it’s not the only method.

  33. Jonathan, awesome stuff man. Funny though, I just wrote an article about how the ‘old school’ is dead (or at least really close to it)…but I think the whole key here is balance– Intelligently using old school marketing while embracing the new. Again, GREAT article Jonathan.

  34. Phil Mags says:

    I’ve been thinking alot about the role of social media marketing within the traditional context of marketing. I’m with you in that it’s a component of a mix of marketing methods and overall strategy. One that honestly cannot be overlooked.

    I liken the comments of those who claim classic marketing is dead to those who (in 1999 and 2000) thought web businesses were going to be the main business model moving forward. They even sold Wall Street on that! In hindsight, we can now see that an online presence is necessary, but also complementary to a brick and mortar presence.

  35. Social media has COMPLETELY changed the way our company goes to market these days.

    That said… our key sales driver is still direct response email marketing. Wouldn’t give it up unless you paid me a WHOLE lotta money.

    Using social media WITH email is where it’s at for us.

  36. Naomi Niles says:

    Awesome. You should address the free brigade now. Oh wait, you already did that. 🙂

  37. Jon Jacobs says:

    I’m a newbie at this Web marketing stuff, yet I think I grasped your concept and just recognized what appears to be an example of someone who systematically does what you advocate in this post. Check out this guy’s tweetstream and tell me if I’m right? (It seems like 4 or 5 witticisms, then a low-key product offer, then more witticisms, then another offer, and so on.)

  38. Jodi Kaplan says:

    Jonathan, I think you’ve just invented the 1/4 page marketing plan!

    >>Here’s how really good direct response works. You set up a funnel…<<


  39. Doug Edgar says:

    My problem with social media marketing is the same as with traditional media: marketers will do anything to separate people from their money. I get that it’s their job. I know that I’m cynical and jaded. I wish that there were some places we could go without vultures hanging around trying to monetize everything. The internet started out that way. My wish may be utopian but it is my wish nonetheless.

    • Doug, I just this instant got off the phone with my best friend Jerry Kennedy (who also happens to be my sales training coach) and we were discussing exactly what you’re talking about.

      I love Utopia; I have a really hard time selling things, because in Utopia, people recognise the life-altering value of what I do, and they’re happy to trade their money for my skills and knowledge.

      Utopia can be a pretty hungry place.

      Jerry and I spent 15 minutes sparring on the phone, and in a microcosm of Utopia meeting Cynicville, came up with a newsletter list-building technique which satisfies his desire to help me succeed personally and financially, yet manages to wholeheartedly satisfy my intense desire for my marketing to always be personal, anticipated, and relevant.

      Do a Ghandi, Doug; be the change you wish to see. Make living in Utopia affordable.

  40. Joe Sorge says:

    Wow! It looks like I’m late to the game here. Jonathan, thanks so much for bringing a bit of our story into your blog post here, and what a great post it is. Lot’s more to think about than just how SM applies to social media. But it’s been said well here that Web 2.0 has really just given us in the service industry another way to engage our guests at the point of the experience. And it’s there that we are forming solid and loyal relationships via SM tools.
    Thanks again for the added exposure of our story.
    All the best,
    Joe Sorge

  41. […] also have to acknowledge that traditional models of marketing and customer interaction still work in many cases, and talk about how the new works with the […]

  42. Jonathan,

    I get it. And I must say, having your request to join your mailing list pop up right at the outset of reading your post about the premature death of direct mail certainly did prove the point!

    Though I must say, this mode of double reinforcement didn’t make me want to sign up.

    All right, all right, I know it’s an accident. Just a little ironic.

    • Jonathan Fields says:

      Haha, yeah, that subscription box was actually coded to trigger AFTER a post has been read and you’ve scrolled down to the comments, but it’s seems to be triggering on a timer now, we’re working on it, lol. Interestingly, I was a bit terrified to test it, but the feedback on it has been very positive (when it works) and it’s increased subscriptions many times over (and the content has kept the tribe intact)

  43. Great article..
    Got the insights of social media marketing which you happen to call “Direct Response 2.0”..

  44. This is all true one technique I learned is that you can create a group and build relationship with those members and use them as a list, for you can send direct messages to everyone.

  45. Taking care of business today is key–regardless of what will be happening in 20 years. Knowing how to do direct marketing skillfully makes all the difference.

  46. Nadira Jamal says:

    Maybe I just got lucky with good training early on, but your description of “leveraging social media with a direct response sensibility” is exactly what I would describe if someone asked me to define “social media marketing”.

    If you’re just having conversations, you’re not marketing, just socializing.

    I think what the “organic conversation” argument is missing is that the “direct 2.0” process you described doesn’t have to be self-serving and abusive. When it’s done well and with integrity, it’s like dating. It gives a prospective client the chance to get to know you and what you have to offer before they commit their time and money to the relationship.

    I think the big difference between “direct 1.0” and “direct 2.0” is that social media makes it easier to tell who is interested in you and what you need, and who just wants to get what they want and run.

  47. Stella says:

    Again, why do folks view everything as “either/or”? There is still plenty of room for both (including, in some cases, the use of TV, Jonathan, which is not as dead as you may think. It’s just been wasted for the most part.)

    Companies, and individuals, can and should use both traditional marketing methods and social media IF they are relevant to their audiences of current and potential followers, AKA customers (yes, we need to use that word folks, not all the euphemisms, because whether a product or service, most are indeed looking to sell something and there should be no problem with that provided you have a product or service that has value and is of possible interest to a targeted audience.)

    This constant need to automatically go for social media today, without even thinking about its value and relevance in an overall marketing program, is what is making so many resistant to its use. (No, it’s NOT about how old you are or how long you have or have not been marketing. It’s about paying attention to your audience, being willing to test new media and then also accept that it may not in fact be the best way to reach/influence your targeted “tribe” to act.)

    Just because Twitter exists doesn’t mean you can use it to successfully market a product. In fact, far too many folks, who really do not think or understand how it works, end up wasting time/resources on this and other new media that do nothing to enhance saleability or build a brand– and may even be counterproductive.

    By the way, love your articles and some of the comments, although frankly, the use of jargon by many commentors gets in the way of actual communication. I have to laugh. So many of us opted out of corporations where so much of life was about corporate speak. Now, it’s the same thing with all the social and new media speak. The apparent need to be “cute” and entertaining sometimes limits real conversation.

    FYI: From my experience, most Tweets are a total waste of time. I can count on one hand the stuff that appeals to me as either a consumer or a business professional. I don’t think that “less is more” in any conversation but then I don’t believe life can be lived in 140 characters.

  48. […] Fields: Not too long ago, I raised some eyebrows when I wrote a post called “Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth” that came out [and] said the people and companies I know making real, measurable ROI with […]

  49. Chris says:

    Earlier you said “I still dont understand why people buy TV”

    Disclaimer – I do not sell TV Advertising

    Response – The majority of the Billions spent on TV are for one simple fact, It works better than everything else. And its been measured time and time again, it simply works better for all aspects of the purchase cycle. Fortune 100’s are built on this simple fact alone. Its the lifeblood to every major DR company. CMO’s have been schooled in this for decades. Create compelling measurement to prove your case, and you will slowly see the tide shift. Marketers want proof, not promises, its how their dollars are spent.

    Social unarguably builds trust and identity for your Brand, figure out activation please tell us all how to do it!

  50. Steve Evans says:

    I think that the average person, who once had no choice but to accept whatever advertising was put in front of them in the days before the web and PCs, is coming to realize that they do have the power to begin to control how intrusive the advertising is in the places they choose to visit. They are also realizing that there will also be times when they just want to find a product they need fast – and that advertising can help there too.

    So, yes big obtrusive banners will, I think get the cold shoulder increasingly, replaced by ads in the margin, for example “Facebook style”.

  51. […] social media marketing and it’s applications for selling offline.  Today, I read a great article on that very subject.  It seems there are people in marketing that believe social media should be […]

  52. Lori Taylor says:

    Jonathan, I couldn’t agree more. Social media is a medium. If you use it for brand awareness only, that’s fine. But you should understand that internally and put it in the “marketing black hole”, look your boss in the eye and take the Sally Fields (relation? lol) approach…”but they like us, they really like us!” Even if you measure, mentions, reach, comments, click through on links, etc–if it is not tied to revenue somewhere, then you have to be honest with yourself why you are doing it. Fans are vanity, sales are sanity. (Unless you have a budget just for branding. But even then, you leave money on the table by not offering products or services of VALUE if you have them.) It’s about understanding the audience, their pain and providing a solution. I always ask my clients to get clear on their outcomes. As we’ve discussed, more times than not I hear crickets when asked “what’s the light at the end of the funnel.” (My favorite is “I want a viral campaign.” Going viral is a happening, not a promised outcome!) Direct marketing does NOT have to be spammy–so your point of “done right” is right one. Another high 5 for Mr. Fields (still wishing that was the cookie family 🙂 )

  53. Dawn Groves says:

    Good points all, Jonathan.
    Human beings respond to the same things we’ve always responded to. Sure, we’re more jaded, worldly, and–for those of us online a lot–impatient, but we still salivate when we think about food, hang around folks like ourselves, and steal glances at cute butts.
    Direct Response 2.0 is a sexy box with the same contents.