Is the Word “Interactive” Irrelevant in Marketing Yet?
Thursday, August 4th, 2011When will the word ‘interactive’ become irrelevant in marketing? Soon, I hope.
Back in 2001—before the first dot-com crash, before the app marketplace—our predecessors in the Minnesota Interactive Marketing Association produced the very first MIMA Summit. I was working in Boston at the time, and recall the fervor that era required, distinguishing interactive marketing from its sluggish parent. ‘Interactive’ described a new approach to thinking about the practice of marketing. It defined a rejection of bureaucracy, an embrace of entrepreneurial action and much better taste in eyewear.
Working in and creating ‘interactive’ has certainly rewritten my deepest understanding of the role of marketing and how it can best serve the needs of the world. And I believe the inception of ‘interactive’ has changed business, not just marketing, forever. A few examples of how interactive marketing advances have impacted business over the past ten years:
Data
The sheer amount of digital data created in the early days used to numb and crush but now serves to inspire, fuel and sustain. In the past decade we have seen data become the new storytelling device. Yet, as our 2011 morning keynote Avinash Kaushik has noted, the vast majority of marketers still do nothing with the incredible stores of data at their command. Where is the next Nike+, which is already over six-years old?
Empowering Tech, Empowered People
Perhaps the greatest impact of the past decade has been the technical means and avid culture inspiring individuals to produce, curate and promote as they see fit. Marketers are no longer the only ones marketing, nor are they entirely in control anymore. This has re-shaped how creative agencies operate and opened billions in realms of new marketing services.
DIY Revolution
Home Depot’s “You can do it. We can help.” tagline synthesizes the effect of interactive upon marketing over the past ten years. Consumers don’t need brands and marketers the same ways that they needed or utilized them in earlier decades. It’s not about passive consumption anymore. Marketers need to embrace the ability and willingness of people to tinker with the inner workings of the brand.
“Good Enough” Revolution*
The flip side of easily empowering technology is a lessening interest in product quality and craftsmanship. The new enemies are cost and time. The World Wide Web and ubiquitous computing creates a false confidence, that anything can be done faster and cheaper. And the truth is this revolution cuts and challenges agencies and marketers with equality.
“Free” Revolution
We also now have the dramatic reduction in costs of processing, data storage and transmission – what was prohibitively priced is now almost free. Where the “Good Enough” revolution lowered expectations of quality, the “Free” revolution made it okay for anyone to act big. Small agencies now have access to tools and functionality that only big agencies could afford in the past. And ‘pro-sumers’ can effectively act as agencies if they want, which they often do.
There are more, and there will be more of these examples. That is the nature of a rapid re-combining, testing, and mutation of existing systems and rules. This is why I’m convinced all marketing is inherently interactive now, and we probably don’t need the term quite as much as we used to. We’re not over yet, not by a long shot.
Good thing there’s the 2011 MIMA Summit coming up, featuring Wired’s Chris Anderson and Google’s Avinash Kaushik. You’re sure to hear about all of these ideas, and many more. And currently all for the same ticket prices as 2009. Hurry, before time runs out.
*Kudos to our 2011 afternoon keynote, Chris Anderson’s Wired magazine for first coining this term.
— Tim Brunelle
