Post by account_disabled on Dec 21, 2023 3:46:26 GMT
“In traditional marketing, for brands, the plan was simple: press, magazines, billboards, radio, TV, emailing to be “top of mind”, i.e. present in the consumer's mind when they have to choose the product A or B. Problems for the consumer: on the one hand, it is “one-way” communication and on the other hand, it is interruption marketing (the expression is from Seth Godin ). Seth is brilliant and has said and written a lot of good things. But I think he didn't invent anything and that a good part of his thinking comes from John Wanamaker: I don’t know what year this brilliantly lucid statement dates from, but this visionary died in 1922… Traditional marketing is very marked and for decades, by very push approaches: we push our brand.
Its content, its offers by multiplying the speaking opportunities in mass media Email Data or by socio-demographic targeting by investing in support or a media that we think will reach a target audience based on their profile and not based on their needs. In traditional marketing we start from the principle that since profiles are similar they could have the same needs. In effect, it was a sort of “shut up and buy”. On the brand side, it wasn't a panacea either. They were in a way blind: little or no direct contact with customers (especially in BtoC) and dependent on specialists in surveys and polls whose data everyone knows has several flaws.
On the one hand, even with the most extreme vigilance it is extremely difficult to ask questions which do not induce an answer and are not imbued with any cognitive bias; on the other hand, on the side of the respondents, the socially acceptable response also distorts the data collected. Finally, the question of the representativeness of those interviewed remains raised. Example: someone does not change their toothbrush once a year and will indicate that they change it every quarter. We know this phenomenon well in political polls where votes for this or that party are still not taken. And, as one of my teachers said “I never had lunch with market research”. .
Its content, its offers by multiplying the speaking opportunities in mass media Email Data or by socio-demographic targeting by investing in support or a media that we think will reach a target audience based on their profile and not based on their needs. In traditional marketing we start from the principle that since profiles are similar they could have the same needs. In effect, it was a sort of “shut up and buy”. On the brand side, it wasn't a panacea either. They were in a way blind: little or no direct contact with customers (especially in BtoC) and dependent on specialists in surveys and polls whose data everyone knows has several flaws.
On the one hand, even with the most extreme vigilance it is extremely difficult to ask questions which do not induce an answer and are not imbued with any cognitive bias; on the other hand, on the side of the respondents, the socially acceptable response also distorts the data collected. Finally, the question of the representativeness of those interviewed remains raised. Example: someone does not change their toothbrush once a year and will indicate that they change it every quarter. We know this phenomenon well in political polls where votes for this or that party are still not taken. And, as one of my teachers said “I never had lunch with market research”. .
