Friday twitter mania.. salivating social media experts on the interwebs  and commentary by some of my most respected comms strategy peers has inspired (if not set on fire) a saturday morning stream of consciousness.

Here’s the source material:

David Armano on Marketing In a Post Consumer Era.

Gareth Kay on Social Ideas.

BBHLabs: Twitter, the end of the Beginning.

David’s post is a great summation of the big picture.. something we all need to think about in terms of the shifting dynamics of how people connect, communicate and make decisions.  BBH nails things in terms of why twitter isn’t the main point of our conversations, it’s just a beginning.. a disruptor.  Gareth (whom I regard enormously as a deep thinker) concerned me at first.  Though it is a good, simple message to digest around social media’s impact on advertising.. I see less relevance on how we tackle the question of what is communications and marketing? Lot’s to chew on all around with all these posts.

See my deeper commentary with BBH and Gareth after the break.  But let me leave those of that are too ADD addled with your tweet decks and facebook pages to read on with a few simple thoughts:

WE  (COMMUNICATIONS AND MARKETING) ARE NO LONGER IN THE “IDEA” BUSINESS.  WE ARE IN THE INVENTION BUSINESS.

Ideas are flat, one dimensional or at the very least contrived. But to Gareths point, social concepts and experiences are not.  This got me thinking further on the root of my reaction to Gareths commentary and differing styles, approaches and needs in the so called “idea” business.

I believe the ad industry needs to come to terms with a simple decision.  Which of the following do you want to be?:

Option 1                                                  Option 2

do you want to be the spectacle creator?  the insular artist that engages people based on your singular vision?  or.. do you want to be the mad scientist.. [fyi.. that pic above is not lee clow ;)] the one that invents crazy-never been done before things?  whom takes pieces and parts and works with other people to develop breakthrough platforms, tools and media innovations?

pick one.. stick with it.  because doing both is tremendously difficult.  there’s totally different skill sets at play.  perhaps there are exceptions (ala Jonathan Harris types) but at the moment those folks are a hard lot to find.  a spectacle creator (borrowing the term from Russell) would seemingly be a more natural place for many ad agencies. For others.. particularly those that are passionate about interactions, technology and multimedia, invention is the place to be.  Not just interactive shops but those that play with many different mediums, tools and technologies (startups, boutiques, academic labs, consultancies, etc).

I’m a tinkerer by nature, so I choose mad scientist.  But the world needs to be inspired by the latter too.  Perhaps if we stop trying to cram all of us towards an evolution to be both..we’ll all be much more productive.  If ad agencies try to invent but don’t have the mindset, skills and people to do so their ideas suck.  If they use their narrative abilities and dreams of creating amazing experiences perhaps they will find greater success?

My commentary to BBH labs and Gareth after the break.

(response to Gareth Kays “social ideas”)
for sure a blind focus on twitter or social media is definitely missing the point. but I think your explanation social ideas seems to be a concept that works tactically well for some our ad-centric peers.  i think it lends itself to singular spectacle creation, intercepting people tactically with an interaction or some type of social theater.  i think there something much bigger bigger at play.

let’s also remember that social media outlets like twitter, widgets and technology enabled real world experience are not a medium so much as a disruptive platform.  all of these disruptions lead to very different “media” that we have huge opps to build upon, strip apart and rebuild entirely new things with. that’s a very different way to approach ideas that frankly most of the industry is not capable of tackling with the people resources at hand.

twitter points to a bigger picture truth:  platforms of communication are being completely rewired. so are the dynamics of human interaction.  the way people connect will inherently continue to change rapidly.  to adapt to this you need not just create “ideas”, you need to invent platforms (literally by technology or figuratively with a combined series of experiences).

using your nike + and run london example there was a series of completely new inventions (product, utilitarian technology, dynamic experiences, empathy for what drives social interactions, etc)

that’s all much more than an “idea”.  of course we’re playing with semantics but I think its an important distinction.  using the term “ideas” feels like a corrupt concept in the ad industry that promotes a kind of laziness.. to stick within a comfort zone to manufacture stuff – no mattter how social or authentic we attempt to approach it.

let’s stop writing ideas on the back of napkins.. and take a moment to understand how all these pieces and parts of how people think, interact and connect via various means and help to inspire creation (whether on our industry side, for those we are trying to communicate with, combined collaboration)

let’s think in terms of a philosophy of BUILDING (social?) inventions.

otherwise we’re stuck in tactical role as the young minds that are wired like jonathan harris leap frog well beyond what we do and leave the creative ad business behind and totally irrelevant.

[response to BBH LABS "Twitter: The End of The Beginning]

it’s not about twitter. what is it with the ad and marketing biz.. propping new bright and shiny things on a pedestal like the second coming only to club it mercilessly? we’ve seen it over and over, branded entertainment, iphone apps, virtual worlds, microsites, myspace, facebook apps etc.

they are losing the larger point. the way people connect is drastically changing. and instead of thinking of how to use social tools to craft with other pieces into an experience.. they are acting like the greeting card biz.. they keep manufacturing one dimensional”greetings” that are becoming more and more irrelevant.