Bob Hoffman on ‘The Golden Age of Bullshit’
At Advertising Week Europe, held in London earlier this month, Bob Hoffman, author of the adcontrarian blog, opens a fascinating debate on the failed predictions of advertising experts over the past decade, with particular focus on the social media marketing of brands.
VIEW THE VIDEO
Bob Hoffman is The Ad Contrarian. Bob is an author, speaker, and partner in Type A Group, a consultancy to agencies and marketers.Bob is author of “101 Contrarian Ideas About Advertising” which is the #1 selling advertising book on Amazon.Bob is also author of the book “The Ad Contrarian” and “The Ad Contrarian” blog, which was named one of the world’s most influential advertising and marketing blogs by Business Insider.
In 2012, Bob was selected Ad Person of the Year by the S.F. Advertising Club.Bob was previously chairman/ceo of Hoffman/Lewis advertising, one of the West’s largest independent advertising agencies. He was formerly ceo of MOJO USA and president and creative director of Allen & Dorward.Bob has created advertising for McDonald’s, Toyota, Shell, Nestle, Chevrolet, Pepsico, Bank of America, AT&T, and more companies than he cares to remember.He has served on the board of the Advertising and Marketing International Network. Bob has also been a middle school science teacher and served as Special Ass’t to the Executive Director of the California Academy of Sciences.
27 Comments
Great talk. We need more contrarian thinking in this business.
It’s sad but true. The saddest thing of all is that nothing will change.
The bullshit will continue. Clients will neck the cool-aid, before pissing their money away talking to themselves and, as Bob points out, a bunch of computers.
Talented people who understand the importance of ideas will continue to be labelled “Luddites” and those who can’t seem to understand that the technology is not the idea will carry-on oblivious.
Sad.
I find it really sad that the most interesting article on the blog in ages gets two paltry comments, whereas slagging off the latest Droga ad gets dozens.
Don’t you guys care about this business?
Found this talk really encouraging to hear. For ages I’ve been seeing case studies of social media campaigns and 99% of the time “what happened to sales?” is the only question I’ve got that doesn’t get answered.
For anyone wanting to dig deeper on FB’s bait and switch and what it means for a brand’s FB page this dude (another science guy oddly enough) does a fantastic presentation/analysis of what happened when he advertised his business on FB:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag
So glad this out there. Sick of the so called ‘social specialists’ in the agency talking shit the entire time and actually believing and preaching it like some kind of social cult. Most of the time I feel they’re just trying to justify their jobs.
Bob’s Pepsi example is great. No one in their right mind wants to engage in a brand as much as the Social cult want us to believe they do.
Unfortunately this sort of shit will continue to get peddled until the wool gets removed from clients’ eyes. I weep at the thought of the money being pumped into Social Media salaries at agencies around Australia simply because it’s like cat-nip for clients.
Sorry, Pterodactyls and T-Rexes, but while the medium isn’t the message, Social is here to stay. It’s growing like crazy and is an undeniably huge part of everyday human life. If you don’t use it as a channel to talk to people, and can’t see its potential, you’re the ones drowning in your own bullshit. Go sit at your tellies and let the rest of us evolve with reality.
All these comments backing up a guy who doesn’t live in reality.
We all know that social isn’t the answer, thats obvious, but the world and people have evolved well beyond advertising and the channels that all the dinosaurs above and Bob are clinging on to.
The irony is that there is more snake oil and bullshit in mass advertising than anything else.
Using Apple as an example of someone who uses mass advertising is just retarded, they built amazing products, an ecosystem and the biggest army of advocates in the world. Yes they create mass advertising, does it have anything to do with their success? No..
Normal people are watching TV in ways that do not include TV, the younger generations are pirating/downloading everything. Those under 20 are not buying TVs, are not reading press, are ignoring most advertising. So what happens in 3-5 years? We just sit with our head in the sand.
TV audiences are growing, cross platform, but attention is literally dying in the ass.
The only bullshit here is a lack of ability to see that normal people are changing daily and advertising as a whole is becoming less and less effective.
Carry on thinking this way, the world has and will continue to leave you all behind. Which is brilliant.
Hello Dinosaur alert,
did you actually watch Bob’s amazing address? By your comment I would assume you didn’t, but I don’t like assuming, which is why I asked.
He didn’t say the social medium needs to die, and he said he was a user of the social medium. It helped him become an influential blogger and best selling author.
His message was for us to be sceptical about the folks pushing clients and everyone to believe the bullshit that real people want to have “conversations” with brands. Also that likes and tweets don’t translate into sales like the bullshit artists lead everyone to think.
I’m 22, so I’m not old, but I’m sick of brands asking me to “join the conversation” fuck off already.
Cheers,
Freddie Miller.
I think there is a logic flaw to your ‘argument’.
Bob Hoffman is the one questioning perceived wisdom, challenging accepted business practices and attempting survival of the fittest. He is the mammal.
You are the one burying your head in the sand and blindly following a path that patently doesn’t work.
Which would make you, in evolutionary terms, the dinosaur.
As one would expect, I’m sure you are unable to see this.
Hi Freddie Miller
Yes I did watch it, so thanks for not assuming.
And I still don’t agree with it or think it’s ‘amazing’ – unless you mean amazingly ignorant.
People willingly have conversations with brands all the time, and will do that more and more.
Sure, we have to be wary of vacuous conversation starters, and not overload people with empty reasons to take part in social chatter, but that doesn’t mean it’s snake oil or bullshit. At all.
For an expanded version of my answer, see ‘Brilliantly retarded”s brilliant comment above.
And for the record, I’m sick of hearing the dull, pompous thuds that are the dying thrashes of Brontosaurus tails.
Cheers,
Dinosaur Alert
Dear @Dinosaur Alert
You think wrong. Because, as the dinosaur, as one would expect, you can’t think at all.
Best,
Dinosaur Alert
Dear @Dinosaur Alert
You think wrong. Because, as the dinosaur, as one would expect, you can’t think at all.
Best,
Dinosaur Alert
It’s important to show both sides of the argument. So here’s the counterpoint:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itvvFfeLh84&feature=youtu.be
Thank you for proving my point so magnificently.
At least you’re typing for me now.
My planner liked it….
I’m on the fence – yes I believe a lot of what is currently being discussed is bullshit BUT this is more due to half-arsedness by clients and agencies. Nike+ is social idea, enabled by tech that translates to sales and serves as a comms platform. Problem is constructing a similar requires investment and thinking from all parties involved. I can promise Nike didn’t walk into the room and ask for simply more FB likes.
@ Dinosaur Alert, Wake up. It’s your thinking and close mindless thats makes you prehistoric. To think TV is going away is a little naive and stupid. Social only plays a tiny part and if you really think people like to have conversations with a brand then you need a reality check.
i’d really like to comment on this subject but i’m way, way too busy having a social conversation with a brand.
Wake up to yourself Dinosaur Alert!!! Your thinking is exactly what’s wrong with the Social exaggeration generation.
An enjoyable rant, playing to the crowd…
But… the population of Australia is 23 million people. To use his data driven argument against him, 81 million people have actually voluntarily chosen to like the Coke page. 46 million have put their hand up to follow Disney. 43 million to follow a company that makes cold coffee, Red Bull. 36 million for Starbucks etc.etc.
Not insignificant numbers. Especially when you overlay them with the fragmentation of TV in a market like the USA with hundreds of channels and people on ad free binges on iTunes, Netflix, Hulu etc.
Media landscape-wise Australians are vast consumers of digital content. Some of the most passionate in the world. Think it’s not important? Try leaving your phone at home for a day.
Agree that there are a lot of snake oil salesman and women taking advantage of prehistoric clients. But people at Google, Pinterest, Facebook, Twitter etc aren’t saying advertising is dead – it’s actually how they are monetizing their product.
It’s here. There’s no going back. You just have to be smart about how to take advantage of it.
What’s the point of quoting numbers of likes, clicks and shares as evidence of effectiveness when we all know the other brutal bullshit.
80% of them are generated by click-farms in Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa .
The myth is that social activity in digital space makes it perfect for social marketing and somehow this leads to sales in the real world.
That’s why I set very strict objectives and KPIs for my digital budget. And you can bet it isn’t measured in likes, clicks & shares.
Yes, 81 million people (or bots) have Liked the Coke page.
So what?
Firstly they Like it because of the big old-fashioned ads they’ve seen over the years. Ditto Disney. Ditto Red Bull. Ditto Starbucks. These are all big mainstream brands who have spent big bucks building said brand.
But again, so what?
There is much evidence that liking a brand is good. There is zero evidence that Liking a brand on FB does anything more than liking a TVC does.
Yet gaining Likes is lot more expensive, as the Pepsi example indicates.
@Clinet I quoted the like because Bob said that people don’t want a relationship with brands and I think that’s proven to be false.
Those big digital brands are worth billions – billions. Would love to see your source for the 80% number.
The decline in time with print. newspapers, radio and TV etc is undeniable. I will say that Australia is a little unusual as a lot of people don’t have cable and there are only a few channels. But, this was a speech by an American to Europeans.
And I applaude you for setting strict KPI’s for all your media spend – you’d be a mad if you didn’t.
@1:53am – agree TV has been amazing building brands over the years. And it’s still super important, especially in a small, concentrated station market like Australia. But look at where people are spending their time – YouTube, google, Facebook, Twitter etc – they show photos and play videos aka TV.
So, it can be a similar tactic and ad – just a different screen.
Hi Andrew
Check out ‘Facebook Fraud’ re Virtual Bagel. Over 2 million viewers have seen it on YouTube. The entire Facebook lie is laid out on how click farms not only distort but mislead the veracity of clicks.
They are the steroids of social marketing.
Yes- brands are worth billions. So the experts tell us.
However no financial body in the world has managed to have it listed on the balance sheets. And this is not from lack of trying. Back in 2003, a nameless global holding company funded a lobby to have the worth of a brand to be considered as an asset but no accounting body would support it.
CEOs & CFOs don’t buy into fancy powerpoints of abstractions, prophecies and the scare tactics of admen or math men. Money talks and bullshit walks.
To be fair, I tried have a conversation with a global banking brand all weekend. But when I contacted their 24/7 hotline, they put be on hold for 40 minutes.
To customers, this is the only conservation of the brand we actually value.
I prefer my bank to spend their social marketing budget on beefing up their call centre .
@Client, I looked up the Virtual Bagel video you referenced and saw this:
https://www.jonloomer.com/2014/02/11/facebook-fraud-response/
Any time there’s a new technology the scammers jump in to make a quick buck.
The article you referenced is from 2012, a lifetime ago in the new world. Facebook didn’t even have a mobile offering back then now it’s the most popular mobile site in the world. Over 30 mins are spent on it each day on average – and they have over 1.2 billion people using it.
Plenty of global CMO’s are seeing great business results – Mark Prichard at P&G, for instance and Jim Farley – at Ford are big advocates.
There is a new landscape you can’t deny. For starters the TV market in the USA is so fragmented, hundred of channels, so you can’t buy as efficiently as you can in Australia. And that will change in Oz too.
Also a lot of the people marketers want to reach have cable and can time shift stuff and/or binge on iTunes, Netflix or Hulu etc. If you chose to subject yourself to ads, you’re mad.
For the record I love making TV ads. I hate watching TV ads.
I think labeling things digital, social, experiential etc. and thinking about them differently is part of the problem. Fragmented budgets, agencies, responsibilities and ideas.
Which vertical are you in? What are your business objectives? How do you measure you various platforms?
@A client
The value of a brand isn’t recognised as an asset? If only. Australian Accounting Standards (AASB1013) include the value of “effective advertising” and “brand” as non-current assets…believe me, trying to account for goodwill and its inevitable impairment keep me up at night.
So you’re half right, CFOs hate Social because they know that any financial benefit is tenuous…if it’s there at all. But at least they can amortise the cost.
On the other side of the boardroom CEOs love it. Social makes a pretty graph to show shareholders, and it is (at least temporarily) on the balance sheet.