Posted on 

 by 

 in 

Balance

Rob@Cynic left an insightful comment on my post below (thanks Rob):

"…the marketing and communication industry is so obsessed with 'future' that they forget the emotional power of the past…given we're in a generation brought up on technological communication, the good ol' "snail mail" might have more impact and engagement with youth than their current mediums because in many cases, they've rarely received a bonafide letter – especially one that is written with warmth, passion and intrigue.

I believe we're in the midst of a transformational change in communications that is both fundamental and permanent. The relationship that people have with brands and media…how we interact, organise, get things done. Its all changing forever. But I also think that this change is about striking a new balance, albeit a fundamentally different one, and in striking that balance the old will find new meaning.

4 responses to “Balance”

  1. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    No thank you Neil – you’ve let me take credit for George’s genius but as the guy is too clever by far, I will gladly take it, ha!
    Your point about striking ‘balance’ is a great one – and I think it comes down to ‘idea neutrality’ rather than ‘media neutrality’ [that phrase is from my Virgin client – I really add nothing of my own do I!] because once you know how/what you want to do or say, then the message, medium and emotion can all be inherently linked leading to true openness of media choice [ie: snail mail] rather than embracing this disproportionate technological influence most of us in adland and communications have.
    Have I made sense? Probably not – but you’re smarter than most so I’m hoping you can translate my rubbish 😉

  2. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    No thank you Neil – you’ve let me take credit for George’s genius but as the guy is too clever by far, I will gladly take it, ha!
    Your point about striking ‘balance’ is a great one – and I think it comes down to ‘idea neutrality’ rather than ‘media neutrality’ [that phrase is from my Virgin client – I really add nothing of my own do I!] because once you know how/what you want to do or say, then the message, medium and emotion can all be inherently linked leading to true openness of media choice [ie: snail mail] rather than embracing this disproportionate technological influence most of us in adland and communications have.
    Have I made sense? Probably not – but you’re smarter than most so I’m hoping you can translate my rubbish 😉

  3. neilperkin Avatar
    neilperkin

    Yep. Media neutrality was a horrible, overused and meaningless phrase. Idea neutrality is much better. One day maybe we will have complete openness of media choice – I certainly don’t think we have it now

  4. neilperkin Avatar
    neilperkin

    Yep. Media neutrality was a horrible, overused and meaningless phrase. Idea neutrality is much better. One day maybe we will have complete openness of media choice – I certainly don’t think we have it now

Leave a Reply