Personally, I would say a bit of both. It just depends on who I’m talking to and what I want to say. I don’t mind sending out the odd tweet and text message, but if I’m going to ask my husband to pick up some milk on the way home, then a phone call might be better.
So why is it that marketers think that they have to have a marketing strategy for digital and a separate marketing strategy for ‘traditional’ forms of communicating with their consumers?
This is what Steve Sammartino from Grey advertising talked about at a breakfast seminar I recently attended. One of things that rang the most true for me was his comment that “We need to get rid of the word ‘digital’. There’s just humans and communications.”
His comment was aimed mainly at marketers who think they need to have a digital presence by setting up Facebook pages and Twitter feeds. So they employ a Digital Marketing Manager to do the job. Similarly ad agencies will have two departments – ‘Digital’ and ‘Traditional’ advertising. Research agencies also seem to suffer a similar malaise with agencies who seem to favour just digital or traditional approaches.
The bottom line however, is that it shouldn’t be about the technology that is or is not used to communicate to consumers or clients. It’s about recognising and embracing that as human beings, we use a lot of different ways to communicate with each other. The latest social media revolution is just another one of the tools at our disposal. And we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that ultimately it’s about communicating in the most efficient and logical way.
Typically, this will mean a combination of both digital and traditional approaches – a clear integration of the ways and means to get the message across. And this applies to marketers communicating with their consumers, businesses communicating with their clients and humans communicating with one another.
On that note, I better text, tweet and phone my husband to ask him to pick up that milk on the way home!