Let me elaborate.

I am of the belief that today’s most purposeful marketing (that which satisfies the near-or-long term “bottom line”) is that finds unique ways/methods to embrace/reference/dance around culture. In a landscape ridden by unorganized noise where it’s always rush hour, paired with unlimited interpretations of pounds and pounds of data, it’s often difficult to navigate where to push, where to pull, and quite frankly, where the hell to rest your hat (this is especially true of national/global brands).

Fear not. (And keep reading after the jump.)

To add some perspective to my earlier comparison, I cringe whenever I hear the term “they won’t get it” when discussing campaign/project creative that is perceived to fall short with the “masses” (as if we’re talking to one, singularly-conscious general market). Not so much because it isn’t true, but because it implies that it’s a bad thing (it isn’t). In fact, the moment the argument is even entertained, I’d argue the authoritative tendency of said brand erodes, even if immediately unnoticeable.

Your product or service isn’t going anywhere (at least I hope not), and neither is its fundamental raison d’être. However, keep in mind that culture is the most ethereal variable in your quest for supremacy. No matter how much we as brand stewards think we do, we don’t “own” culture- no one does. Culture is a free-flowing, evolving/devolving phenomenon that we can, at best, permeate or predict-  never fully control.

In my opinion, not making a point is of greater consequence than one’s audience/community/tribe not “getting it”. Because if you’re truly positioned the right way and equipped with an unwavering sense of self (that whole meme of “brands having personalities”), your audience is guaranteed to eventually get “it” because you (and your narrative/creative) will shepherd them there. People know when their intelligence is put on trial. There is nothing more boring or of less impact than a prefabricated, fly-by-night attempt at attention in this era where differentiation is the holy grail. Difficult takes a day, impossible takes a week, and engagement takes a leap of faith in looking passed the LCD (lowest common denominator) to achieve true suspension of disbelief.

suits suck!

Advertising Age debuted an exposé today (in their “Digital A-List 2010″ section) about Lady Gaga and her unfathomable, drought-defeating anomalous rise to acclaim in which they attribute her success to social media. While I don’t completely disagree, I’m not sure if Gaga’s time in the spotlight has been a landscape-definining case study for social media marketing.

I’ll elaborate….

While the numbers suggest her to be a social media rock star by Web media standards (a combined 8 million fans on Facebook & Twitter, and a disgusting amount of cross-channel views & impressions *Cam face*), her campaign to the top hasn’t exemplified any market-defining activity or out of the ordinary use of the space- she’s a champion of the old model ruling with an iron fist in the new media environment.

But for how long, and to what extent?

Using Twitter as an example- at 2.8 million Twitter followers with only 255 tweets, Lady Gaga hasn’t exhibited the “socially engaged”  behavior that us marketers advise our (non-human) clients to exemplify. Her machine (Akon), her brand associations (Polaroid, Beats by Dre, Mac, Virgin Mobile), and her alliances with various areas of lifestyle have largely defined what we’d consider to be her brand ethos, and have had a balloon-like effect on her perceived status. Not to mention her timing- 2008 witnessed a renewed general interest in electronic “pop” music, as evidenced by the domestic popularity of Daft Punk, Justice, etc.

The argument here is that the digital landscape has simply provided a means for her story and persona to proliferate amongst people who were genuinely affected through a traditional media onslaught – and that she’s done right by it by virtue of her embracing it, even in the limited extent that she has. We live in a world where music sales are diminishing, yet consumption is at an all-time high. That simply means that to affect the bottom line (in this case music sales), popularity within the digital space is a metric that, when combined with great PR and key integrated marketing approaches, can move the needle. Mashable’s Alex Mann asked the right question in his piece on Gaga’s social media explosion: “if there was an absence of free channels to hear Gaga, would her album sales be higher? Or, does the social media universe only perpetuate and support her existing successful career?”

I truly don’t know. However, if anyone is in the right to set digital precedents to use culture to push product, she’d definitely be the most fitting.

Stay tuned.

SUITS!

A close colleague of mine (whose image I’ve cropped out in respect of his privacy)was putting together names for an upcoming seeding (using the word “influencer” to describe myself is too vain. plus you all already know. ha!) initiative his agency is executing, and he IMed me to let me know.

One can only wish, right? lol…

For those who are reading that don’t fully understand the context of the above microconvo, click here for Mr. Kirshenbaum’s stats.

SUITS!