Some of Mark Ritson’s claims around media are ‘dangerous’ says media agency exec
A senior media agency strategist has taken issue with some of the claims made by controversial marketing academic Mark Ritson, saying he is not “representing all of the facts as we interpret them”.
Peita Pacey, Sydney head of strategy at Carat who is a lead on the Woolworths account, told the National Radio Conference some of Ritson’s claims around traditional media, and in particular TV, are “dangerous” for the industry.
In a keynote session at Friday’s conference Ritson had revisited some of his previous claims around “bullshit” digital metrics, and accused media agencies as marginalising radio because they see it as “uncool”.
Ritson told the room: “Here’s the problem: your average media planner is 27 years old, he’s male, predominately he lives in Sydney, occasionally in Melbourne, he’s never read a newspaper, he doesn’t listen to the radio, he does have a TV but he claims he doesn’t. He is already living the dream of the future. They don’t have a sensitivity to these other media.
“Most of these media planners are very talented and smart people but they have no training in marketing and no training in media, the new generation.
“Marketers are now paranoid they don’t know what they’re doing, and the look on their faces when you recommend radio as an option is best described as unpalatable. It’s like you’re fucking crazy, radio?! What are you? It’s not 1962 mate.”
He also described radio as “the great multiplier” which “plays well with others” and said sales execs should be using that as their pitch to agencies, rather than a “versus” mentality trying to get dollars from other mediums.
In a later session discussing what media buyers are looking for from radio the panel was asked by an audience member whether Ritson’s presentation had “moved” them, and whether agencies do ignore radio because it is “uncool”.
Pacey replied: “He stoked a fire in your belly. He didn’t, I think, represent all of the facts as we interpret them.
“I think some of his messaging around digital overclaiming can be interpreted as valid. The facts that he delivered about TV and traditional TV still the life and soul, I think it’s dangerous to be presenting it that way because it’s not the way it is moving.
“I don’t feel like in our agency we look at radio as a has been media in any way shape of form. I think we need to look very differently at how we use radio. He’s right that it is a complementary medium, and we would never go 100% radio, people don’t just consume one channel. For me it’s about understanding radio’s role in the whole of the mix of what we’re trying to do for our particular campaign or client.”
However Maxus Sydney’s associate director of Intel Zoe May disagreed with that last point, saying they had just completed a 100% radio campaign “and it worked really well”.
She added: “I don’t think we look at radio as not being cool, it’s how do we see the next evolution of where it’s going as obviously you guys have big plans for that and you should tell us about it and tell us that as we’re really excited to hear about that.”
See Mark Ritson’s presentation atthis year’s Mumbrella 360 where he also pulls apart “horseshit” digital metrics below.
How exactly is it “dangerous” to be presenting the facts that way?
User ID not verified.
Mark presents a compelling, logical and considered argument when in full flight.
We need more senior opinion leaders like him calling bullshit on the rhetoric that digital is taking over the world
User ID not verified.
My Uber driver on Saturday night told me his day job was “digital marketing”.
By the end of the trip I knew that:
– videos belong on YouTube
– lots of people are on Facebook
User ID not verified.
It’s dangerous when reality conflicts with the pitch you just delivered to your client.
User ID not verified.
Disruptive thinking forcefully put and robustly challenged can only be good for the industry. More please, Prof. Ritson.
User ID not verified.
“Facts as we interpret them”?
Oxymoronic!
User ID not verified.
I think Peita is correct around some of Mark’s comments – he shows a very ‘Us vs Them’ mentality, when we should be looking at how they can work together.
Every medium has advantages and disadvantages, but I don’t think all brands are fully aware of what these are at the moment
User ID not verified.
Pacey says: “Most of these media planners…have no training in marketing and no training in media, the new generation.”
Why the hell are they being employed or given planning roles if they have no expertise? This is exactly why there is so much cynicism about digital – most of the alleged experts are faking it.
User ID not verified.
He’s offending all the right people.
User ID not verified.
Ritson said that not Pacey
User ID not verified.
The problem for the industry here is not many of us can match wits with a Ritson… including those mentioned above. I like what he’s doing as we need more spirited debate.
User ID not verified.
Go Mark. Its time someone called BS.
User ID not verified.
I’ve said it before, and i’ll say it again.
The biggest issue is the time it takes to plan out campaigns now, with a gazzillion media choices! And the reason it takes so long is because of the outdated systems everyone uses to brief, plan, buy and report. Creating compelling media plans with umpteen choices and sophisticated flighting is difficult at the process level. No one knows what is happening, and the iterations of media plans is chaos. The whole industry is suffering from “systems fatigue” yet NO ONE is talking about this. Everyone has their heads buried in the sand. But I’m telling you, it is the reason we have such churn in the industry. Good people come into it, see the horrifying processes they have to endure, and say F##K that!!
User ID not verified.
I don’t get Prof Ritson’s digital metrics bashing when TV metrics are based on data from less than .08% of Aust homes.
User ID not verified.
No-one has come forward and presented a compelling case for why Ritson is wrong. That says a lot about the leadership at Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and many others who prefer to sit on the side lines and comment rather than enter the debate. He’s won over plenty of fans and he has influence in the C-Suite. Like other marketers, I’m fed up with the number of strategists Facebook continue to push in my direction. They’re a sales function and offer little else – certainly nothing you’d call strategy, just trend-oriented tactics.
User ID not verified.
The tipping point for me was when our media agency tried to sell me a skin for 1 day on well know site for over $100k, quoting ridiculous and quite obviously unrealistic numbers. There comes a point where you know you’re being ganged up on. Good on Mark Ritson for providing an alternate view and keeping it real.
User ID not verified.
You tell ’em P.P. –
User ID not verified.
I don’t get blood tests when they are based on about 0.075% of the blood in your body.
User ID not verified.
Er…. it’s basic sampling. A sample size of .8% has a confidence interval and confidence level well within predictive levels. You can get a statistically representative sample of the whole of Australia with 400 to 500 completions.
User ID not verified.
Alex, Tim. Why don’t you sponsor properly having this out. Let’s get some media agency heads, CMOs, media owners across all platforms and Mark and have a fact based discussion about what does and doesn’t work. An evidence based discussion is what’s needed not blustery opinion. Mark argues very well but he uses facts to make his points and that’s why he’s compelling. If you have an alternative point of view, bring the facts to prove it. Otherwise it’s just your opinion.
User ID not verified.
It’s really not a debate between old media and new media, whatever they are.
What all of our clients engage us to do is to find the best channels to help them sell more stuff, in the most cost effective and trusted way. Anyone who thinks the answer starts with “digital” may have forgotten that.
User ID not verified.
Seconded
User ID not verified.
*drops mike*
User ID not verified.
Here’s what a person with real clout thinks about the media world these days: https://shift.newco.co/when-5-billion-customers-shift-their-habits-you-shift-with-them-1b65f8c92ea2#.1iyid01a5
User ID not verified.
This.
User ID not verified.
Its amusing that Ritson thinks of himself as a disruptor. Mark, in fact you are the status quo, it is digital that is doing the disruption. You cite P&G pulling spend from Facebook as an example of how bad digital is . . . you may want to read the article referenced above. But of course Mark, you know better.
User ID not verified.
I don’t get physical TVs. 99% of its matter is empty space.
User ID not verified.
Mark Ritson’s commentary is great for the industry. He’s smarter, better informed, and more articulate than just about any commentator in the industry in recent years. Raising the level of the debate has to be a good thing for the industry as a whole; we all know that the media agency category is tainted right now, and our clients, staff and potential recruits deserve high quality, informed discussion. We don’t always have to agree, but we do have to have the ability to put forward cogent, persuasive arguments if we don’t.
User ID not verified.
I don’t think Prof. Ritson has said that digital is not a worthwhile medium at all, or suggested that it is unworthy of a place on today’s media schedules.
All he has done has shone a light on some of the measurement ambiguities and suggested we have another look at what problem we are trying to solve and the best way to do so. Surely any media professional would be delighted to engage in a considered conversation around media effectiveness?
User ID not verified.
The lucrativeness of lobbying for these decaying edificises is matched only by the stench of the decrepid horde, lined up in solidarity to deny the inevitability of change.
User ID not verified.
Ditto!
User ID not verified.