As we get closer to the US Election there seems to be polls coming out from everywhere. What is surprising is that in this day and age, that there can be such as large diference in the two. This morning, one poll has Obama 12 points ahead, while another had the lead at only 6. Without knowing the measures or samples used it is hard to draw an accurate comparison however the expectation would be that they would both be looking at similar samples so the results should be the same…market research, love it, hate it?

It is the same old story – can I have two of the latest fads for my marketing mix please sir. The amount of times clients, and marketers in general, want to jump on the newest bandwagon that is going through town to feel that they are at the cutting edge of marketing is unreal. Over the last couple of years it has been Green/eco-marketing, Cause Related Marketing or social marketing. Without really understanding the tools or thinking about how it can sit in their mix, marketers just lump it in and feel that they are driving their brands forward. When done well it is very effective, when done poorly or for the sake of it, it is transparent and fake – which are criticisms launched at marketers too often and usually for the right reasons.

I am all for including new tools but only when the rationale is correct. The reason for this post/rant is an article I read this morning from Steve Rubel (Director of Insights with Edelman and all around Mr. Online Marketing). Steve makes some valid points about using blogs and social marketing in your PR plans and it is well worth the read and also a moment or two to think about it.

Recently when reviewing some concept work for a client, a colleague remarked “We are in the advertising not art business”. We are been discussing edits to the concepts and requests to include more details, the old chestnut from the client – I love it but can you change xyz and add in abc. The statement stuck with me and it really is a principle that more marketers and also creatives need to be aware of.

Creatives can get sensitive when their concepts are tweaked and changed, sometimes beyond recognition, but in essence the ad/campaign has to deliver on its objectives (which are usually measured by sales) or else we are all on the side of the street. The statement is particularly true when thinking about the recent Gorilla campaign for Cadburys. Apparently it had greater recall then Galaxy’s advertising, however it lost market share to Galaxy despite investing nearly £200m in advertising Dairy Milk over the last 18 month.

We currently have a client who is going through a standard bureaucratic process. It all seemed to be going smoothly until the inevitable happened and those in the public sector jumped in with their two big feet.

What does he do – drag the story into the public domain and expose it for the nonsense that it is? All the PR advice is no, he needs to go through the process and deal with things one by one. It doesnt matter that this will cost him more money and delay his project – you can’t upset or argue with those in authority.

I don’t claim or want to be Michael O’Leary’s biggest fan but he is someone that is focused and committed to what he believes in. During the recent radar fiasco at Dublin airport, O’Leary and Dermon Mannion (CEO Aer Lingus ) were interviewed on the radio. Mannion pandered – said that the Dublin Airport Authority were doing all they could, thanked them for their hard work (even tho they knew about the problem for 5 weeks before it brought the airport to a near stand still and delayed hundred of thousands of passangers). O’Leary said it for what it was – a disaster and the DAA just sat on their hands and waited…while the passangers waited, planes sat on the runways and companies lost millions as a result (O’Leary stated (pinch of salt time) that Ryanair were losing a million euro a day because of the issue).

So who faired better – Mannion or O’Leary? I dont know but Aer Lingus hope to break even this year while Ryanair will be in profit. And in 5 years, will Aer Lingus still be here? O’Leary says no but Ryaniar will be.

To come back to our client, maybe he should draw out the issue intp the public, highlight the bureaucracy and mentality of the public service that is attempting to stall any development or growth in our stagnating economy.

What has he to lose – maybe making a slow process slower, what has he to win – getting a stalled ship moving and giving two fingers to narrow minded authorities…what to do.

All the talk at the moment is that we are in/will go into/have been in a recession. Is this the usual bad news for marketers as the chaps in Finance take out their red markers and start slashing advertising and marketing budgets? Maybe, probably…however rather than accept this faith, marketers can embrace it and potentially also do a job at improving our reputation with the lads in Finance and the rest of the departments. Maybe we can shed the image as being cost centres that spend money willy nilly and have no interest in what it delivers.

Now more than ever marketing spend needs to be accountable and now is the perfect opportunity to demonstrate the value we add. Even in times of recessions brands still need to work, campaigns need to deliver and the marketing job goes on. It is continually demonstrated that the companies that marketing themselves well in the bad times rather than go into hiding, perform considerably better in the good times than those that come back out of hiding.

The last time there was a recession (mid 80s), one of the marketing results was the mass development of direct mail. Now twenty or so years on, there could be another new dawn for marketing but only if marketers decide to stand up and be counted rather than cry into skinny extra shot no sugar frappe wappa…ccinos. Make marketing more accountable and maybe accountants will get marketing!