Traditional advertising and social media are getting cozier by the day. So cozy that you might want to call them “friends with benefits.” That guy you overheard talking about his favorite yogurt? That woman blogging and twittering about her awesome new car? Maybe not quite so unbiased – since they got that yogurt and that car for free. Say what you will, getting something for nothing makes a difference. Hence, the benefits.

Solicited word-of-mouth is nothing new; BzzAgent has been around a while, sending people out in the world to comment, share and, well, generate buzz. Now, Ford Fiesta is giving away cars to agents. Hey, if I had a new car for 6 months, I would probably like it too. Ah, that new car smell. Nothing quite like it.

Our response? It's time to embrace your inner skeptic. The message is only as valuable as you allow it to be. These days, everyone has something to share, and it’s not all as innocent as it might seem.  As Pete Cashmore wrote in his post "Can Social Media Make Us Buy More Cars?": “In the era of user-generated content, being an informed and skeptical consumer of media is as important as being a skilled creator.” And for every blogger, vlogger, or twitterer commenting on a product, there are ten consumers who need to raise that eyebrow just a little higher.

Of course the real question is: will it work? How skeptical are people these days? Keep watching Ford Fiesta and maybe we'll find out.

For the longest time, digital agencies have done everything they can to convince the world that no, no, no …they only do digital. Why?  Two words: Wall Street.

Remember when Digitas went public?  They (brilliantly) positioned themselves to the dot com rabblery  as "Digital Gone Wild" when, in fact, at the time, more than 60% of their revenue came from offline sources like, say, junk mail.  Did you ever hear Tom Bedecarre of AKQA bragging on his print campaigns for Visa?  Not likely.  For just about ever, Wall Street has given digital agencies a much higher multiple on income than it has given the IPG's and Omnicom's of the world.  So even if the business was there, Digital CEOs underplayed their offline revenue because nothing good could come from it.

But now the advent of online video as a content and ad form may be the catalyst changing all that.  Here in Adweek the formerly high minded digerati of Razorfish (incidentally owned by MSFT of all companies) is taking credit for a campaign in …gasp… broadcast video.

We've thought this would happen forever.  The digital agencies are in the best position to win these clients over the long haul.  Why? EZ. They understand and appreciate data — something the traditonal agency world has yet to fully wrap its
head around.  So, in some respects the high multiples are justified as the Razorfish's of the world may start to gobble up broadcast budgets and position themelves as the center of the marketing infrastructure.  Their future growth curve looks way brighter.

Whoops, didn't mean to do THAT, said the dude from One Show –one of the premier awards shows for advertisements– when he slipped and accidentally emailed the spreadsheet that listed all of the entries (and how much they paid) for the 2009 awards to a handful of agency execs.

Too late, it's out, and Ad Age reports that apparently, even in tough times, agencies are willing to shell out quite a bit for a chance at recognition and industry fame. Total # of entries, excluding interactive & design? 9,795 — with an average cost of $358 each, pulling in $3,507,860 for One Show.

Ad Age estimated also that considering how many entries they received the year before (26,000), the organization got about $10 million in entry fees. One Show's response: We are a nonprofit, and agencies realize that this money goes towards supporting the industry.

BBDO was the hungriest hippo, accounting for more
than 750 of the entries – spending a total of more than
$250,000, according to the spreadsheet.

Sick of hearing about layoffs, bankruptcies, and — dare I say it — cut ad budgets?

Here are few bright spots among all this doom and gloom:

• Interpublic Group (holding company for McCann Erickson, Universal
  McCann, Initiative and Lowe) posted  organic revenue growth of 6.2%
  last year, despite the downturn. That's $6.9 billion in annual revenue, but more importantly, $265.2 million in net income, up from $133.3m in 2007.
• Tech companies are going green. That is, using solar energy to power their massive, power-hungry server farms.
• Brands are figuring out how to do Facebook up right.
• Advertising is still sexy, politically-incorrect, and can be totally dangerous. My favorite: Mad-Men-style ad execs "doing nothing," from JWT Manila.

Which companies made social media work for them this year?

Forrester calls out the corporate projects that it says best used social applications to accomplish business goals.

Below, the winners of the 2008 Groundswell Awards, in the various categories:

• Embracing: MyStarbucksIdea.com by Starbucks
• Energizing: Hershey’s Bliss House Party by House Party
• Listening: Mattel’s “The Playground” Community by Communispace
• Managing: Borderless Workplace by Accenture
• Social Impact: Artshare, Click Exposition, and Posse by
  Brooklyn Museum
• Supporting: Nerd Network by National Instruments
• Talking: Young & Free Alberta by Common Wealth Credit Union

You’re invited to check out any, all, or none of these projects.

Some words of wisdom – from the press release, where they are not often found. [Bold mine.]

“The reality is that consumers are in
control, and companies must be in tune with them in order to constantly
adjust to their needs and behaviors. Aligning with customers is the only
way to maintain loyalty and market advantage, particularly in a down
economy where fighting for every customer counts.”

                                                        – Carrie
Johnson, Forrester VP and Research Director

Cast your vote a few weeks early – for the best digital ads, that is.

Eyeblaster is holding its seventh annual awards event for Digital Advertising Campaigns – and you can have a voice by voting for the People’s Choice Award. Go here to vote before October 17.

New this year is the award for best cross-channel campaign, or the campaign that exemplifies excellence across multiple digital channels.

North American Nominees

• HP Touchsmart, Goodby Silverstein & Partners
• Buckleys, Saatchi
• British Columbia Dairy, Tribal DDB, Vancouver
• San Diego Zoo, M&C Saatchi LA
• Sheraton, AvenueA Razorfish

International Nominees

• Non-Stop Fernando, Lean Mean Fighting Machine
• Mini R55 Launch, Glue London
• Springfield, OnTwice Interactive
• Texas Poker, Ogilvy & Mather
• Cacique, Doubleyou ES

Winners will be announced in New York City on Wednesday, November 5th at the Eyeblaster Awards bash. Will you be there?

Microsoft is trying to get itself back in the news. More specifically, back in the rankings. It spent more than $912 million on marketing last year, ranking # 45 on their list of Leading National Advertisers. And now setting its sights on being Number 2? They’ve got some sort of plan for the next 3-5 years, we hear, that  will go for increased share in web
search, page views, percentage of total time online, and percentage of
advertising dollars. I guess everyone’s got to have a dream.

Ad Age writes of its new review for a "consumer-related creative
assignment", worth $300 million. With that kind of money on the table, likely candidates will be agencies like McCann
Erickson (their agency of record), Y&R, Crispin Porter & Bogusky, and the like. But what is that supposed to mean? That’s like making an announcement for an innovative Internet technology. While you’re at it, why don’t you put an ad on Craigslist for local activity partner.

Although details of the proposed project were not immediately
available, it is believed that the campaign will attempt to help
Microsoft improve its image. When asked if it will be a way to get back
at the popular Mac vs. PC campaign from Apple with its unflattering
portrayal of Microsoft, one executive familiar with the situation said,
"It may be."

Blogoscoped has a post called What if Microsoft had designed Gmail? — a critique of some design choices Microsoft has made in the past. Of course, there is always someone who will point out the obvious – it’s a hapless criticism. Like Jack, who throws the ball back, here.

So, all Microsoft-haters, New Media Douchebags, and industry observers, stay tuned for the revelation.

A study released at ANA today noted that the most significant obstacles to digital media are insufficient
metrics (62%), lack of organization support (51%) and lack of
experience (59%) in new media.

Clients want to hear, "yea, sure, we’ve done this before. and it totally worked." Unfortunately, that is not always the case with the agency. But what about the individual? Is new media really so new for everybody? And how does this tie in to the industry’s quest for new faces – with a slightly seasoned smile, of course?

From the archives of Mediapost’s Online Spin – "To Attract New Talent, the Industry Needs to Change"

People hear that advertising is a rough business and that the
opportunities are limited, but that’s not the case anymore. The same
excitement and energy that was bringing people to the Internet in the
late ’90s is here again, but coupled with sanity and a strong business
sense. It’s a great time to get that message out and attract quality
talent. Our industry needs to start thinking about how to do so. We
need to spend a little more time talking to other people rather than
continuing to talk to ourselves.

And from another post, this one by Dave Morgan about the shift from traditional to digital: "When offline media fully transforms into digital media, what will happen to its talent? [...] As media digitizes, fragments and moves closer to the consumer–as the
media world becomes more “open source” akin to what we’ve seen happen
in the software industry–so will the talent."

The demand is there. Plug in "online" or "digital marketing" into craigslist -albeit the bay area listings- even just under the category of marketing/advertising/pr jobs, and you get hundreds of hits. The question is, how much experience is really ideal for these types of jobs?

Many of the requirements seem vague: 1+ years of demonstrated success in a position requiring strong analytical and quantitative skills, project management experience, interpersonal skills, leadership, etc. You know the drill. You’ve written or answered so many of these types of job descriptions that it almost becomes comical. The only thing that matters is – are they going to have enough know-how that training/hand-holding can be minimized, but not enough experience to be considered mid to upper-level?

The good news for employers was that online marketing is still a relatively new phenomenon. But as the industry grows and revenues increase, you’re going to get these young whippersnappers who maybe worked for Google for 8 months and are now considered clever veterans of the online world. Algorithmic secrets, SEO-dustballs, and spider-friendly treats are hidden deep in the pockets of their ripped designer jeans. They’re no comp sci grads, or web analysts. They may not have known what Web 2.0 was a year ago. But now that they do – does that really make them qualified? Or, like Amish teenagers, do they need a more traditional upbringing in order to ultimately make the right decisions?

Hard to find: 85 percent of surveyed companies said they are having either a "very
difficult" time or a "somewhat difficult" time finding qualified
applicants for open positions, says a Bernhart Associates report.

Ad Age reported last week that Andy Berndt had been "lured away" from his post as co-president of Ogilvy & Mather, New York, by Google, to lead their "new global unit dedicated to collaborating with marketers, agencies and entertainment companies." I may be new to the business, but isn’t that what an agency is? Consultation, account services, and the like.

But they’re getting around calling a spade a spade by calling it well, a hoe.  Digging down to the depths for some self-promotion, from the inside out. Or, as Ad Age called it,

…an admission that
massive word-of-mouth endorsement around a hit in one category — here,
search — and a brand that has entered the cultural lexicon doesn’t
automatically translate to other products.

Do they need help? You be the judge. Sure, there are a suite of products and services that may need promotion, like photo-sharing services, social networking site, and mobile offerings, and they’re certainly big enough to have an in-house marketing services department.

"In some respects Google has been a one-trick pony with search, but
lightning doesn’t strike twice often; very few people win the lotto
twice," conceded Greg Stuart in the article. "When you don’t hit lotto, you need to grind
it out and build a business like everybody else."

Grind it out? At Google? I thought it was all fun and games. Well, I don’t know that they’re going to have as much fun as the in-house lobbyists and lawyers. But they’ll try.

From Ad Age:

If it’s successful in penetrating the biggest ad market, OpenAd will be
yet another potential disruption to the global ad-agency model, and one
a long time coming. A dozen years after the internet gained mass
appeal, OpenAd represents the ad industry finally taking advantage of
flat-earth economics and communications realities to solve one of the
marketing business’ biggest challenges: finding ideas.

Ad agencies once
had a lock on that job, but a more complex media world has challenged
traditional assumptions, meaning that all manner of interlopers, from
media sellers to regular consumers, are now providing grist for the
idea mill.

Critics of the system are many, arguing that this is just another way to outsource labor to cheap workforces, like India and Eastern Europe. (It sure saves on visas.) But with over 122 countries represented, and reported statistics showing a good spread from Latin America, Asia, and Europe – with only 6% from the U.S. and Canada – this criticism is soon nipped in the bud.

So, they’ve got the numbers (9,000) and they’ve got the diversity. What about quality?

Here is their answer, straight from the horse’s mouth: "The quality and integrity of the ideas on OpenAd.net is of the greatest importance to us."

OpenAd.net exists to put Buyers in touch with original ideas produced
by talented Creatives. That’s why we do everything within our power to
help deliver the top quality, unique ideas you’ve been waiting for.

Sales-speak aside, there’s got to be something good buried in the muck. Nine thousand Creatives can’t be wrong, right? *Note the use of Capitals when talking of the Individuals here. Buyers. Creatives. Let’s hope it’s not Suckers.

I bet this was all a scheme hatched by an account exec who just finished Tim Ferriss’s Four Hour Work Week. Be careful what you wish for. It just may come true.