This has been a rich couple of days for a few ideas surrounding the state of digital marketing strategies and execution--and how they are viewed by the rest of the world. First, there's this .pdf hot off the presses from the American Association of Advertising Agencies (AAAA): "Understanding the Economics of Digital Compared to Traditional Advertising and Media Services." It's really required reading, but I will echo the sentiments of others who say that it isn't perfect but it's a start. The good news is that it VALUES digital marketing strategy and the time it takes to do digital right. If you think your digital agency is "expensive," which we hear all the time, this report does a fabulous job of telling you why it feels that way--it takes a lot of effort. The bad news was from an Internet Oldtimer Foundation member: "The credits and thanks starting on page 42 are hugely impressive. In my 21 years in the digital space, I wish I’d met one of them."

The second idea for this discussion has to do with two AdWEEK articles.  The first, "Are Banner Ads Poised for a Creative Comeback?" accurately praises the thinking and execution of a VISA campaign by nearby agency, AKQA.  The work is filled with mashups, geolocation ideas, and temporal cues.  It's REAL TIME, in all meanings of these words and phrases.  This article links to another, "Ready, Set, 'Go' For VISA."  This details the consumer insight process and brand advertising push from industry powerhouse TBWA.  What strikes me about these articles is that they highlight the conclusions of the AAAA's paper: Digital is different and requires lots of expertise.  But, taken together, these articles prove that branding experts are equally experts and valuable.  When each finds good partners, the work really extends to the great benefit of the client.

@philjohnson has written an article for Advertising Age which cites one of my favorite books, The Innovator's Dilemma, and applies its model to Twitter as the disruptive technology. Here's the important part of the article:

"The bright light for agencies is that they can use this time of transition to make their organizations a proof-of-concept for social networks. They should be able to demonstrate how they have developed their own brand on Twitter and other prominent platforms like Flickr, YouTube and SlideShare. That they have created multiple touch-points for sharing content. That they have built a network that connects all their important audiences. And that they are accessible and open to honest conversation with all the people who want to engage."

Now, the not-so-bright light. Do we really think that very large advertising agencies can turn this quickly? I leave that to the Twitterers to decide.

As many of you know, our Second Life practice is in full swing. Every department at Clear Ink is now involved in the creation of marketing programs for several clients now, and we've taken to referring to the practice as "Clear Islands". I intend to be much more vocal on this blog than I have been in the past because I've been around for a while and I've seen this cycle. Witness a post on marktd, which sounds conspicuously 1996.

Some question whether it’s worth the time and expense, and wonder whether Second Life is just another online fad. “For an agency, it is really more of a showcase, a bit of self-indulgence, a way to promote yourself to marketers that might be on Second Life,” says Jeff Lanctot of Avenue A/Razorfish. Ben Fennell of Bartle Bogle Hegarty calls it “an extraordinary concept” but admits that Second Life, “in terms of presenting creative work, is not a brilliant mechanic.” And AKQA’s Tom Bedecarre acknowledges that, as a recruiting device, the virtual world has its limits: “They still will have to show up in person, so we will see if they are really a troll with green legs, a man, a woman or anyone in between, once we meet them in the real world.

Are these the same people who, in 1996, asked people like me why a business would need a web site if someone could get the brochure by calling an 800-number? No, evidently not. Two are from interactive firms. One says Second Life is "self-indulgence", the other says he is using Second Life as a recruiting tool. The third, a pure ad agency, says it is no good for presenting creative. Second Life is not any of these. It is, very simply, a social networking tool in its infancy. And, spank me later, it is the foundation of what the Internet will be in 10 years.

Says Amanda Van Nuys of Omnicom’s Organic: “Just like any online business, you can’t built it and leave it. It must be a new line item in your marketing budget.

Hooray for Amanda! Remember the "if you build it they will come" times in 1996? We're in those times again. However, we should all know better now that you don't just do a web site or a Second Life build. It is indeed a persistent presence that needs care, feeding, social attention, and maintenance. If you visit many of the high profile builds from recent months (Sun, Nissan, etc.), they're almost always empty. However, if you manage parcels, land and groups appropriately, you have an amazingly powerful tool. <p>I've been called crazy many times in my career. But, over the course of 11 years, the crew at Clear Ink has rarely been wrong about the potential of emerging technologies. We're betting on Second Life bigtime.