Will Publiomnicomis Take Over AdLand and the Media Universe?

It’s been a couple of weeks since we last posted on the ThinkInk blog, not because we’ve had nothing to say but because we’ve been crazy busy.  Summer is usually a time when a lot of businesses wind down, but it’s been the opposite around here.

New people, new clients and lots of new ideas...stay tuned for more on that but, in the meantime, we have a lot to say about last weekend’s announcement of the Omnicom-Publicis merger.

You know corporate news is serious when two things happen: the story breaks sometime between 5pm on Friday and 7am on Monday (slowing down media response and giving in-house spin doctors time to go into information-management mode) OR if said news is lampooned by comedians.

In the case of advertising agencies Omnicom Group, based in Manhattan, and Publicis Groupe SA, based in Paris, both have occurred. Last Sunday, in a lovely photo-op embrace, the agencies’ head chiefs announced the intended merger, valued at $35 billion. Meanwhile, a July 29 headline in The Onion read: “Merger of Advertising Giants Brings Together Largest Collection Of People With No Discernible Skills.”

Gibe aside, a merger of this magnitude is no laughing matter. If approved, it will have a profound impact on the advertising industry – and far beyond. Whether the fallout is “good” or “bad,” however, is up for debate.

Camp A: Spooked

On one side is the “spooked” camp, with words like “monopoly,” ”behemoth,” and “stifled competition” on the tips of its members’ tongues. Considering that the new company (will it be called Publiomnicomis?!) will have spent a combined $3.31 billion in media placements during 2012 accounting for nearly half of the world’s top 10 media agencies’ efforts, it’s more than a fair concern and one that I appreciate.

Camp B: Rosy-Eyed

Then there’s the other camp, those who see opportunity – an opportunity for smaller firms to capture new business as some disgruntled clients flee, industry pricing/digital ad value and KPI standardization, as well as increased resources to acquire, manipulate and act on big data. The latter point will help adland better compete against Silicon Valley natives like Google, Facebook, Salesforce and Adobe, among many others.

Camp C: Vanessa

My camp falls somewhere in the middle. If the proposed mega-company survives the scrutiny of both US and French regulators, the bigger question becomes “what type of precedent does Publicis Omnicom’s soon-to-be-existence establish?” Just as the airline, automobile, entertainment and pharmaceutical industries have endured mergers and acquisitions for decades, what will the advertising landscape look like in five or ten years? Will there be room for corporate and creative independence or will the specialized firms of today, like ThinkInk, be relics of a bygone era?

I really don’t know. Some 46 countries must ultimately give their blessing and the final merger may not be complete until early 2014. So there is lots of time for positing and pontification.

But don’t let your head and screen be your own echo chambers. Share your views with the ThinkInk community: do you think the advertising world will embrace this new corporate marriage or will it leave executives across the media landscape po’d and just plain scared?

Celebrity Boob Jobs More Important than the Victims of 9/11? NBC Thinks So

Over the past few weeks, a number of ThinkInkers (myself included) have been spending a lot of time sitting in airport lounges, in cramped seats at 35,000ft, emailing from the back of taxis or shepherding clients through a series of trade conferences in different time zones. To say we’ve been busy would be a gross understatement.

So I haven’t been keeping up with my vigorous daily digesting of news. Naturally, when I did get some time to pore through last week’s newsfeeds, I couldn’t help but groan when reading about NBC’s blunder on the 11^th anniversary of 9/11.

While all the other networks cut away from their regularly-scheduled morning programming at 8:46 am on Tuesday, September 11^th to observe a minute of respectful silence for the thousands of innocents who lost their lives that horrific day, NBC’s “Today Show” skipped the brief tribute and kept rolling an interview with 

Kardashian matriarch Kris Jenner, who rambled on about her breast implants.

Really, NBC?

Naturally, the network earned itself an avalanche of criticism for the inane decision and now sports a serious PR shiner. Social networks and the comment sections on dozens of news sites lit up with outraged readers launching their verbal slings and arrows at the network. And who could blame them?

Few, if any, events have had a more thorough and absolute impact – beyond the 3,000 lives lost that day – on so many aspects of American life in the 21^st Century than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

After the Al-Qaeda hijackers flew their planes into New York City, Washington DC and a Pennsylvania field, the government sent our armed forces into two wars. Those wars have deprived 298,000 people of their lives and have cost American taxpayers a whopping $4 trillion, according to Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies.

It’s because of 9/11 that we have to take off coats and shoes, haul laptops out of bags, give up our bottled beverages, endure intrusive pat-downs and even subject ourselves to scans that show all our nooks and crannies to get through airport security.

And it’s because of 9/11 that so many innocent Muslims, as well as non-Muslims who “look Arab” or wear turbans, have been the targets of ramped-up verbal and physical attacks by ignorant, frightened bigots.

NBC has defended itself by saying it stopped observing the minute of silence in 2006, with the exception of last year’s 10^th anniversary. That may be. But the network dropped the ball by replacing a moment so meaningful to so many with mindless fluff about a member of the vacuous Kardashian clan.

And that single minute of misjudgment has cost it a conviction in the court of public opinion. I wonder how they’ll try to make up for it next year?

You're In the News Baby!

Just about every business thinks theirs is newsworthy. That's why companies like ours exist.

But the problem with establishing what's newsworthy and what isn't comes down to perception, objectivity, good storytelling and knowledge (of media) - which is very hard to do when you're in a vacuum or if you really have no idea about the expectations and needs of media outlets.

My colleague at TravelInk'd, Jennifer Rodrigues, wrote a great piece this week called Is Your Hotel (News) Worthy?. While aimed at the hotel industry, the 10 tips that Jenn writes about can be applied to almost any business.

You can read the entire article at Hotel Interactive here.

WSJ and NBC…don’t they have bigger fish to fry?

This blog is by intention strictly nonpartisan. There is a place for politics, and it’s not here. My focus today isn’t national politics – it’s the politics of the media covering it.

I read a piece in the Washington Wire last week and felt compelled to comment.

The Wall Street Journal and NBC News conducted a recent poll on Obama Exposure. At least this topic is some relief from the endless rounds of opinions and polls on the healthcare debate – right? We all know that BHO is loved and hated, passionately. He makes for a good headline and avid viewing. Media in this country have been feeding on that passion and his media blitz even before the get go. Both Fox News and MSNBC have absolutely thrived post-election, and there’s no sign of letting up. So don’t you find it ironic that two news organizations created a poll which served to reinforce the very core of the problem?

Do you see that, or is it just me?

Even White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, wasn’t lost on the irony about Obama’s media exposure - “We’re sifting through your questions of overexposure in between your interview request invitations,” he told reporters.

But surely there are more important topics the media could be addressing? Like how many Americans are looking forward to not having their homes foreclosed upon? Or is Wal-Mart is the best symbol of corporate America today? Really? (Yes, according to Vanity Fair, 60 Minutes and CBS News). Or what can be done to help California climb its way out of the enormous debt-hole - or wait, wait…what about how many Americans are feeling positive about the next quarter? (I made that one up).

Can’t we be prodded to feel good, positive and productive for a change? Cant the media be asking questions that would add a bit more meaning and value to our experience (and perhaps a more accurate glimpse into our current psyche), than whether or not the President has been over-exposed in the media? (In fairness, he IS the president at a time of national crisis. It’s probably not a bad idea to pay attention to what’s going on.)

I just think the media could use its influence in a way that better benefits the public - its constituency.

What do you think?

Media Blitz - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/09/18/its-show-blitz-obama-tapes-today-for-sunday-talk-shows/

Obama Exposure Poll - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/09/22/wsjnbc-news-poll-on-obama-exposure-too-much-too-little-or-just-right/