Recently, an agency representative decided to dissuade a client by stating that things such as mobile marketing, email marketing, social network marketing, and then some more, are all a waste of time and money because they're based on receiving users' permission and voluntary agreement to engage with a brand.
He then went on to say that time would be better spent not including these sort of activities at all in the communications strategy and that the company should spend its budget and attention on traditional advertising.
If you are like me, you too would have raised your eyebrow, much like a wrestler does in the ring. Let's see why…
Firstly, he was quite right. It is about receiving permission. But in a world where so many brands are competing for consumers' attention, attracting even a minuscule percentage of the public to agree to foster some sort of relationship with a brand seems to me, and many others, a worthy exercise.
Secondly, and I have said this before, it's not about competing for budget spend. It's about using different communications tools to target different types of audiences. Billboards won't attract everyone's attention. Radio ads won't interest all consumers. As yes, permission-based tactics won't concern certain audiences. And that's why one activity is never the right mass-market strategy.
Of course, neither activity should be done in isolation. You see, permission-based activity needs traditional media because in one way or another we need to draw people in. In the same way, traditional media needs permission-based marketing if we're to grow relationships with our target audiences and personalise the communications activity.
Permission-based marketing is a very strong tool that we as marketers and communicators need to grasp. As Seth Godin says, “Permission marketing turns strangers into friends and friends into loyal customers.” This is then what leads to arguably the best marketing activity any brand could wish for; word of mouth.
