LaughlinOutLoud

On Language: Traditional Media

Posted Apr. 9, 2010 by Casey Flanagan

Filed under: Advertising, Ideas, Media

I’ve been thinking a lot about words lately. In this business, we have a tendency to spend hours (and hours) deliberating exactly which adjective to include on a brief. Is the brand smart or intelligent? Nimble or agile? Fast or really fast?

For better and worse, words matter.

It strikes me as odd, then, that there are so many words we just let slide. Tim Williams, principal of Ignition Consulting, points out that most marketing words are based on the military: strategy, tactic, target, campaign. The list goes on. But string enough of those together and – at least on paper – we’re at war with the consumer.

His bottom line? We won’t change our behavior until we change our language.

“Traditional” is the first word I would change. Webster’s defines traditional as:

An inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or a social custom)

and

A belief or story or a body of beliefs or stories relating to the past that are commonly accepted as historical though not verifiable

In our world, traditional media is often used to characterize any media that’s not digital. And the word itself suggests “old.” If you search for traditional media on Google, the first return is from Wikipedia – which comes right out and describes it as old media. In marketing, old is where brands go to die.

Traditional isn’t old. And new isn’t new. We’ve all seen incredibly innovative television commercials and outdoor executions. We’ve also all been exposed to exceptionally tired Twitter campaigns.

But, if you need a game changer, who would go with something traditional? Especially when you could go with something new! And, if it’s new, we’d have to assume it’s… improved!

But “cutting edge” isn’t good. Just like “tried and true” isn’t good. Good is good. And any descriptor that – even subtly – impacts a strategic decision otherwise needs to be neutralized.