Today I came across a short discussion between two great analysts -Esteban Kolsky andBen Kepes - who, naturally, take different positions. I mean, where would the value of a discussion be when everybody agrees from the outset ...
Whereas Ben maintains that he very much accepts having his behaviour, whereabouts and preferences collected (in the example by Google) and used to receive targeted advertisements that match his interests Esteban counters that it is none of Google's business - and you can freely replace Google with any other brand name - to know this and use this, without your explicit consent.
Though I think that centered marketing may be higher than the scatter-gun method of earlier times I thing with Esteban. I do not need to emerge as the
Yeah, I am a little dreamer ... but so far the value of highly targeted advertising is more on the business side than on the customer side. As long as this doesn't change why would I accept or even like my data being used? And things have become so much easier for businesses and their marketers with the advent of smartphones.
It has gone out of control!
This is also one of the main ideas behindEpikonic. Enable people to easily switch on and off communications with a business. Why? Because the business is there to provide value to the customer. Only if that outside-in thought becomes prevalent marketing has a chance of becoming valuable to customers. Until then the products and services rendered, the experiences that I have at every touch point, is the best marketing for a business and customers are their best marketeers.
Where do you stand in this discussion?
Comments
Post a Comment