Russell Davies On Why We Should Object To Urban Spam

As part of his series on engaged design, Russell Davies writes about why urban spam (guerrilla marketing, ambient marketing, outdoor marketing and the such) is something that we find so objectionable. Some very interesting insights here:

In recent years the declining efficacy of regular ‘broadcast advertising’ has created the largely horrible ambient and guerilla media industries – a huge marketing arms race aiming to squeeze every drop of attention from unwilling eyeballs.

I think we object to this so much for a number of reasons:

a. Because it doesn’t feel like a societally negotiated deal. We’re basically OK with the notion of ads in newspapers on in the middle of Coronation Street. That’s a deal we’ve done. We’ll swap that much attention for that much subsidised media. But every new bit of spam forces us to examine that deal again; is it worth doing? Are we willing to swap this bit of attention for that bit of fun or utility or free stuff?

b. The deal isn’t that clear. What do I get out of Coffee Republic selling space on their tables? Is their coffee noticeably cheaper or better? Are the staff better paid and more cheerful? What do I get out of the way you’ve brokered my attention?

c. One person’s fun is another’s spam. These little trucks are advertising a model village. I’d find them charming, some might find them annoying. But, in a new environment, with new media, in a world that people think of as more cluttered and mediated the fun bar is set a lot higher. Bouncing up to me with a free t-shirt isn’t going to cut it any more.

d. Most of it is insultingly crass and unimaginative.

All these effects, and more, are going to be magnified by animated, augmented urban spam. There’s a massive step change between moving posters and TV Everywhere. Especially when that TV is starting to know you’re there and react to you.

And this matters for a couple of reasons. (Probably also obvious) Firstly, because living in Bladerunner brought to you by Cillit Bang would be horrible, just as a person. Secondly, because I think it actually makes for counter-productive marketing. Annoying your potential customers in more and more places is not a useful strategy for businesses.

Apologies for taking such a big chunk and republishing it here, Russell – but in many ways, you started a huge reaction to what the advertising industry was trying to do – and we think it’s a very important discussion to have. Read more about his thoughts on possible solutions to marketing’s malaise here.