It’s 1997 all over again,” assessed Maria Mandel, partner/executive director of digital innovation at Ogilvy Interactive. Mandel drew a parallel to today by hearkening back to the late ’90s when ad agencies were acquiring interactive shops to build new media acumen and resources. Now she again sees deja vu on the horizon, with more agencies seriously looking to acquire mobile ad firms and expertise.
Mandel’s comments came as a panelist during a roundtable session at the Mobile Marketing Forum on Nov. 14 in Los Angeles. The day-long event of panel discussions and case studies was sponsored by the Mobile Marketing Association (MMA), a non-profit group established to lead the growth of mobile marketing and its associated technologies. The MMA has more than 500 member companies spanning agencies, advertisers, handheld device manufacturers, wireless operators, aggregators, technology enablers, market research firms and other shops focused on the mobile space.
While Mandel and her agency panelist colleagues are enthused over mobile marketing and advertising prospects, they acknowledged that there are still obstacles to overcome in order for that potential to be realized.
Eric Bader, senior VP of digital connections at MediaVest Worldwide, noted that a relatively small buy for a mobile campaign entails logistical complexities that require extensive man hours, often making the initiative far more expensive than it should be. He explained that campaigns frequently have to go across different mobile phone and digital device carriers, all with different standards and no agreed upon serving technology. This, he said, can make it “exponentially harder” to handle the mobile aspect of an advertising/marketing campaign.
And there’s still a considerable learning curve to be mastered by the clients themselves, related Renee Borkowski, senior VP, digital & database marketing, at Arc Worldwide (an affiliate of Leo Burnett Worldwide). “Brands are challenged by the medium…they’re even struggling with their own cellphones” when it comes to more sophisticated uses such as tapping into richer experiences offered by broader band content, she observed.
Borkowski said that clients generally are doing well in areas where marketplace adoption and penetration are most established like text messaging and mobile Internet, but agencies need “to teach [clients] as we go” for emerging, more ambitious, less exploited mobile forms of communication, including rich content.
MediaVest’s Bader related that there are different means whereby mobile campaigns are being funded, the first jumping-on point being “the maverick stage” in which a client or brand with a maverick spirit finds money in the “couch cushion” portion of budgets to invest in experimental mobile initiatives. “Almost nothing is integrated at this stage,” he said.
The next, more advanced stage that’s aspired to, he continued, is indeed when mobile is part of not only an integrated campaign but an overall allocation of dollars. In this scenario, mobile serves a role in communicating with consumers–in concert with and complementary to other platforms–and is measured and valued as such.
As for the impact of Apple’s iPhone on the mobile landscape, Bader observed that consumers access mobile media because they want to participate in something or want to get answers. Thus the direct WiFi line for iPhone users, he said, “can only be good for consumers and everyone,” including its implications for the mobile marketing community.
Supreme Court Allows Multibillion-Dollar Class Action Lawsuit To Proceed Against Meta
The Supreme Court is allowing a multibillion-dollar class action investors' lawsuit to proceed against Facebook parent Meta, stemming from the privacy scandal involving the Cambridge Analytica political consulting firm.
The justices heard arguments in November in Meta's bid to shut down the lawsuit. On Friday, they decided that they were wrong to take up the case in the first place.
The high court dismissed the company's appeal, leaving in place an appellate ruling allowing the case to go forward.
Investors allege that Meta did not fully disclose the risks that Facebook users' personal information would be misused by Cambridge Analytica, a firm that supported Donald Trump 's first successful Republican presidential campaign in 2016.
Inadequacy of the disclosures led to two significant price drops in the price of the company's shares in 2018, after the public learned about the extent of the privacy scandal, the investors say.
Meta spokesman Andy Stone said the company was disappointed by the court's action. "The plaintiff's claims are baseless and we will continue to defend ourselves as this case is considered by the District Court," Stone said in an emailed statement.
Meta already has paid a $5.1 billion fine and reached a $725 million privacy settlement with users.
Cambridge Analytica had ties to Trump political strategist Steve Bannon. It had paid a Facebook app developer for access to the personal information of about 87 million Facebook users. That data was then used to target U.S. voters during the 2016 campaign.
The lawsuit is one of two high court cases involving class-action lawsuits against tech companies. The justices also are wrestling with whether to shut down a class action against Nvidia.... Read More