A very senior marketing industry professional messaged me in the month of March after seeing my commentary on a new ad film.
(I took their permission to talk about our conversation but, obviously, without any identifiable references, either of the person or the ad film)
The contention was that I was capable of writing a lot more, a lot differently, instead of writing what they already knew/had known.
I have heard variations of this argument from a few others too, sporadically.
Why do I ‘describe what is going on in the ad’ when people can watch the ad and find it for themselves?
Or, why do I write, verbatim, certain dialogs or voice-over narrations of ads when people can view those ads and hear them themselves?
Or, the most basic version: ‘I know all this. You are not adding to anything new except being the one to share an ad that most people haven’t seen so far’, and ‘This ad is from last week. Why are you sharing it this week?’.
I have addressed the ‘being first’ syndrome of content sharing online in a separate post already.
I had also spoken about the ‘nothing new‘ part earlier while talking about ‘perspectives’.
But, on the back of the message I received, there’s perhaps more that I can add.
In that earlier post, I had explained the simple differences between an opinion and a perspective.
An opinion is a belief or a sentiment that you form.
A perspective is a view or an outlook that you build.
When you say “I like it” or “I hate it”, that is an opinion.
When you explain why you like it or hate it, that is a perspective.
In the former, you give the world a glance at what you think.
In the latter, you give the world a glance at how you think.
With opinions, you are questioning your own self, “What do I feel about…?”
With perspectives, you are questioning your own self, “Why do I feel X about…?”
A perspective is a point of view. In a literal sense, the way you observe and describe an object near you would be based on your point of view. Or, where you are positioned and where the object is, in relation to you.
I recall taking our son, when he was very young, to a zoo, and he tried drawing the animals he saw there, later. The crocodile he drew was mighty unique. Reason? We saw the crocodiles while standing on top of a bridge and he drew a crocodile seen from the top unlike the usual drawing that we try which sees the reptile from the side.
When we map the same concept of a point-of-view to an event, occasion, book, ad film, or movie (among others), things get a lot more complex.
To a large extent, most people who see a crocodile from the top would draw it the same way – the same overall contours and shape. But most people who read a piece of news or watch an ad, would not react the same way. Here is where the difference between opinion and perspective is very relevant.
Two people could like (an opinion) a movie. But why they liked the movie could differ based on their perspectives. In essence, what I see in an ad need not be what you see in the same ad. There could be overlaps in what we see, of course, but the mental connections I may make based on what I see may differ from the ones you may make.
Why may they differ? To use the crocodile story, I may be the one to have stood on the bridge to watch the reptile, while you may have only seen it from the side. The equivalent with an ad is this: I may have seen more ads, read more about ads than another person, and that allows me to unlock more connections that are relevant when watching the same ad. Or, I may even have been exposed to a more diverse set of related material relevant to the ad, and this too would allow me to form more intricate perspectives.
Steve Jobs put this very eloquently in his famous 1996 WIRED interview: “When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things. And the reason they were able to do that was that they’ve had more experiences or they have thought more about their experiences than other people.”
And he adds: “A lot of people in our industry haven’t had very diverse experiences. So they don’t have enough dots to connect, and they end up with very linear solutions without a broad perspective on the problem.“
Look beyond the creative industries for a minute. Even the act of observing something (like a new ad, for example) could be more interesting, fulfilling, and enriching if you have ‘more dots to connect’. The dots may be there, hiding in plain sight, but unless you can see them, how can you connect them?
This perspective-building is applicable to everyone, by the way. What you think after reading a piece of news is unique to you, based on your reading, your experiences, you expertise, your knowledge, etc.
Besides what you observe, what you may miss too depends on every individual’s point of view. This is a subset of what you *choose* to focus on while observing something.
The simplest example is the letter grid that makes its way on social media from time to time and you are supposed to identify the first word that you can see. Every person’s first word may differ depending on so many factors. If you miss my word, it simply explains how we see things differently even if the source is the same.
So, if I write the dialog or the voice-over narration of an ad verbatim, it is for 2 reasons – one, because I really appreciate the way it is crafted; and two, I’d like it to help those who may have missed it while watching the ad. You may not miss it, but someone else may have.
Coming back to the marketing industry veteran, the fact they found what I write too obvious and simplistic is completely understandable. They have been through a lot in the industry and hence, would find what I add as perspectives to be nothing new.
But only I know who I’m writing for 🙂
If, for instance, I’m writing for a focused audience of marketing industry leaders (say, on a newsletter, or inside a LinkedIn Group where I can see the audience profile clearly), I’d say very different things. I’d work hard to make it relevant to that audience.
I’m, however, writing on my blog, and on LinkedIn. My intended audience is anyone and everyone – no one group in particular. The readership of an open (non-gated) blog and on LinkedIn is bound to be universal.
One of the most important points I raise in my personal branding sessions is to find your own voice more than trying to speak to an audience. Social media platforms, by nature, are open to the world. The audience is literally anyone and everyone. This means that you define your tone and theme and choose what you want to say and let an appropriate audience find you… than trying to concoct your communication to a specific audience which could be a smaller subset of the overall audience on social media.
The difference is very similar to a targeted advertising campaign vs. a broad brand-building campaign 🙂
The targeted campaign assumes an audience and talks to them, while a broad brand-building campaign (particularly for a B2C product/service that anyone could be a potential consumer of, or a decision influencer of) appeals to all at varying degrees and gets the word around.
Personal branding is a B2C brand-building exercise in my view, not a B2B exercise. The B2B decision-makers are human too and they are part of your larger audience set.