The Channels, which we usually describe as the chosen path from the brand to the consumer, is often no more than a one-way pipeline which brands can poor stories into in order to create value at the other end
- “…special people in special places think up special ideas. Then you have a pipeline that takes the ideas down to the waiting consumers, who are passive, who can say yes or no to the invention…”
So now that Web2.0 has moved from being larger than life websites where people can contribute or voice their opinion, to thinking of participation with the brands as smaller, personal applications in a larger context, we are starting to create a different class of areas which immerse the participant.
These are Arenas, much richer than pipelines or channels, at the same time as they state the importance of having a form of interaction, between the brand and the participant, or between participants
. (as opposed to channels)
If I’m right when I previously said that:
- “A brands is therefore our personal reflection of an experience, influenced by our anticipation.” And “old advertising” is all about creating the anticipation, whilst new advertising is all about creating the experience.
Then “Channel Advertising” is the old advertising, and all about creating anticipation through stories
And the “New Advertising” is all about creating the Arenas where the experiences happen.
This creates a whole new kind of “idea” being developed
actively participate in the choice of therapy (shared decision How does cialis work? 1. Informed patient choice.
. And the question is:
As our ideas move from channels to arenas, are we still advertisers?