CGM is nothing new. It has been done many times over probably thousands of years. A letter to the editor is a CGM, so are videos sent to Americas Favorite Videos, and photos and essays sent to brands for promotions. Citizen pamphlets created before the revolutionary war (the US one), and an ancient Greek citizen standing at the Parthenon spouting rhetoric is also CGM.

Let’s be honest some CGM are gems and most suck. We enjoy laughing at how bad they really are. So what is so different today? Mainly we use today’s technology to create the input and we have the internet that allows us to show out CGM with no filtering by the brands except for an occasional law suit.

I think agencies have nothing to fear so why they are “fighting back” I don’t know. I guess people hate change.

By the way, I hate using acronyms (CGM) for buzz phases but I am too lazy to type it out every time.

Harry Hallman

Harry,

Thank you for your perspective. CGM is as old as the first human. The technology is better but we need to get over ourselves in the belief that CGM this is somehow revolutionary. The tools are, the strategies aren't.

I keep asking myself what have we marketers who have not been using CGM been doing? Starbucks growth over the last 20 years came mostly from CGM. In fact, what b2c business doesn't grow mostly from CGM?

Spike,

I failed to mention that I agree with you. What is this panic (paranoia) by some over CGM.

Why are we concerned about asking "amateurs" to create messages? 1) They aren't waiting for us to ask, and 2) We should embrace their passion and use it for our clients' brands.

Many of us have been graced by consumers willing to talk about our clients' brands, and have been using their passion for decades. That is why in my previous comment I ask: What have we marketers who have not been using CGM been doing?

Harry is right: much of CGM is garbage but the messages are gold. Even those messages that are critical are gold, as we use that feedback to improve upon our products, services and customer experiences.

Thanks for the comments.

I think the ones that are "garbage" are still VERY important. Sure, they are not the ones that most would choose to use as a Super Bowl ad, but someone took the time to create something by whatever means they had because THEY CARE.

Don't ignore the "garbage," because it's still a chance to engage with a passionate customer. Just because you don't think they are creative doesn't mean you should discount their effort.

Couldn't agree with you more. I wrote about the same thing on Friday at http://transmissionmarketing.ca/?p=27

spike, i'm in someway disturbed by the definition of amateur.
even if you are a seasoned professional in advertising, being so harsh to what's new around, means that you do not live anymore in the real world. i used to talk too many times with creative people who never get into a supermarket because they are too cool. are they still talking the everyday language of the common people? to quote david jones “What’s been quite a prevalent trend in the lazy agencies over the last two years is to go, ‘I know. NEW MEDIA can now create ideas so what we'll do is get them TO PLAY A WHILE AND THEN GET BACK TO OUR BUSINESS.’”

Spike: Thanks for calling attention to this over here.

Readers: do take time to read through ALL of the comments at Brownstein's piece. Many are sobering and saddening...but yes, God once again came through with her ultimate wisdom (and wit).

here's the link to that piece again:
http://adage.com/smallagency/article?article_id=113240

I like Seth Godin's phrase, used in a different context but applicable here: Marketing is much too important to be left to the professionals.

I watched David's video snippet and read his article. I really do get where he's coming from. He wants to light a fire under the collective ass of the Ad industry. I agree with that. Advertising has gotten lazy enjoying the fruits of time tested formula including the legacy of the 30 second spot.

But I don't think working harder or being more brilliant is the answer. Pandora's box has been opened. People now want to play around with brands—expressing themselves in the process. No, this should not be a substitute for all marketing initiatives, but we have to learn how to help facilitate in ways that empower people and brands alike.

David,

I, too, watched David's video and came away thinking the same thing and said so on John Moore's blog. I don't think David is blasting CGM as much as he is us marketing professionals, especially those of us on the advertising brand building side of things.

Many of us have gotten lazy, and more than a few of us are paying too much attnetion to our bottom lines and not enough to our clients' needs.

As a marketer, I don't care where the brilliant ideas come from. Be it from somone who gets paid to do it (a pro) or someone who spend time to do it (an amatuer) -- it doesn't matter. What matters for us marketers is being smart enough and visionary enough to recognize the brilliant ideas from the banal ones. And then comes the hardest part ... turning an idea into action to deliver results.

Sounds like everyone is saying the same thing differently.

You know, every time I turned a creative assignment over to 'the masses', I'd have to say I got 99% garbage. But that's not the point. The insight I gained from doing this is that 'the masses' had a blast putting it together, competing with each other, judging each other's work... and being a member of a *community*, even for a short period of time.

I don't think the nugget here is that ad agencies are doomed (I think we're all OK on that, right?) -- CGM is a great community building process. It does a fantastic job of engaging people. It let's people lose time while playing in your brand. Hard to do that with an ad sometimes, isn't it?

And I agree, we all hate TLA's (three-letter acronymns), but when you're trained to Blackberry everything, it really saves your thumbs.

I agree with both Harry and Lewis... it's nothing new, but we, marketers, give it a new spin. However, one thing that's somehow bothering to me is that it seems we get caught up in our own bs... I know it looks foolish if we don't follow the hottest trend in marketing, but we should know better... is it really a new big thing or did we drink some of our own poison?

I have never felt so much pressure to be on the leading edge of being creative and innovative, but I'm not 100% sure "fads" such as CGM and others are the answer I'm looking for. Honestly, we need to spend more time looking inside the box to really get to know our consumers/clients.

It's an open market. The best ideas will win. The most creative approaches will gain attention. The most engaged customers will buy. Darwin knocks at the door of professional marketing, maybe not as an altogether welcome guest!