The Question Isn't: are There Alternatives to Advertising/marketing;

It's "Why do people fail to even consider them?"

One of the major problems with advertising is that there are far too many Chiefs and no Indians at all! And all have a different opinion as to why advertising is under severe questioning.

Here are just two examples of ChiefSpeak:

"TV under pressure", says Accountant turned Adman, Sir Martin Sorrell. However he goes on to say, "Television is under pressure at the moment from the Internet…but predictions of a depression have gone too far. Television advertising is not going to disappear. It still has the pulling power, but the balance will switch".

I wonder if he tells that to his Client, Guinness?

Meanwhile another Chief, Derek Morris, Chairman and chief executive of ZenithOptimedia attended "Media 360 Conference" in Wales recently. In a long letter in MediaWeek, he said, among other things, "But what are the lessons to bring home from South Wales? What should we actually do? And there, in the final session, reality caught up when the Client told us to "Change before you are dead".

"Digital is just media, while new, it follows the old rules. It has increased the role communication can play. To be in media requires knowing how to use it and all other channels".

Does that mean we shall be reading the obits on Accountant turned Adman Sorrell in the very near future, has anybody had the decency to point out to him that one Client even said that?

'Cos. he really needs to know!

And certainly his high powered executives should be telling him the meaning of the word "communication" assuming, that is, they themselves really know.

"London 2012 – It is a puerile mess, an artistic flop, a commercial scandal"!

I must admit that I debated over including this in this article then I thought "What the hell…we need desperately to hammer home the point that advertising is failing us all, all it has become is a brand tax and a despoiler of the existing media scene".

After all who needs advertising if the basics are wrong?

So what is The Times of London talking about, Advertising or the logo design for the 2012 Olympics?

In point of fact, in a way, both!

The logo design, for the 2012 London Olympics adequately represents the barrenness of most advertising and commercial design thinking.

And to think that we paid Wolff Olins, the branding consultancy £400,000 for a year's work! It is disgusting!

The justification for this dreadful design reads thus: "The new emblem is dynamic, modern and flexible reflecting a brand savvy world where people, especially young people, no longer relate to static logos but respond to a dynamic brand that works with new technology and across traditional and new media networks".

Thus, in a word – nonsense!

Similarly the same nonsense is replicated in the decision to place drink ads on child football shirts.

Fuzzy thinking than allows a spokesperson to say…wait for it…"One of the concerns is that if you do take your branding off there may well be some fallout in terms of reducing sales".

In another word – nonsense!

Thankfully a ban has been placed on child football shirts with drink ads.

The ineptitude within the commercial communications industry knows no bounds, it would appear that the moment a "new medium" venue appears that they want to slap ads on/in it.

In three words – rubbish and clutter!

I am sorry to keep hammering on about the failure of advertising but it is pointless to tackle a pile of excrement by spraying gold paint on it, or getting consultants and spin doctors to dance around it waving dodgy statistics, we need to get a shovel, a bucket of water and tackle the basics and return to interactive marketing communication…the sooner the better!