OPINION: The disintegration of the media and advertising industry

I was very fortunate to start my career within an advertising agency. Even though it was only a short stint, it helped me fuel my passion for media and advertising by being schooled by senior account executives on Advertising 101, brainstorming together with creative people, and learning my trade as a media planner.

Now, it’s all about discipline specialisation—an advertising agency, a media agency, a PR agency, an activation agency, a digital agency, an iWOM agency, a search agency, so on and so forth, you get the point. Each agency tells a convincing story to clients on the benefits of specialisation.

As a result, marketers today work with a number of different agencies in order to get the most out of each individual discipline. 

But does this lead to a better end product?

I find myself saying “no” more and more often recently.

From my personal experience, the distance between advertising and media agencies has grown. That has contributed to the sharp decline of overall knowledge in each field. I find account executives to be less proficient in media knowledge as they used to be. I find junior media planners becoming more uncomfortable when the conversation ventures outside of media-related matters.

This is to be expected. We don’t work in the same space and have different reporting lines even if we are part of the same group. The only time we update one another is probably during a status meeting at client-side. 

A personal anecdote: I once sat in a meeting with five other agencies, all of different disciplines working on the same campaign. Each presented its take on the brand strategy, including some digital and mobile ideas. All the while I kept thinking to myself: This is just not a very efficient use of everyone’s time and expertise. And if we executed all the plans as they were presented, I’m sure consumers would be very confused.

Which leads us to the next question: Who should be the lead agency in today’s structure? It used to be the advertising agency. For some clients, that still is the case. But there’s no clear leader in today’s process, with everyone competing for that role. 

The problems are obvious. Advertising agencies have a harder time getting other agencies in line, and they also don’t want to do this for free. Clients don’t want to pay extra for integration, figuring they can save costs by doing it themselves.

The reality is, clients don’t do a great job at integration. It’s not a matter of ability; it’s a matter of not having enough time. Clients are busy people just like everyone else, and integrating different agencies takes a lot of time. 

Paying extra for integration won’t solve the problem either, because agencies will still compete with one another as long as there are separate P&Ls. Plus, you’re holding only one agency out of many accountable.

I see that media agency services are becoming more diversified, with comms planning, research, social, branded content, digital labs and so on. Sounds like a full-service agency without the creative capabilities. In fact, some media agencies have already set up creative studios within their shops. But these have not flourished because, within this structure, creative takes a back seat to media.

Is this where we’re heading?  A re-shuffling of power within the agency structure where media takes the helm? 

As a media person, I’m not sure if this is the best way forward. I don’t fault agencies for what they do. I’m not naïve, I work in one.

But, I do fault myself and some of my peers for being overly individualistic when it comes to ownership of ideas. I do fault ourselves for not communicating more often, for not giving enough credit to one another.