Comments on: The Message or The Medium: Debate Now!

By: Heidi Skinner

Heidi Skinner — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:55:15 +0000

I think they both need to be in harmony. It’s like Ying and Yang.

Re: The product – Sometimes the product is good, but it’s not sexy enough to talk about. That creates a real challenge in developing the message. In many cases the creative use of a new medium or the value we provide within the channel helps us a)associate the brand with the technology/or medium, and b)gives consumers something to talk about.

By: Lisa Weinstein

Lisa Weinstein — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:03:52 +0000

Ultimately, in a perfect world, I agree with Nate -the product must be of quality. How about taking a step back and figuring out what makes sense regarding the campaign’s objective. I say, the medium or channel is more important for branding. The way a message is conveyed and the environment it lives in will affect how consumers think of the brand. Are they doing something new, cool, hip, etc? The message is more important for direct response. This works well with sales events, promotions, deals and driving traffic. If I had to make a choice, I personally would choose the medium as the winner, because I strongly believe the context in which the message lives in is more important to the message itself in today’s fast-paced world.

By: Anna Mer

Anna Mer — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:57:18 +0000

I agree that to have a successful media campaign all of the following must work together to create a unified front for the brand: product/service, messaging, and distribution channels. While product/service drives channel and messaging, we usually end up with channel driving messaging or vise versa when it comes to planning. So which one is right? It’s definitely based on situation (ideally we’d have these two elements work hand in hand … although we know that’s easier said than done), yet in our current push towards emerging media and exploring beyond just display, I believe channel should drive messaging. When looking at the social space, you can’t just have a conversation about your brand and hope your consumer will find it and agree with you; a brand must first crawl the social space, find its audience, listen to what they’re already saying and then join the conversations with an in-sync message. I believe the further we get into the emerging media space, the more channel will drive messaging.

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:48:12 +0000

The experience is the message and the experience is the platform — product, messaging, customer service, product instructions, packages, platforms they are experienced on and in…You can’t have a platform without a message (silence would be a message in itself)and you can’t have a message without a platform. McLuhan resolved this in the 70’s.

By: Courtney Kuehn

Courtney Kuehn — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:06:01 +0000

Nate – I agree. The product/service/thing needs to make sense for the consumer’s lifestyle. Obviously if there’s no relevancy or the product basically sucks, the game is over before it even started.

By: Daria

Daria — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:42:12 +0000

That’s kind of strange debate, it is like debating about superiority of X-mass over Eastern. One can’t exist without another. You need medium to communicate the message. The medium needs the message to exist. Both are equally important – media as tools and messages as content (stories, information, etc.)…

By: Nate Archer

Nate Archer — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:09:47 +0000

I was originally going to reply with a response stating that the message always trumps the medium. However, after thinking about it I came to the conclusion that both are trumped by something else. While people in advertising hold advertising in high regard (a little too obvious, I know), it is merely serves as a substitute for the true product or service. No matter how good the message is, or how well used the medium is, both will always be overshadowed by the product or service in question.