You are on page 1of 9

Arma 0 @awolk you're u h troublem ker Alan.


Does he

t 9 Y like @Arma 0 i goi ng 0 Edelman mean e social media battle over Ad Agencies? Discuss. R pi

. .. . ~ .



Re;> Re e

@Armano I'm even sealing your char s now. An hommage

h p: / / .toads

n r p I to 'h'01


in r ply to



olk Alan. I don' do pi ch s. ;-)

h mo e "vir II

zeb RT @a 01 : Does e act ha guy Ii e

@Ar 0 going 0 d m n an PR i

h oci I m di a lor Ad AQ n i ?

a er" copywriter @awol I d unno. Th ink many dien s ore comfort ble OT controlling PRo Selling S as PR (v lu a d) e sier for acencles,

R p R et ?

II edelm n se s

differen Iy h n d-holdin

a he ould go 0


o op r pre

co. so no surprise 0

r i h a oik

sc afer @awol It may more mean indies re able to lden ify and move quicker on tale than holdingcos ...

in r pi (0

@ischafer or that larger traditional agencies are unaware of that type of talent.

Ec ofo



in reply to ischafer

scha e @ olk 0 second hough I hink i

m ha PR ag nci or of a po ial for

mod I in social m dia. m vb .

@ischafer that's what I was thinking Ian. They are set up to charge a consultant style hourly rate. Agcys build & charge or I things"

s go



in reply to ischafer

m 0 r @ 01 @ischafer m yb parti I c use of

raditio al agencies tha build faceboo nd iter

pages 0 broadcas , but don' ge social


orr @a 01 @ischafe agree a PR agencies are ccus omed to working as consul ants,

radition I ad 9 ncy billing doesn' or for social

@ orri hat ay well be t e case


in re to mmorri

a tro @a 01 @ischafer tradtl agencies only ppe r 0 charge for "things . th y actu lIy ch rge labor-b s d fees for' ide s h 0 hers make'.

@ antro you spea rom experience here. Does he charging or "labor' cost model ransla e to a consul ant like model?


antro @awolk no neccessarily. depends on 'what" u are se up & h ve lent to del ive r. new model mus merge bes of PR & Adv & purge he wors

R pi

Ag reed: RT @kan row: ne model must erge best of PR & Adv & purge he wors

a 0 @neon rca e ur channelin gers ner f om a decade ago. not sure ge era ing grea ideas is a separate exercise from execu ional abilitv today

Re:>1 Re 'eet

a trow @neon rcade no sure firms are even required as we look forward. thi k in erms of eams & capabilities. we re growing case s udy


edia ave yrna awo @ antro ... do U thin radit agencies Righting 2prove conceptual ideas

h clients don't grasp as fair crea ivi ?


@ edia aven yrna my hought was he clients ho hired them are no familiar with notion 0 a consultant s yle contrac or S ely

in reply to

di av n yrn @awolk ... 1 so agree! 1 ind

hey don't easily grasp the 'were' of SM

m rketing & c eativi y in 0 involved. thx 4 eresting thread!

i!:)1 Re et

in reply to '01

eon rcade @kantrow @awol g nera ing ideas is increasinglye sy, bu guiding the ideas hru

execu ion d gaini 9 speed 0 ar et re the

d pa


on c de @kantrow never mean h t . hey cou Id be se para e. bu pie nty of fi rms do 0 e or he

othe .. and that's no good.

ad ot

o y is going.

rrellw i elaw PR agencies defini ely eedi 9 t he SM rough. And ew older gcys have any sort 0 inteq rated PR arm.

in ply to darrel hitela

~ arr II te a @ wol beauty of

en hough agencies p y for the wr p h t eo up' deli r bl diges ible.

IR is tha an hours ie m

e 0 'ee

rrell i elaw yo and @ damwo I have a wise pia . Well done

in eply to darrel

c mpflrestev If only I could keep the

01 k/ 0 l's s raig h t @da re I itela yo and

@ dol have a wi e plan. ell done' (via @ olk)


arnpflres eve @d rrellwhi elaw Was thinking that if @adamwo I was a vohl we d g tach oth rs tweets constan Iv



Sr topian @awolk @A mane social edia shou ld be owned by he br nd; agencies should be there to help


Re:>1 Re et

Sr topian 01 d h 's j in mu opinion

orking for brands and pi h s I h b

involved i 0 er he last 7 ye rs


@Bri opian but

ich* agencies?

R ply

in re to Britopian

Sr· 0 ian Id y hid p nd on

he skill s t within org. Ad/In er ctiv ag nci s

• general) re Ii e ehind he c e. I HO


@Bri opia other side of the table, identical observa io

in ply to Bn 0 ian

cpeale @awol good? To me SM is much better fi wI PRo One reason: PR people are accus omed to lack of can rol. ad folk don' lik tha.

Re:>( Re et

@cpeale excellen pain. Lack of control idea 0 execu ion aking back seat 0 id a- hat's all for. ign.



in reply to cpealet

cpe Ie 01 having once do e PR for big ad

agencies, execs n ver cou Id und rstand we

(au ldn' revie stories before they en to press. Pi if I.


@adbro d @ pealet. Sad thing i many of them likely thought .. ou mean he does n't?"


i r ply to adbro

cp alet @adbroad @awol yeah ... I really hink many did think he president go to see stories before public tion. A thing of wonderment. R

dbroad 0 qu ion @ 01 I ink long a

soci 1 dia is ho 9 of as m d i it will b J d

Y PR players in he free medi sand box

je co b t righ R @ dbroad: B success in genera ing engagement and ac ion al 0 depend on compell i ng crea ive, righ @ge ne r? (@a 0

Rep Re, e

broad Bu uccess in 9 nera ing engagement a d c ion also d pend on ompelling crea iv , righ @g nnef r? @awol


dbro d Bu imho, @ olk social media is less

bou media han abo crea tve hich is the rea

agencies can 0 n. If they w ke up and wan


adbroad current sm b dgets seem largely

relega ed to p , as far as i can ell @ il Bu z. Ad agencies don I ge /wa e . Chum p change

@a olk

@adbroad chu p change 2009 could be big buc s 2015. That s

h r.


in re to adbroad

dbro d but if d agencies find specter of 2015 S fearsome vhv he sm inertia (0) walk?

p R

vanityfa r Minus his use of • Discuss': RT @ olk Does fact a guy like @A mano going Edelman mean PR's winning social media ba Ie over ad

ag nci ?

Reol Re et

@Vanityfaire than 5 0 RT. Love Vanity Fair or long flights. Wh i your ngl on hi ?

1 Reol

@Va ityfairer while ( have your a ention going to be a it-he &

II yo 0 check 0 @hiv aw rds P II hiv ard. am

@Ar no on Adv Bd

01 On h Armano pr v d


Ire @ 01 p r on lIy, I do I e much

r nc be een pr dv rti ing mar e ing when it comes to social media - all media is socii


in repl to vanitvtairer

yf I r ~ 01 an!! B full i 10 re:

11m no offi illy Van ity F ir -- he e' orne

contrext links bout' ho I' am: http://

'"ouuu"UU.p s.orq/rnediashi /2009/0S/vani y-f ir-yor r-fan-blog -g'v - r -pr- o-cond t123.h ml

@Vanityfairer very cool idea & write-up. Re: SM - ad agcys & pr rrms Ighting or "control" of SM. Who gets the bulk of the budget.

r I to

o s go Ec 00

in reply to vanitvfairer



Had not contemplated services (PR) versus products (Ad Agcy)? split as suggested by @Vanity airer. Sounds right, will mull over.

Repl *

in reply to va ityfairer

I r I (0

a y irer @a olk Thanks! A see yo r oin re hoge s 'bulk of budge II. Thin i really depends on indus ry; e.g., services (PR) v. orod c (Ad)


Conversations like this one tonight- and the offshoots it

: produced are why I love Twitter. Thanks all. Sleep beckons. Reoly *