The changing model of promotional communication

1,478
-1

Published on

These were the introductory slides to a panel debate on the impact of the web on professional financial advice businesses at the Personal Finance Society Annual Conference 2010 at the University of Warwick.

They were designed to illustrate how the traditional model of mass communication had been disrupted and altered by the intervention of the social web.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,478
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The changing model of promotional communication

  1. 1. The changing<br />model of promotional communication<br />Personal Finance Society Annual Conference<br />University of Warwick, September 2010<br />Ian Thomas<br />www.newtradition.co.uk<br />
  2. 2. Health warning<br />These slides are designed to illustrate how changes in technology have disrupted the traditional model of promotional communications. <br />
  3. 3. They do not, by any means, offer a comprehensive analysis – they just help to illustrate change.<br />
  4. 4. If you want to read all about mass communications theory, try Denis McQuail’s Mass Communications Theory.<br />OK…<br />
  5. 5. So, at one end of the model, there’s an individual or organisation that wants to transmit something…<br />Encoder<br />
  6. 6. Which means they have to decide on the content of a message…<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />
  7. 7. And select the media by which they intend to transmit that message…<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />Medium<br />
  8. 8. In order to reach an individual at the other end of the process…<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />Decoder<br />Medium<br />
  9. 9. Encoder<br />Message<br />Decoder<br />Medium<br />…with access to the<br />means to receive and understand the message <br />
  10. 10. So the rules of engagement are determined by those with the ability to gain access to the medium…<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />Decoder<br />Medium<br />
  11. 11. Encoder<br />Message<br />Decoder<br />Medium<br />…while consumers<br />of content are subject to<br />those rules<br />
  12. 12. Web 1.0 continued this pattern<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />Decoder<br />Medium<br />
  13. 13. Web 1.0 continued this pattern<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />Decoder<br />Medium<br />But Web 2.0<br />has entirely changed the potential of this role<br />
  14. 14. That’s because Web 2.0 has made the ability to publish content freely available<br />
  15. 15. That’s because Web 2.0 has made the ability to publish content freely available<br />Free<br />
  16. 16. So the rules of engagement are<br />determined by those with ability to<br />gain access to the medium…<br />Message<br />Encoder<br />Medium<br />
  17. 17. So the rules of engagement are<br />determined by those with ability to<br />gain access to the medium…<br />Encoder<br />Message<br />Message<br />Encoder<br />Medium<br />And the rules of engagement are determined by those with ability to gain access to the medium…<br />
  18. 18. You end up with a model where – so long as they’re prepared to invest the time – individuals possess the same potential as organisations to publish content via platforms<br />Provider<br />Content<br />Content<br />Provider<br />Platform<br />
  19. 19. Which is social<br />
  20. 20. Which is social<br />(As in socialist – everyone who’s able to can participate equally in a common means of sharing and publication)<br />

×