New Wave Marketing 101: Lack of Meta-Narrative Changes Everything

(Writing advertising for the few, the proud, the passionate ...
and sometimes the crazy)

OK, so what’s a meta-narrative? My use of the term comes from Jacques Derrida and ‘deconstruction.’ (Don’t ask me to define deconstruction -- Derrida himself did a poor job of it.)

Essentially, a meta-narrative is a shared set of stories among a large group that lies at the heart of the group’s ethical, social, psychological beliefs. It’s so deep that we rarely see it or question it -- which is why deconstructionists love to pick it apart.

A meta-narrative can encompass the world, a country, a religion. The American meta-narrative, for example, involves our country being ‘a city upon a hill’, the Wild West, democracy, the unassailable perfection of the Constitution, etc.

Advertisers and marketers fashion their work on these deep-seated, shared beliefs. Writing an ad that contradicts the narrative is suicide.

How far would you get with an ad that says: (‘Americans... love to follow their leaders and hate being independent individuals), that’s why you need to buy X because everyone else is'?

I put the first part in parenthesis because that’s the meta-narrative that goes unstated.

But what happens when the sharing breaks down? Well, take a look around: red states and blue states have different narrative interpretations, as do young and old, the 1% and the 47%, east coast and west coast... this goes on forever in our country.

This recent phenomenon is due, in part, to the fact that we have personal access to all the information in the world. Literally.

No one interprets it for us in the light of the American narrative we used to share; instead we each have our own interpretation and so the meta-narrative decays -- and it has done so very, very quickly over the last decade. Again, look at our political landscape.

These days we're left with fragmentation not consensus and that’s bad for advertisers and marketers.

How in the world do you tell a compelling story when there’s little common ground? At times, writing an ad seems like telling the tale of George Washington and the cherry tree to a Sri Lankan fisherman. It’s not that he’s stupid; it’s that there is no meta-narrative on which to ground the story and connect meaning at a deep level. To the fisherman, the story is simply about cutting down a tree and not about American honesty and pragmatism.

So, what to do?

Well, the problem that’s been exacerbated by the Net is also solved by it.

But first, the new reality: most ads have to be tightly, tightly focused (as do the products themselves) on one of the newly formed and always malleable sub-groups (whose members can change quickly).

Think Zumba participants or tennis players or ex-military or families of small children. These people share a meta-narrative... at least during the time of their participation. And because many are ‘new’ to the activity, they’re generally pumped and passionate and ready for a message that uses their (temporarily) shared beliefs.

No one buys more musical accessories and related merchandise (bumper stickers, T-shirts saying ‘Make Music, Not War’) than a new musician. And no one buys the latest writing software (I just did, Apple Pages) than a (male) professional who needs to try the latest thing (mostly so he can criticize and talk about how much better he would have made the software).

What’s consoling is that the Net also provides inexpensive ways to find sub-groups and target them. Using social channels to tell multiple narratives isn't as cheap as everyone makes out but it's not cost prohibitive. Twenty years ago you couldn’t afford to produce five various print ads, each tailored to a specific group, and run them in associated magazines at $10,000 - $50,000 a pop.

The solution is tailored ads moved into tight-knit communities that could be smaller than you ever thought worth the effort. But capture a few of these and you're into the bigger bucks.

The (sad) truth is that we’re losing our identification with country and religion and even family. We’re becoming parties of one, with our own unique meta-narratives that can be, at times, frightening: Charles Manson had a unique narrative and you see where that ended.

Advertisers must DEAL with what’s REAL (now I’m Johnny Cochran, for god’s sake). 

That means changing how they create, what they create and the products they sell to suit the few, the proud, the passionate and (sometimes) the crazy.

Yahoo Lies, If Marissa Mayer Is To Be Believed

One thing about a marketing/branding narrative is that it must be consistent at its heart. Anything that is out of character, no matter how small it seems, is a big deal. People sense and dislike inconsistency because it usually speaks to the heart and soul of a person, a product, a brand. (NOTE: Occasional breaks with a brand’s look and feel are fine… consider Google’s constantly changing logo. But there can be no contradiction in core philosophy.)

An aside: you know when you get a feeling about someone you’ve just met? You’re slightly ‘creeped out,’ and you don’t know why… he or she seems fine, looks good but you feel something. Here’s why: The person’s actions and words do not completely match… in some deep way that your subconscious understands. He says X but his eyes say Y; she looks nice but her hands are clenched. What’s creeping you out is this ever so slight inconsistency that subtly screams ‘LIAR.’ To the extreme, the smiling clown who makes you think of John Wayne Gacy.

Back to Yahoo.

So the new CEO, Marissa Mayer, has her baby. Congratulations. Then announces she’s taking just a two-week maternity leave and back to the office.

I’ve nothing to say about the parental wisdom of that choice.

But from a corporate/brand point of view, she should be fired ASAP. Why? She obviously does not understand nor does she believe the essential philosophy of Yahoo. How, then, can she be its CEO?

Fire her today and put out this story:

The Board of Yahoo has terminated Marissa Mayer for the following reasons:

 1. Her insistence on returning to work after two weeks maternity leave is against the corporate spirit of Yahoo. We are an employee-centered organization and we cannot condone our CEO setting such a precedent… one that will be used by unenlightened companies to force parents into quickly returning to work.

On the contrary, we encourage extended maternity leave as a time for parents to bond with their children and enjoy the blessings of bringing a new life into the world.
 
   2. Just as important is Ms. Mayer’s disregard for the primary philosophy of Yahoo. We are an information company built on the idea that users have access to all the data, news and entertainment they need to do their jobs and enjoy their lives. We are also founded on the principle of portability, that is, no matter where or when you need information to do your job you can count on Yahoo. Without this core belief, Yahoo would be nothing more than an entertainment hub and not a source of vital business and marketing information – not to mention being a primary collaborative link for international commerce.

Ms. Mayer’s insistence on returning to work belies our structure. In essence, her actions call into question our basic philosophy. Logically, she’s saying that she can’t access all the information she needs; she can’t do serious work with Yahoo; and the idea of portable, accessible information is a lie.

Judging by Ms. Mayer’s actions, we can only conclude that she does not at all believe in the promise of Yahoo.

This being the case, she is terminated immediately.

(Am I the only one who noticed this glaring, amazing, ignorant inconsistency?)