Look, we freely admit that social media marketing departments can get a little carried away. It probably has something to do with (a) their heady blend of type-A personalities and (b) their profound conviction that folks in the real world really, really want to hear what they have to say. Toss all that in a blender, add 24/7 internet connectivity, and you've got a very powerful cocktail.
On the other hand, the daft cluelessness that lingers in print media outlets isn't any better. Like their social media counterparts, ink-stained wretches have the type-A gene, and of course they love to talk/write, plus they wear suspenders and reek of Brylcreem (yes, it's still on the shelves). And right now, they're feeling pretty desperate. We give them a wide berth.
And so, it was somewhat inevitable that the former would eventually figure out its newfangled video camera thingamajig to make a video ridiculing the latter. And fortunately for us, Swedish newspaper Daagens Industri did it by mocking a new, imaginary campaign for a new, imaginary car:
Yes: a newspaper has relied on social media to spread its message of how ineffective social media is. Mull that one for a moment, Grasshopper.
Now to be fair to our elders in print media, we've been involved in social campaigns that aren't too different from the one Daagens Industri is parodying. They've been a tad overwhelming, and frankly, we're not entirely sure they've hit their mark. Then again, the Fiesta Movement was pretty similar, and it generated a whopping 60% product awareness among the general public, so what are you gonna do?
Our take? The claim that newspaper is a better advertising medium just because it's simpler is patently ridiculous. Sure, newspapers hit a broad audience, but that audience is shrinking faster than the Brazilian rainforest. (NB: those two should be a little better correlated, shouldn't they?) Why would any advertiser wuss out and go for "simple" when he or she can use social media and other tools to hit numerous demographics from multiple angles? Heck, just because newspaper owners are addled doesn't mean that its supporters are, too.