Omnicom-IPG’s powerful AI front could protect against a big tech takeover
On December 13, 1996, Miller Beer withdrew all business from Leo Burnett, literally overnight. Officially, these were poor sales, but rumors abounded that Miller had discovered that a Burnett subsidiary had taken a small project from Anheuser-Busch, and Miller was furious.
Now that holding companies hold a significant share In the advertising landscape, companies are more likely to live with the fact that their advertising agency is part of a family of companies that may also serve a rival. But other than both CEOs playing golf with the conglomerate CEO (not at the same time), there is no overlap. Each affiliate agency’s creative and account services are hermetically sealed from everyone else in the network, which may be more of a financial arrangement than a true network. And depending on the rigor of the clients, the same goes for the media, even if cost savings ladder make bulk purchases more attractive.
The evening after Omnicom and IPG crashed like two land masses forming a supercontinent, I was teaching my advertising history class and my students were curious about how company executives justified the merger, which is, in reality, more of a takeover. control of IPG by Omnicom.
Was it a question of money? It’s always about money, but why now? They tried to merge years ago; the climate is better today with Asset return to the White House, but that doesn’t explain everything.
I looked at Google Search Labs’ somewhat boring new “AI Overview,” asking it to list the benefits of the merger. All but the last point seemed like a list of platitudes about being stronger by sharing your resources. Let’s face it, many of these resources are, as mentioned above, owned by competing clients. And why share? Both Omnicom and IPG are huge and have become, like Mel Brooks’ Engulf & Devour, advertising and communications planets in their own right.
The last item on the AI-generated list was both a eureka and a déjà vu moment for me: “The merger, which would create the world’s largest advertising agency, comes as the industry is facing the challenges of generative AI and other technological changes. » In other words, there is huge fear that digital companies will give AI the freedom to create, execute and serve advertising, thereby rendering advertising agencies obsolete. A bit like self-driving cars making driving obsolete.
The whole landscape is changing and everyone is worried about what it will look like. And as for déjà vu, in a Interview with the New York Times in 2012Ed McCabe, the creative director who made Volvo Safety and Frank Perdue a household name, said of this phase of the digital revolution: “Right now we find ourselves in a situation where agencies advertising companies are getting it wrong, trying to adopt technologies they don’t use. I understand very well, trying to prove that they agree.
Axios threatened advertising agencies more explicit: Google and Meta offer tailor-made AI advertisements directly to advertisers. Kyle Chayka The New Yorker added Microsoft to this list. And IPG has had a few lackluster years on top of all that. It’s going to be interesting to try and see if Godzilla or Megalon will win.
As a copywriter and creative director by trade, I’ve developed a perspective based on the wisdom of advertising philosopher-practitioners like McCabe, Bill Bernbach, Pat Fallon and Dan Wieden. And I’ve seen technology be the tail that wags the advertising dog for decades now. Seventy years ago, Bernbach said: “In 100 years, the Idea will be even more important than all the technology in the world. » Sixteen years ago, Alex Bogusky, co-founder of CP+B, wrote in his introduction to Luke Sullivan’s Hey, Whipple, Squeeze This: “You see, new media, non-traditional media, integration – these are perhaps being the buzzwords we read every day. day in the media hype surrounding our company. But to my knowledge, they have yet to find a powerful form of communication that doesn’t at least begin with words.”
So while the media giants battle it out, creative advertising will remain the bedrock of the industry – and until AI is good enough to think like a neurotic, doubtful, non-linear, hype-addicted human being caffeine, it won’t. capable of replacing creative thinkers. But as we have seen, for a short time the novelty of AI could overwhelm us.
However, AI is useful and, apparently, it is indispensable in media. As Neil deGrasse Tyson said, there is a ton of data and without AI we would never be able to understand it all. Last year, Omnicom acquired the “digital commerce powerhouse” Flying; the terrain on which the coming battle will be fought appears to be digital media. Google, Meta, Microsoft (where are Amazon and eBay?) versus Omnicom, WPP, Publicis, Dentsu, Havas and perhaps some exciting new entrants. Flute player, are you interested?
As for the inevitable upheavals and shake-ups, I don’t know John Wren, but I worked closely with Philippe Krakowsky a few years ago, and I can say with certainty that he really cares about the people he works with and will try to make the most out of the merger for them.
Was it inevitable? Will AI truly be a game changer or just the latest technology enabler? I think back to around 2005: Gary Goldsmith was creative director of Young & Rubicam. A reporter asked him to predict what the advertising industry would look like in 20 years, and he replied: “There will be two giant advertising agencies left, and one will try to buy the other.” » Everyone laughed.
