Is Permission Marketing A Flimsy Theory?

Tom Asacker makes some cogent points about wide gulph between what marketing experts recommend and what brand managers continue to do.
Consultants and popular marketing bloggers alike (they’re often one in the same) increasingly advise brand managers to:

1. Treat customers with respect
2. Do what’s in the best interest of potential customers
3. Get rid of the hype and, instead, provide more depth
4. Be authentic

Yet, we all know there’s a major disconnect here. For brands that regularly annoy us with spam, unwanted direct mail and telemarketing continue to make their numbers.

If we want corporate marketers to change their ideologies (and thus their approach to us as customers), doesn’t the responsibility ultimately fall on us? As long as we help them achieve their goals (by responding to their offerings), shouldn’t they continue on their ROI ways; especially in this age of relentless pressure on the bottom line?

Maybe consumers ought to refrain from ignoring these interuption marketers and start a black list.

About David Burn

Co-founder and editor of AdPulp. I wrote my first ad for a political candidate when I was 17 years old. She won her race and I felt the seductive power of advertising for the first time. I worked for seven agencies in five states before launching my own practice in 2009. Today, I am head of brand strategy and creative at Bonehook in Portland, Oregon.


  1. Why start a black list? Does anyone think that would really do any good? Who would maintain the black list and wouldn’t there be some possibility of using such a list for an evil (or at least unintended) purpose?
    Why don’t we encourage consumers to be really good consumers and just not buy the products sold by these interruption marketers?
    Just a thought.
    Mike Bawden
    Brand Central Station

  2. Good thinking, Mike. Let’s just shun them.