Product Description

Bestselling authors and world-renowned marketing strategists Al and Laura Ries usher in the new era of public relations.

Today's major brands are born with publicity, not advertising. A closer look at the history of the most successful modern brands shows this to be true. In fact, an astonishing number of brands, including Palm, Starbucks, the Body Shop, Wal-Mart, Red Bull and Zara have been built with virtually no advertising.

Using in-depth case histories of successful PR campaigns coupled with those of unsuccessful advertising campaigns, The Fall of Advertising provides valuable ideas for marketers -- all the while demonstrating why

• advertising lacks credibility, the crucial ingredient in brand building, and how only PR can supply that credibility;
• the big bang approach advocated by advertising people should be abandoned in favor of a slow build-up by PR;
• advertising should only be used to maintain brands once they have been established through publicity.

Bold and accessible, The Fall of Advertising is bound to turn the world of marketing upside down.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #53079 in Books
• Published on: 2004-05-01
• Released on: 2004-05-11
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 320 pages

Amazon.com Review
In The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR, longtime marketing strategist Al Ries and his daughter/business partner Laura Ries offer solid arguments championing the latter over the former for modern-day brand building. Such a stance is hardly new for these two, who have jointly, individually, and with others written eight previous books on related topics since Al penned The Positioning Era Cometh for Advertising Age some three decades ago. What's fresh this time is the dissection of contemporary corporate hits--like Starbucks, Botox, eBay, and even Harry Potter--that have eschewed traditional advertising and nevertheless soared to the top through the savvy use of public relations. The authors spend the first part of the book discussing how advertising lost credibility among consumers as it became more of a creative art than a sales tool, and the second part showing how PR subsequently supplanted it in effectiveness. Using the above examples and others, they explain how such practices can work in various situations (building a new brand, rebuilding an old one, dealing with line extensions, etc.), as well as ways advertising can still be usefully employed (primarily to maintain a brand and "keep it on course"). The result is both provocative and practical. --Howard Rothman

From Publishers Weekly
Marketing strategists Ries and Ries spend all 320 pages of their latest book arguing one point: skillful public relations is what sells, not advertising. Case in point: the failure of Pets.com's sock puppet ads. However, in a chapter devoted to dot-com advertising excesses, the authors never mention that many dot-coms had miserable business plans and neophyte management. (The Rieses may be counting on the sock puppet to sell another commodity, as a deflated sock puppet dominates the book's jacket.) Today, most small companies aren't bloated with venture capital to buy TV ads, yet the book has little practical advice on how these companies' executives should use public relations, particularly PR's most important role: crisis control. Some readers might resent paying $24.95 for what amounts to an advertisement for pricey PR consulting firms like Ries & Ries. The authors frequently poke fun at the most outrageous TV ads of recent years, paralleling Sergio Zyman's The End of Advertising As We Know It (reviewed above), a more thoughtful critique of current advertising trends. The inherent flaw in the Rieses' logic: time and again they cite ad campaigns for new products that are "off message" and then say how much sales declined; this supports the notion that products and services are sold by good advertising. Although their book is occasionally entertaining, the argument is simplistic and self-serving. Illus.
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal
The father-and-daughter authors who previously collaborated on The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding here attempt to explain the difference between advertising and public relations, arguing that PR should be used instead of advertising to launch new brands. Once a brand is established, advertising may then be used to maintain the brand in the consumer's mind. The book is arranged in four chapters, with the first chapter describing the "fall of advertising" and offering examples of failed campaigns such as those for New Coke and Pets.com. Subsequent chapters describe the rise of PR and its effective use by brands like Sony PlayStation and Red Bull, tout the new role advertising can play in maintaining brands, and attempt to finally differentiate between advertising and PR. Throughout, the authors' mantra is "advertising failed, PR would have worked," but they never fully explain how and why PR would have been more successful for the companies and the brands used as examples. An optional purchase for corporate and academic libraries. Stacey Marien, American Univ. Lib., Washington, DC
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

Customer Reviews

Yes, But......
The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR is a good overview of the weaknesses of the advertising sector. The rising costs (far in excess of inflation), declining credibility and decreasing media audiences for advertising are all valid points. But as my high school journalism teacher used to say, there is "an abundancy of redundancy" in this book. That in fact is it's first major weakness.

It's second major weakness is the premise that PR is "THE" answer for marketers. That simply isn't the full truth. The truth is that PR is an answer and an important one. But, PR is far from a silver bullet. As someone who has been involved in the marketing communications industry for 34 years and who owned a successful PR firm for 13 of those years, I can say that PR suffers from its own significant limitations. PR can't be controlled; the "news hole" in newspapers, magazines and in the electronic media is shrinking as costs increase and the audience is balkenized; and, PR efforts are never guaranteed to deliver any audience. Those aren't insignificant problems to overcome.

The real answer is an intelligently integrated mix of advertising, Public Relations, direct, interactive and viral marketing selected by someone who knows what they are doing; who is focused on matching the marketing communications plan and its implementation to the budget and financial objectives of the client; and who takes the time to understand the wants and needs of the customer.

Nevertheless, Ries and Ries perform a valuable service of exposing the weaknesses inherent in the advertising business. The points they make are valid and one conclusion is clear. Somethings going to give in the advertising world. This is the books major strength. To get the full picture, read "The Tipping Point" and "Integrated Marketing."

Finally, as an old PR practioner who has fought this fight inside many an agency meeting, it's simply delightful to read a book (however repetitive it might be) extolling the virtues of Public Relations.

Don't be victimized.
Don't be victimized by this shallow, self serving analysis that is purely intended to stir up controversy thereby selling books at the expense of the readers best interests and the reputation and credibility of the authors. There are too many flaws in their reasoning to discuss here, but here are the main ones.

-- They indite advertising by calling attention to the dot bombs and their advertising campaigns... as though advertising caused the failure of these Internet based companies. Let's use their cover story as a case in point. Was the failure of pets.com the result of it's ad campaign or was it because the company was founded on a flawed business model? The campaign was very creative and memorable. People loved the sock puppet. But not enough to make them go online and order mass quantities of dog food and cat chew toys! People naturally prefer to buy that stuff as needed in the grocery store. Don't hang that one on the advertising, Al. The best P/R in the world couldn't have saved that company.
-- Other examples of "advertising failures" are similarly flawed. Did Chevrolet lose market share because they advertised, or because the Japanese and Germans built better cars at cheaper prices? If they had placed P/R stories instead of ads, would consumers have paid more to get an inferior car? Don't be absurd.
-- They indite advertising as being less credible and more self serving than P/R which is viewed as a third party source. That may be true, but that also makes P/R an undependable medium when it comes to promoting a brand. Why? Because the print editors and broadcast producers ARE a third party and they may or may not decide to run your story! They may not review your product, they may decide to blast it or they might ridicule and make fun of it. And, even if the editor was planning on giving you a favorable story, a heavy news day could wipe it out. P/R firms don't guarantee placement, so you could pay out big bucks and come away with nothing but a few mentions in some minor publications.
-- It's clear that neither Al nor Laura Reis have ever practiced P/R. They contend that P/R is best suited for building the brand and generating awareness. After you have built the brand, they say advertising is acceptable for maintaining it. (This contradicts what they say about the market share loses of Coke and Chevy) But the authors forget that start-ups with no recognition are often considered un-newsworthy and frequently get overlooked by editors. Let's say you are a busy editor or producer bombarded with hundreds of press releases on new products and companies. Are you more likely to look at a release from Coca-Cola or some new company called Ima-cola II? Let's consider a business-to-business scenario. You have two releases. One is from Microsoft and another is from Bumstuck Software. Who's product get's reviewed?
-- And, who says the media is unbiased? A few jounalists have integrity, but the papers and stations they work for can compromise that integrity in a heartbeat. If a company is spending a million in advertising with AOL/Time Warner, would you say they would get more attention than a company that spends zilch? If the company that's spending zilch starts getting enough publicity to begin taking market share from their large rivals, who is the media going to protect...their loyal advertisers or a new brand that says they don't believe in advertising?
-- Finally, the Reis duo claims that success in launching a new product is contingent on P/R to position the company as the first in a category! Like Atari was first in the video game category? Like Commodore was first in the desk top computer category? Like Prodigy was first in the IP category? Instead of being the first mover, it's better to be the last man standing. That's the lesson the Reis' team should have learned from the dot bombs.

A legendary ad man named Howard Luck Gossage said that, "People don't read ads. People read what interests them. And, sometimes, that's an ad! If you write an intriguing ad people will pay attention. If your message is believable, people will believe it. GOOD advertising works. So does GOOD P/R. But bad advertising and bad P/R are wastes of money. Any new revelations here?

Both advertising AND P/R are components of any good integrated marketing campaign. The advantage of advertising is that it says what you want, when you want to say it and in the medium in which you want it to be placed. It's credible if you write good copy and articulate a believable case for your product. P/R may be more credible, but only IF it is favorably written, IF it is favorably placed and IF it appears at the right time to help move your product. Those are some pretty big "IF's". Any brand manager that knows his profession, will use both advertising and P/R in tandem to generate brand preference. But for most brands, the mix should favor good advertising versus undependable P/R!

"The Unconscious Civilization" Meets Madison Avenue
If John Ralston Saul ever decided to write a book to debunk the advertising world's groupthink about its almighty influence on the consumer, this would be it.

I read this book on a flight from LA to Toronto and couldn't put it down. I found that this book answered questions that I had often asked myself about whether advertising really impacts sales numbers. If you ever sit in front of the tv and wonder "Who is the genius that thought that ad would actually get me to buy something?" or you get the Energizer bunny confused with Duracell you might find this a very interesting read.

The book is broken down into four parts:

The Fall of Advertising which details various arenas in which advertising proclaims its superiority (Advertising and Car Salesmen, Advertising and the Dotcoms, Advertising and Credibility are some chapter titles);

The Rise of PR in which there is a primer of sorts on how PR can be used more effectively than advertising (Rebuilding an Old Brand with PR, Dealing with Line Extensions);

A New Role For Advertising in which the authors suggest that the bathwater not get completely tossed out with the baby--that advertising does have a place....as a cart after the horse (Maintaining the Brand);

and finally The Differences Between Advertising and PR which gets a little cloying in the use of analogies but is a good read nonetheless (Advertising is the Wind. PR Is the Sun, Advertising is Incredible. PR is Credible.)

What I liked about the book:
1. It has a breezy, shoot from the hip conversational feel
2. There are ample anecdotes backing up the hypotheses--makes for a very lively read...lots of "Oh ya...I always WONDERED about that" responses.
3. It made me really think about how brainwashed our society is about the value of advertising.
4. This book also gave me some insights as to how to continue as I launch my new company...pitfalls to avoid and things to definitely do.

I am not particularly well-read in this field so this was a good intro to the subject for me.It might be too rudimentary for some. I am definitely going to check out the authors' other books on Positioning and 22 Immutable laws of Branding.

The only tiresome aspect I found in the book is the RELENTLESS repetition of the "Publicity builds brands not advertising" axiom. If one mention is good, 43 mentions is better? I would also have appreciated footnotes on the sources for some of the stats and graphs used in the book. Would have added additional scholastic integrity to the figures.

Otherwise, I would highly recommend the book.