Gary Vaynerchuk VS Lee Clow: the match of the century

I love looking back at history and review the state of the day. I first met Gary in Florida in February 2008 - he was amazing then. He's just more experienced and more revered now - I don't think he's changed much and that's what social media can share that authenticity.

Even though professionally I'm from started in the same stables as Lee, that is very 20th century, when we didn't have digital natives and the need or means to be social on a large scale as we do today.

For me Gary Vee has proven how all of us can use social media for business - even with varying results - we can garner attention, engage with our audiences and monetize our brands.

Looking forward to seeing new and innovative ways of using digital media from instinct rather than from textbook!

Jason,
Great comments. Check out John Moore's post at http://mullen.com Addresses this very subject. Social media is everywhere and nowhere. I also agree that Lee would be all over this stuff, as mentioned in previous comment. BTW, I am a follower of Acme Screw. They are awesome content generators and engagers. ;-)

Wow, this is great. I wrote this post a long time ago and now the conversation is back. JP, again, hard to disagree with your personal examples, or the value of the iPhone, or the tv commercials that so brilliantly present it. BTW, I saw the commercials online because I don't watch tv commercials. I make them now and then but hate watching them. I can't be any more articulate than Christine, so I won't try. Don't know if you know anything about Gary (and btw, he is just an example.) Built a $100 million company from $4 million start. Signed a multi million dollar book contract. Makes six or more figures a year speaking. Sells out all his gigs. Has hundreds of thousands of loyal followers. Don't know if you know the story of Lemonade the movie. See this post. http://bit.ly/g8Be4 Don't know if you know the Best Buy story, or the Obama getting elected president story, etc. But they are all social media at its best. Also, I don't know Lee, but I do know for a fact if he had started his career today, he'd be all over this stuff. He's be inventing in it, creating in it, raising the bar of creativity in it, and inspiring others to do the same. Also, I never said this won't look infantile when the real deal comes. Just that there are amazing opportunities here right now. To neglect them is insane. And, finally, Lee was just an example. A prop I exploited to make my point :-)

If someone can point me to an article about Lee wherein he denounces social media, that'd be great. Otherwise, I can't help wondering why so many people assume someone of his creative stature would just stick to old media. And yes, I realize Lee is really just a figurehead in Edward's original post, but many comments fail to make that distinction.

Personally, I think social media does and will continue to have its place in the media mix. But I also think a fair number of marketers over-estimate just how "engaged" consumers really want to be with brands. Not everyone is Nike or Apple or Harley-Davidson. I have no desire to follow Acme Screw Company on Twitter. As always, the media mix depends on the brand and its target. Use what works, jettison what doesn't.

And if I had to bet, I'd still bet on Lee.
.-= Jason Foxu00c2u00b4s last blog ..Mmmmmmmm, Donuts =-.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. You can't just dismiss social marketing efforts based upon your distaste for Starbucks and Facebook. Yes, there are hundreds of useless apps out there. Yes, it requires a strong strategy to break through the clutter. Yes, everyone is still trying to figure out how to best leverage social, making mistakes, and experimenting. But social media is shaking up the advertising world because it's changing the way that the public accesses information, it provides the possibility of a brand to directly interact with its consumer and vice versa, it's changing the way that the world communicates. You can't ignore that and you should want to find a way to be a part of it.

If you want examples of good social marketing, look at what Mullen has done with Olympus's release of the E-P1, look at companies that integrate social efforts in congruence with their other PR efforts like Tide's strategy with mom bloggers, look at what small companies like Kogi BBQ have accomplished exclusively through Twitter. Maybe the high-buzz promotions like My Starbucks Idea will fade away, but social is quickly becoming an integrated part of marketing in many ways.

Social media is about becoming a part of your own community. That's the difference between Gary Vee and Lee Clow. As with anything, we will get better at it with time. Don't be so dismissive or you could be missing out on some huge opportunities.
.-= Christine Petersonu00c2u00b4s last blog ..captain_pete: I love the word "snarky" =-.

Thanks, Edward - I didn't miss it - I just don't like it. I also don't think it will last in its present form.

This is exactly the mistake that Starbucks made - and the reason I've hit a wall (no pun intended) with Facebook.

Wither Starbucks? I don't need cute. I don't need my name on a cup. I don't need throw-away small talk from a barista. I don't need tryouts for some BravoTV barista reality show on my way to the office. I need coffee that makes me want to drink more. They still have it, except you need a mental machete to find it. Taking on water, they have made a recent token attempt at being coffee-forward, but it's a weak one.

Facebook is a neat idea. Very creative. Never done before (OK never done since the salad days of the W.E.L.L.) But for me to weed through the barrage of personal flotsam and advertising jetsam in order to pluck the occasional heartstring or get a shock from the honest connection of ideas has reached a tipping point. Unfortunately that tipping point is one that drives people from a clear message. Again with the mental machete.

I use an iPod Touch. First piece of new-new technology I've fully adopted in a long time, and I've beta'd and early-adopted them all. I didn't buy it because of someone cyber-shilling about it. I finally bought it because one night, alone on my TV, there was a white screen and a focused set of fingers showing me things I'd never dreamed of seeing on a handheld. One focused ad. They now have several flavors of it. Ditto the iPhone. Focus, clear message, simplicity. Broken model? All those Web 2.0-ers would kill for Apple numbers.

"Way less money" is not getting the audience numbers clients are used to - it's getting many smaller collections of followers - nanomarketing - who are beginning to realize the original false fear of nanotechnology - they are becoming a grey goo. Facebook is a great example of this. People get sick of the ad-driven apps faster than anything else on there. They are the first to go when people realize the clutter.

There might be a paradigm-shifting (sorry!) post-2.0 ad model - but the present is the first wave and will look positively cacophonous and infantile when the real deal arrives.

Lee. Period. The implication here is that you may have found the "Web 2.0 Lee Clow" in Gary. You decidedly did not. You found the love child of Max Headroom and Billy Mays, a web-enabled pitchman. The web is still at the flysheet stage. Not much can stand out in that environment. Web 2.0 and its democratization of promotion has resulted in a sea of personality-forward near misses. The reason Lee Clow is not a household name is because he does not need to be a household name, his clients/their products do. If there is a web-lee-clow you won't know him/her until the content is forward and you dig deeper. They will not be standing in front of their work, but behind it.

The Beard is now up to 350+ followers, thank you.
.-= Lee Clow's Beardu00c2u00b4s last blog ..leeclowsbeard: Great ideas can come from anywhere. Even creatives. =-.

Howard:
The growth of Google and Facebook, not unlike the growth of brands such as Amazon.com and Starbucks offline were all built without offline advertising because the brands were the advertising. They were ubiquitous, sticky, and benefited from word of mouth.

As for Lee, he does the kind of work that you see at the festivals, big, pop culture influencing, able to put brands on the map. The creativity behind that advertising is helpful (though not always) in getting a brand remembered.

This post was intended to be tongue in cheek, sort of, but at the same time to say, as you suggest, that things really are changing; we now have new media and tools, changing roles played by the consumer, and easy to master technologies and platforms that let an individual achieve massive reach and influence.

Those are the facts. Figuring out how what to do with it all to be an effective marketer and creator is the challenge.

I did not take this seriously at the outset, but the discussion has given me pause for thought.
I am a designer and not an agency person. I am also South African, where the advertising is influenced more by conceptual European thinking.
Is it a gauge of advertising brilliance in America when a giant brand is built?
Is it, then, about size?
I am sure Lee Clow is as brilliant as described here. Massive amounts of money and energy obviously go into supporting the reach of his ideas.
But what happened with Google?
Suddenly everyone knew the word.
What about Facebook?
Suddenly everyone knows Facebook.
Who was behind that?
So I am now pondering the model of creating massive awareness.
The international advertising festivals I used to visit a movie theater to watch in South Africa, were hugely entertaining, brilliance and creativity overflowing in their abundance.
They did not create massive brand awareness necessarily.
But they were ingenious nevertheless. And seem to predominate in the European and Asian models.
Is America then just about size and Tide?
About creating brand leaders?
If so, who branded Google?
I think something very fundamental has changed in this country.

Media has never had a form, only a function.
And advertising is end-result, of media.

Cult of the Amateur, is a nice campaign within in traditional media.

Marc Rappu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..iPhone Controlling Ableton & VDMX

Great post, Edward. Hilarious concept to match these two formidable forces.

Having worked for Lee at TBWA/CD I can vouch for his brilliance at building brands. Gary V is himself a brand. In fact, he's a brand, an ad agency, a PR firm, a production team all rolled into one. He is brilliant at promoting Gary Vee. But this proves his skill as a businessman; it doesn't necessarily make him a marketer. Great marketers are skilled at building other people's brands. Which is why you may not have heard of Lee Clow.

Helen Klein Ross aka AdBroadu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..still twitter-averse? finding time to get roundtuit

Personally, I'm not picking sides. I'm glad to have both to learn from. One of the biggest joys of the modern media landscape is the multitude of voices and opinions we have access to. Perhaps the future is not about the individual voice, but a confluence of voices sharing and finding better solutions than one might alone. And I don't mean this in a creepy design-by-committee sort of way (though that is always a danger if we choose to pander to the safe middle ground). But the ability to hear and understand multiple perspectives and synthesize them into useful action is always what leads to progress.

Plus, a Clow/Vanyerchuck hybrid would make a fantastic dinner date. Sign me up!

Pete:
Not sure who your comment is directed at. Hope not me. I've been in this business not quite as long as Lee, but long enough to know who's who and who knows what. Even when I've had way too much wine, chances are I would still know the deal. If you've read anything I've written you should know I'm all about the idea and creativity; in fact I have been insistent, in light of SM u00e2u0080u009cgurusu00e2u0080u009d who think it's only about the conversation, that itu00e2u0080u0099s still content and creativity, in whatever form it appears -- programs, experiences, communities, conversations u00e2u0080u0093 that will be the difference between OK SM and great SM. Otherwise, who will want to engage? Clearly this is a topic and post that has inspired conversation, debate, agreement and multiple perspectives. Hey, guess what? That's what social media is all about. And, if I say so myself, had this initial post been flat and boring, sans concept, my guess is no one would be here talking about it. Long way of saying ideas will always matter. But theyu00e2u0080u0099ll take on new forms, live in new places, work in new ways and learn as much from the world of Gary as from the world of Lee.

Favorite scene from The Incredibles.

Helen: Everyone's special, Dash.
Dash: That's just another way of saying no one is.

To which I would add what Ian Malcolm had to say
to John Hammond in Jurassic Park:

Malcolm: Your scientists were so preoccupied with
whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think
if they should.

Tell you what, Gary. I'm going to take you up on your offer. If you plan to be in Boston any time soon, email me at Ernie.Schenck@hhcc.com. We'll set something up. I would love nothing better than to go deep on this stuff with you. Especially if you're springing for the wine:)

I think you misunderstand what Lee Clow does.Just because he has worked in the realm of big budgets and corporate clients doesn't mean that he couldn't put together some very inexpensive wine videos and find a way to get on some TV shows. If you believe that the principles of good advertising and creativity don't apply to new media marketing solutions then you've had a little too much wine!

I know a lot about GV, but less about Lee Clow. The post provided a good education on Lee's background.

That said, the *future* of marketing is going to be all about deep engagement with your customers, being authentic living your brand, and the movement of control from the big co's to the empowerment of individuals interacting in communities built around brands.

Lee's background is in the broadcast, top down, control-based non-interactive world. Gary's experience is all about the hyper-branding (even individuals have brands), hyper-interactive, hyper-engaged world that is about to come into all of our lives.

So you say what's at stake is the future of marketing, but that's not at stake... that's going to happen. Maybe what's at stake is Lee's influence in that new world that is coming. And that's really up to Lee. My advice to him would be to take a couple of meetings w/ Gary to prepare for what's about to rock the world of marketing like few things Lee has seen before.

Great advertising is created by great clients. Good conductors like Lee Clow marshall ensembles of energy every day who are often the unheralded forces behind good ads. Those forces are now at work building new toys and languages for us and the medium is king. Looking for masters is an old media theme. Looks a little like the music business to me. When everybody is a brand, the new advertising will still be created by great clients. It just won't look anything like the old advertising.

I've worked with Lee Clow. He is the Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods and Babe Ruth of advertising, combined. No one in the history of the ad game has created, produced, directed, overseen or influenced as many of the most outstanding and memorable commercial campaigns as he. No one. His life's work casts a shadow not just on the industry, but also on the culture at large.

Gary Vaynerchuk is a phenomenon. His passion is palpable, his drive is admirable and his enthusiasm is infectious. Plus his work ethic is as impressive as his achievements are noteworthy. I'm a big fan.

Of course, it's impossible to compare the two, but this much I'm sure about: they would get a kick out of each other. For Gary, because Lee's clarity of vision would be truly enlightening. For Lee, because he enjoys red wine -- without the pretense, snobbery and bullshit historically associated with it-- just like Gary delivers it.

If they ever do get to meet, I'll be glad to bring the pizza.

Rob Rosenthal [http://twitter.com/FreshPie]
Short Order Dadu00c2u00ae

NEW MEDIA JUST BIT OLD MEDIA IN THE ASS.
OOOHHH!! Now it got kicked in the shins! That HURT!
OH NO! It fell down! WAIT! It's getting up ... staggering a bit,
Quick! Bring some cash!. Ok, that's a bit better ...PLAY IT SAFE! Get some life support in here!
I'm afraid the prognosis is not good ...
Will everyone please stop crowding around and give the poor thing some air ...

Gary,
Thanks for the comments and your perspective. Your openness, honesty and authenticity are admirable. You deserve all that you've achieved to date. I've always been a fan of Lee Clow. But as you say, since there are no sides, I'm a fan of yours, as well.

Gary vaynerchuk

I am super flattered, first of all, to even be in the conversation. And to be honest I donu00e2u0080u0099t think I deserve it. Yetu00e2u0080u00a6 I hope to work hard and continue to trust my feel for the market and put in the effort to be worthy of this kind of debate! That being said, It is interesting to me to hear peoples' thoughts. Iu00e2u0080u0099m 33 yrs old. I havenu00e2u0080u0099t had time to show my long term vision, etc. And for the many who've commented on my skill set, please afford me the opportunity to buy us a bottle of wine and riff about business/marketing for the night! - I wish you all well and I hope we are all smart enough. There are no sides, just changing times, which, oh by the way, doesn't mean all the 20-30 somethings who claim to be social media consultants know what they are doing. Branding and business building is the same no matter what the tools are!

Gary Vaynerchuku00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..Crush It! Why Now is the Time to Cash in on your Passion

I agree with you that there are tons of avenues, and that the fundamentals are still valuable. I don't care how good you are at getting your message out there, if you don't hustle and/or can't run your business, you are going to fail, no matter how good your product or service is. There're lots of companies out there with this exact problem. Their revenues are good, but they are too top heavy and just won't survive. It takes skill.

My point is that social media, with significantly less overhead, has the ability to engage a user community in a way that print and television can't, and at a significantly lower cost per exposure. As you said, anyone one with half a clue and an internet connection can use them. To someone working a 9-5, the only cost is rearranging some time.

Vaynerchuk was not an overnight success, and I think that he makes it a point of letting people know that you have to hustle to get whatever you are after. He also did have an empire built, and WLTV became a significantly win-more endeavor for him.

The last two comments highlight one of the biggest "problems" with new media advocates: the idea that there's two sides in this "fight" and that new tools equal new ways of thinking. The fundamental concepts of marketing haven't changed, there are now just a million different channels and methods to reach people where there only used to be a few, and now most of them are available to anyone with an internet connection and half a clue.

Creativity, drive and business smarts are still required to be successful, though, and it seems Clow's accomplishments are being diminished a bit in this discussion.

Also, it's worth noting Fields' point above, that Vaynerchuk wasn't exactly an overnight success nor did he start from scratch.

I am just the instigator and the moderator but it appears that as we get late into the match Gary Vaynerchuk is coming on strong. Gerardo, you are right in many ways (as are others who've commented here) that social media in some variation is the future. The price of entry may be high in terms of imagination and creativity, but it's low in terms of money. I spent 30 years in the traditional space before becoming a complete convert. Having lived and worked on both sides (if they are, in fact, sides) I see merit in each. But instinct tells me that while creativity, content and big ideas will always matter, old media, one way messaging, and traditional solutions are rapidly dying if not already on life support.

I think the metrics being used in the fight are skewed. I think when the dust ultimately settles, people are going to realize that Gary Vaynerchuk wins by KO two minutes into the first round.

I think that all too many people still fail to realize that the landscape is so drastically different. Clow's media campaigns were brilliant, and they reached tons of people, but I bet they cost any company a fortune to put together and get in front of viewers. If you study any successful ad, it is insane how everything is planned down to the smallest detail to provide maximum persuasion.

Gary takes a completely different approach. If a company wanted to, they could use social media, and engage in one of the most massive word of mouth campaigns ever. For the cost of a consultation, and the crafting of a message, a company can leverage social media to virally spread a new campaign ad at a fraction of the cost per exposure of traditional marketing. That does not even include the fact that a company could incentivize users to organize a community of consumers/users for them.

A television ad may make me want to buy a product, and maybe tell someone about it if I like it. As an affiliate marketer, I will buy a product, and tell people about it, because it is in my interest to do so, more than it is my affiliate partners. I think that as more companies realize that, we will still see traditional advertisement for exposure, much significantly larger portions of their advertising budgets will go into social media and affiliates like me.

Whether you like Gary or not, is your prerogative. If you think he's wrong, I hope you soon realize the importance of building up your brand and engaging social media.

Apples vs oranges, Gary V's driven by entrepreneurship, he's more the client than the agency. I spent an hour interviewing him recently. He turned a $2 million dollar wine store into a $60 million operation in 9 years without debt or investors and a web video show into a 7-figure speaking career in 3 years.

And, I'm betting his company's NET is more than many of Clow's clients'...after they've ponied up their $20-$100 million in ad fees (okay, maybe not). ;-)

Plus, you forgot the Critical Tie-Breaker - Who's most likely to win a claymation deathmatch, then be turned into an action figure? Gary V wins hands down.

Jonathan Fieldsu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..Renegade Profile: Artist-Entrepreneur Ann Rea

Uh, who the hell is Gary V?
I don't know either personally- but I do own a copy of the out of print "Chiat Day, the first 20 years" and read it to my staff chapter by chapter.
If I had to sit in a room for a week with either- I think I'd be tired of Gary in under a day- and Lee would continue to fascinate.
There is a reason only those of us in advertising know who Lee is.
His ideas are bigger than he is.
Gary V. same size package.

David Esratiu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..Is CRM the next wave in marketing?

If I were a CEO with just a few pennies, had a family at home that depended on me, and so therefore needed someone to help me with my business so my family could survive, I'd pick Gary. He's a pitch man. And an entrepreneur.

If I wanted big ideas that sound great at cocktail parties, I'd go with Lee. B/c, if things were that dire, I wouldn't be at cocktail parties.

Gary's a survivor. Lee makes me feel good.

If the match were Vaynerchuk vs Jobs, I'd take Jobs. He's a pitch man, an entrepreneur and a survivor, too -- and he has impeccable taste.

Pretty good dialog going on. A quick recap if I may. Lee is winning. Has the experience, expertise, accomplishments. If we had to give our brand to someone it, would be Lee. But Gary, in both his personality and individual brand building offers us lessons in social media and determination. We as individuals and brands can learn from that and apply those lessons. And finally, future marketing success will be informed by both these guys. Oh by they way, they'd probably never be rivals. Might even like each other.

I agree with Mr. Schenck. This is like pitting Al Pacino against Ashton Kutcher, and pretending it's a real fight because Kutcher has more Twitter followers than CNN! Get real.

That said, the next Clow will almost certainly emerge from the new media space, though I'd bet money that they'll have some traditional media experience that they're building upon.

Guy LeCharles Gonzalezu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..What New Media Can Learn From Slam Poetry

This little competition is like arguing about whether a chainsaw or a hacksaw is better for buttering your morning toast. The tools aren't the problem, the question itself is. "Is Gary V or Lee Clow the future of marketing?" The answer to that (both) questions is: Neither of them are.

We shouldn't be pitting these two head-to-head. The question shouldn't be "who's the future" but rather "What and how much can we learn from each of them?" Just as we've learned lessons from the advertising and business geniuses of our past that we still apply today, we should be sucking every bit of learning and inspiration out of these two that we can, and applying those lessons to problems that we need to solve as marketers.

Since I don't know Lee, but do know Gary personally, I'm just gonna rant for a second on Gary.

Gary is an anomaly. And what he does has almost nothing to do with wine, with winelibrary.tv, or even with social media. No one else in Gary's exact position could be taught to do what he has done. Gary's success is because of who he is, his ability to inspire, and his unabated authenticity, NOT because he used social media. Gary is both product and marketing message all-in-one. And there are lessons to be learned there about the "future of marketing," but in no way does it define that future.

About 3 months ago, I got to join a small group of people in Gary's hotel room to argue about the future of just about everything. At 6am, after 8 hours, as we all began our hangovers, Gary stood up and said "I know one thing. You take away every penny I own, give me $100 cash, and send me back in time 1 year... I'll show up on your doorstep a year later worth 100x what I'm worth today. And I'll own the Jets. So fuck everything else." I'll never forget that. With Gary, absolutely everything is possible, every single experience is an opportunity, and every single connection is meaningful. Again, words that every brand should live by.

All that being said, I still can't imagine a world without 1984.

I think Lee has to get the nod for a number of reasons, one of which Edward mentioned, and an important one he did not.

The first is Brands Built. A man who has proven he can build any brand is to me infinitely more valuable than a man who has to date built only one. Anyone can hit a home run (Bucky Dent, anyone?). But wouldn't you rather have Hank Aaron on your team?

The second, and the one I feel really makes the difference, is what I'd call Cost of Failure. According to Brandweek, Apple spent $300 million on measured media in the first ten months of 2008. Their market cap is $109 billion. If for some crazy reason Lee Clow should start sucking at his job, the results would be catastrophic. On the other hand, if Gary's adventures in new media had failed, who would even know the difference? He'd still have his liquor store and probably the same customer base.

One thing (but not the only thing) Edward said that I wholeheartedly agree with is that the future of marketing will call for more Garys than Lees. But I might submit that is simply because there will always be more Garys than Lees.

You know, guys, anyone can give free advice. But see, here's the thing. The advice I get from Stephen King is going to be take a little more seriously than what I get from, say, a pimple-faced kid in college creative writing class. Why, I submit for your consideration-- would anyone think they can learn anything about building a brand based on a bunch of tweets or a book or anything at all from Gary? He sure can drive traffic. I'll give you that. But has he shown he can drive emotional attachment? Um, not that I know of.

Great post - best thing I've ready so far today.

Two things: I agree wholeheartedly with Bob in that its a ten year match, not a ten round one. But also we need to think about timeframe. Gary has been able to accomplish a major brand build without the resources that Lee had, in a much smaller time frame (granted the tech wasn't available to Lee early on).

The advantage I see with Lee is that he's got a long history of experience through all different forms of media. Time will tell if Gary can (or should) make that jump into other spaces and build brands there.

I do think however that Gary is one of the masters of the online play, and adds tons of value to people like US who want to learn how to build brands, thanks to his free advice and personal interaction.
Again, loved the post. Thanks much.

@ryancmiller

Totally agree with you, Edward. In fact, I would go you one further and say that the next Lee Clow very likely will NOT emerge in the traditional space. But for now, I think we can all agree that I know Lee Clow, and Gary, you are no Lee Clow.

I can always count on Ernie Schenck for wisdom, clarity and a solid point of view. I think we would all agree that experience, talent, and a track record are what add up to expertise in any endeavor. And yes, the Lee Clows of the world will always prevail, as they not only shape brands but actually inform culture and set standards. But here's another twist on the question. Will the next Lee Clow work and live in the traditional space? Or in the new one? The creative people (who choose to pursue commecial careers) have always migrated from one medium to another: books to film, print to web, canvas to screen, film to pixels. I certainly think there's as much chance that the next Lee Clow will emerge from the arena that Gary performs in as from the hallways of an ad agency.

Well, Lee Clow has never sent me a personal message saying the he loved me for drinking boxed wine. Then again, I drink that boxed wine as I tap away on my Apple. I say they are both geniuses and I have a lot to learn from both of them. I still believe the smartest brands will continue to use different blades to make different cuts.

Amy Flanaganu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..My 7 year old cries for 20 heartbreaking minutes every time he loses a baby tooth.

Last year, I picked up a book called "The Cult Of The Amateur". Required reading for anyone who's gotten overly enamored with all things user-generated. I love social media. Love Web 2.0 as I'm sure I'll love Web 3.0, 4.0 and 127.0. I fully realize the power of involving people, bringing them into the tent and all that. But are we ready to actually say everything we do in this business, and by we, I mean Clow, Goodby, Wieden, Boches, Schenck, et al, is and has always been an expensive and unecessary smokescreen? I used to cringe when some out of work newspaper reporter would come in for an interview for a copywriter job. So let's see your book, I'd say. Um, I dont have a book, they'd say. I write for a newspaper, so how hard can writing ads be. Did I say cringe? I meant freak out. Talk about frickin offensive. It's great that Gary got a book deal. But based on what? That he built a platform? That's admirable of course. Especially if you're a publisher. Few imprints have the gonads anymore to go with their guts. But long term, the Lee Clows of the world will prevail. As Christine says, guys like Lee see the bigger picture, the nuances, the nooks and crannies of a brand that Gary will never understand.

Great article!
But this really isn't a ten round match, it's a ten year one. Let's talk again in '19!

This is a very interesting match-up!

I'm firmly of the belief that the greatest consumer branding strategies are those that utilize relevant media to reflect or create a personality and culture to surround a product. Both of these men did that for their respective products in ways that were suitable for their time and are therefore equally matched in that way.

I think that what separates these men, however, is the manner in which they developed these campaigns. Lee Clow undoubtedly spent a lot of time studying Apple's consumers, analyzing the place of Apple products within the existing market, identified opportunities, and strategically executed his creative campaign. Gary V, on the other hand, seems to have executed his campaign largely out of instinct. He is more of an entrepreneur and a businessman than a marketer and he instinctively recognized the opportunities of social media and the Internet. He seems to talk and act way faster than he could possibly have the ability to think, which has proved to be extremely profitable for him.

In this marketplace, where opportunities are popping up faster than professional marketers have the chance to analyze and address them, Gary definitely has the upper hand. But eventually, it's going to come back to strategy and creativity and we'll need another Lee C who can see the big picture and execute marketing campaigns thoughtfully and with clear purpose.

I'm in advertising, and I don't drink - so part of me feels like it's Lee. However, I have lived in Jersey and felt like Alvy Singer when I was in California - so maybe it's Gary. But until Vaynerchuyck gets his own body part twitter profile, it's Clow's match in a split decision.

Jim @smashadvu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..Accelerating Through the Turn

Love this post!

I'm going to give it to Lee - as a marketer he's helped to build multiple multi-million dollar brands. The fact that he's not known outside of the industry is an asset, not a liability; it says that he does what he does well.

Gary's brand coup is limited to himself right now. But he's got the brilliance and the command of new media tools to make clients better known than he is. When he does? Well now, there's a match I'm buying scalped tickets for.

Lizu00e2u0080u0099s last blog post..Must be love

No doubt. Can't argue with Apple. But then again, Lee had Steve Jobs as a partner, lots of creative talent, huge budgets. Gary had a video camera, personality and chutzpah. And yes, Apple and Nissan could not do what they need to do without the reach and impact of TV advertising (nor could they have created their brand personalities without that medium) but the future of marketing may call for more Garys then Lees. Yes there will be room for both for quite a while, but things are changing and changing fast.

Very funny and entertaining post. I'm going to have to go with Lee. While The Wine Library is gaining traction, Apple has become one of the most iconic brands in history. It's a household name and has some of the most loyal fans imaginable. While big brands like Apple and Nissan are wise to immerse themselves into social media, they still need to hit the masses, and with 50+ million eyeballs locked onto TV sets each night, it still pays to break out the big guns.