I recently spoke at a conference with Rory Sutherland, Vice Chairman of Ogilvy, and he shared a fascinating insight about the influence of ad platforms on how we think about marketing.
Rory said that many of the metrics that marketers chase are not designed to serve the brand. They’re designed to serve the platforms that provide those metrics.
Rory coined a term to describe this phenomenon: “technoplasmosis.”
Referencing a parasite called “toxoplasmosis” that takes over the behavior of cats, Rory draws an analogy that ad tech platforms are similarly influencing the behavior of marketers.
Behavior science consultant Adel Borky expanded on Rory’s concept of technoplasmosis in The Drum a few months ago (and first introduced me to this concept):
“We congratulate ourselves on being “data-driven” and “efficient”, when in fact we’ve been induced into mistaking a platform’s KPIs for our own…
“Technology doesn’t just give us new tools; it changes what we see as important. Once dashboards and click-through rates exist, they begin to dictate the questions we ask and the answers we accept. If it can’t be measured by the platform, it starts to look irrelevant. If it can, it begins to feel like truth.
“That is the first symptom of technoplasmosis: a slow shift in our evaluative criteria. We stop asking “Does this build a lasting brand?” and start asking ‘Will this improve our campaign dashboard next week?'”
“A platform optimises for its own engagement, growth and revenue. If we aren’t careful, we end up serving those imperatives rather than our own.
“Brands disappear into the machine… Instead of building desire, we build compliance with an algorithm.”
In our push to be data-driven, we always have to question the source and incentives behind the data we have access to.
There’s a famous quote from William Bruce Cameron in 1963 that is newly relevant in today’s data-driven world:
“Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.”
Here are a few related cartoons I’ve drawn over the years:
