The grey zone between communications and marketing
I often think about the difference between communications and marketing.
Communications is transactional. It’s simply the delivery of objective information with the simple intent to share. Marketing, on the other hand, expresses value. It’s the delivery of subjective information with the intention to influence or motivate.
Of course, there’s no clear delineation between the two. Communications and marketing exist together in a grey zone of practice. There is that middle zone where simply transferring information is the intent, but the information is coloured with influence. Take these three sentences:
I grew a strawberry.
I grew a juicy, delicious strawberry.
You would love this strawberry I grew.
The first sentence is pure communications. It simply states that I did something.
The second sentence bridges communications and marketing. It seeks to influence the reader’s perception of the strawberry by establishing its value. I want you to know that the strawberries I grow taste good. Adjectives are the gateway to marketing.
The third sentence is clear marketing. It suggests that the strawberry I grew has such value that you’ll want it. By involving you as the subject of this sentence, I want to inspire you to take action on this strawberry.
There is very little pure communication. When we prepare information we are challenged to restrain ourselves from expressing value. Instead, most of what would be considered “communications” exists in the grey zone. And, more often than not, marketing prevails.
