Phil Myers gets to part of the problem here:
What's important is that it surfaces an interesting perspective that I've always wanted to talk about with regards to marketing. One of the reasons that marketing isn't trusted (and there are at least five others) is that it's motives are not pure. Far too often, we spend money on things that fall into this general category of 'awareness of the brand'. Hard to argue with the need but it creates an opening for programs that are ego-driven, notoriety-driven, personal fulfillment-driven, and creativity-driven.
The problem is deeper though - it has to do with an often complete communications gap between the marketing people and the people who create the product/service being sold. That's often not solely marketing's fault, either - too often the product groups don't talk to marketing, on the grounds that "they won't understand anyway". Thus you get a self fulfilling prophecy, and no one ends up happy. You can have all the authenticity and purity of motive possible, but if you don't understand your company's products, you're still not going to get anywhere.
What are people looking for when they come to your website, or look at some of your marketing collateral? Information. What problem(s) do you solve with your product/service, and how do you solve them? Why is your solution better than the next guy's? How can people make use of your product/service? If that kind of information is hard to find, then whatever you do have available is irrelevant.
Authenticity matters, but only if it's connected to real information.
Technorati Tags: PR