Dan Perry writes "Dave Pasternack wrote a MediaPost column today that outlines his opinion of why the “In-House vs. outsourced SEM” debate is ridiculous. It’s not surprising that he’s taking the side of agency, because that’s where his paycheck comes from. I wouldn’t expect a non-biased opinion from someone in Dave’s position, but I do think there are a few points he makes that are up for debate."
4 Comments
4 Comments
Comments
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his job depends on his not understanding it."- Upton Sinclair
@ppedersen I suppose your quote could apply to either perspective, then.
It could apply to any perspective. As an in-house marketing manager, however, your job hardly "depends" on whether you allow an agency to manage your campaigns or you hire internally. Dave’s job, however, completely depends on this.If Dave had simply said that there are a lot of bad in-house SEM people, I would have totally agreed. There truly are. However, since he’s made a difinitive statement that pretty much translates into "all in-house managed campaigns suck and all agency managed accounts are awesome", he’s made Did-It look like a ship of fools (since he’s their captain) ...which is sad becasue I consider them one of the top agencies in terms of quality. Quality that has, unfortunately, made their leadership arrogent and contemptuous.
I’m sure this picture is about that article. I got it twice in IM today.