Campaign magazine ran a piece last week about how 'traditional' agencies were doing on embracing digital. The article rated agencies out of ten based on stuff like their website, whether they were on twitter, what work they'd done, etc.
They marked us 7/10 and said "Wieden + Kennedy is perceived as one of the best digital ad agencies in town. Its website is well set up and brimming with information. Its twitter feed is popular and its blog is one of the best-regarded in the industry."
Can't complain too much about that, I guess.
The Creative Social Blog commented on this and asked its readers (mainly interactive creative types, I guess) to rate the agencies. Here's how the scores are going:
Can't complain about that, either.
But what about if we rate Campaign on their own interactive 'walking the walk'?
Blog: http://community.brandrepublic.com/blogs 9/10*
Twitter followers: 987 Campaignmag
Website rating: http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/ 6/10 (lots of info on there but bloody hard to find anything and all mixed up with other titles. Missed opportunity to really develop a conversation amongst the industry community.)
Best digital work done: was the e-mag, which seems to have been withdrawn
Biggest digital talent: Rory Sutherland
Overall rating: could try harder, especially in an environment which, for technological and financial reasons, is becoming increasingly challenging for the much-loved 'advertising rag'.
*That's for Rory Sutherland, whose blog is brilliant.
Any views on this from our readers?