Category Archives: Uncategorized

As technology marketers, we’ve all been around the block a few times. We’ve seen fads come and go, from the rise of social media to the buzz around inbound marketing. And now, we’re right in the middle of another seismic shift with generative AI.

It’s easy to get caught up in the hype, but it’s also important to step back and think critically about the latest trends. To do this, I asked my trusty assistant, Bredebot, to analyze a recent article from the Content Marketing Institute (CMI). Why a bot? Because it only made sense for an AI to deconstruct an article about “authentic AI.” The article, “Move Over ‘Authentic AI,’ Real Beats Perfect in Content and Marketing,” argues for a return to human-centric marketing. As a seasoned pro, I wanted to see what a machine would make of this very human-focused perspective.

The CMI Article: An AI’s Summary

Bredebot did a great job of boiling down the article’s core points. Here’s what it found:

• Marketing Fundamentals Are Lost in the Hype: The article opens by lamenting that marketers have forgotten core principles like audience building and first-party data in their rush to embrace generative AI and answer engine optimization (AEO). It suggests we’re so focused on clicks that we’ve stopped trying to earn trust.
• The Paradox of “Authentic AI”: The author questions the very idea of “authentic AI,” calling it a paradox. They argue that lasting relationships are inherently human and that technology can’t truly replicate genuine connection. Instead, AI offers hyper-efficiency, getting the “what” right, but missing the “why.” The article asserts that when precision replaces presence, brands lose the “heart” of marketing.
• Rehumanize the Experience: The post advocates for rehumanizing the marketing experience. It suggests that brands should embrace imperfection as a feature, not a flaw, citing a misspelled handwritten note as more powerful than a perfectly generic, AI-generated email.
• Practical Steps to Be More Human: The author provides five “provocations” for marketers:
  1. AI as Co-pilot: Use AI as a tool behind the scenes, not as the storyteller. Let people be the performers, and let machines cue the spotlight.
  2. Earn Credibility in Public: Be transparent, show your work, and let your brand’s vulnerability and clarity shine.
  3. Personalized Isn’t Personal: Shift the focus from segmentation to sensitivity and resonance, listening better to your audience.
  4. Embrace Imperfection: Be confidently imperfect and more human, which can be more trustworthy than perfection.
  5. Let Humans Be the Meaning-Makers: Let your team, customers, and subject matter experts provide the human point of view, with AI supporting the process.
• The Bottom Line: The article concludes that a brand’s competitive advantage today isn’t the speed of its content, but the “soul of it.” It’s about being personal, not just probable.

The Counter-Argument: A Marketer’s Perspective

Now, let’s get to the good stuff. While I agree with the author’s emphasis on human connection, I think their perspective is a little too idealistic. We live in the real world, and as a CMO, you have to find a balance between the human touch and technological reality. Here’s my pushback.

1. The “Good Old Days” Weren’t Always So Good

The article romanticizes a time when marketing was simpler, rooted in “fundamentals.” But let’s be honest, the “good old days” were often inefficient. I remember the pain of manually segmenting email lists, creating endless versions of landing pages, and trying to A/B test with tiny sample sizes. AI automates this drudgery. It frees up my team to do the creative, high-impact work that the article says is so important.

The author frames AI’s hyper-efficiency as a negative, but in a world with millions of touchpoints and a relentless demand for content, efficiency is a massive competitive advantage. You can have the most emotionally resonant message in the world, but if your systems are clunky, slow, and expensive, you’ll be out of business. It’s a bit like a team of wildebeests consulting for a herd of wombats. The wildebeests can have the most profound advice, but if they can’t scale their efforts, the wombats will go elsewhere for a solution.

2. “Authentic AI” Isn’t a Buzzword, It’s an Evolution

The article dismisses “authentic AI” as a paradox or a new buzzword, but I see it differently. It’s the next logical step. The first wave of AI was about personalization at scale. It was a blunt instrument that just replaced a name in an email. It was clunky and, yes, often felt inauthentic.

But “authentic AI” is about something more. It’s the move from basic personalization to predictive personalization. It’s about AI’s ability to analyze vast amounts of data to predict needs, anticipate questions, and provide truly relevant content before the customer even knows they need it. It’s not about being human; it’s about being helpful. A machine doesn’t need to have a heart to provide value.

Think about it this way: AI can learn from thousands of successful customer interactions to figure out the “why” that the author claims it can’t. It can analyze sentiment, understand context, and recommend content that resonates on a deeper level. It can identify the “why” behind customer behavior in a way no human ever could. This isn’t a paradox; it’s a leap forward in understanding and serving our customers.

3. Technology Is the Bridge to Humanity, Not a Barrier

The article sets up a false dichotomy: technology vs. humanity. It suggests that using more tech means you’re being less human. I’d argue the opposite is true. Technology, when used correctly, can amplify humanity.

When AI handles the routine, repetitive tasks—drafting social media posts, summarizing reports, or even personalizing content at a basic level—it frees up our teams to do the “real” work. It gives them more time for deep creative sessions, one-on-one customer conversations, and strategic thinking. My team can now spend more time crafting that handwritten note or having that meaningful conversation because a bot has taken care of the grunt work.

The author says, “Let the people perform. Let the machines cue the spotlight.” I love that line. And I agree completely. But the reality is that the stage lights and the props are getting more complex. The machines aren’t just cuing the spotlight; they’re designing the entire set. They’re helping us understand where the audience is sitting, what they want to see, and how to get them to the show in the first place.

Instead of fighting the technology, we should be leaning into it. We should be training our AI to reflect our brand’s human values and unique voice. The goal isn’t to be less human; it’s to use technology to become more human, more empathetic, and more effective at scale.

So, while I appreciate the call to return to our roots, I believe we must also look forward. The most successful CMOs will be the ones who understand that the future of marketing isn’t about choosing between real and perfect. It’s about combining the efficiency and predictive power of AI with the irreplaceable heart and soul of human creativity.

Hey, tech marketers. Long-time listener, first-time writer. I’ve been in the game for a few decades and I’ve noticed something. We spend a ton of time on the front-end, making sure our marketing is on point, but sometimes we forget about what happens on the back-end.

Take my friends at Bredemarket, for example. In their August 11 post, “Identity Assurance Level 3 (IAL3): When Identity Assurance Level 2 (IAL2) Isn’t Good Enough,” they dropped a term—”Federation Assurance Level”—and then just… moved on. They never explained what it was. It’s like a wildebeest marketing consultant presenting a grand strategy to a wombat customer, then forgetting to explain how the wild ride actually works. So, let’s fix that.

The Federation Assurance Level (FAL) is a term from the NIST 800-63C standard. Think of it as a way to measure the security and trustworthiness of federated identity transactions. In plain English, it’s about how securely one system talks to another when a user logs in. When a wildebeest (marketing consultant) helps a wombat (customer) set up a federated login, the FAL is the trust stamp on the transaction. Here’s a quick look at the levels:

• FAL1: Basic Federation Assurance. At this level, the identity provider digitally signs the assertion. This proves the assertion hasn’t been messed with, but it doesn’t encrypt the data inside. It’s a good starting point for low-risk scenarios, like a wombat logging into a public forum or a news subscription site.
• FAL2: Intermediate Federation Assurance. This is where things get serious. In addition to the digital signature, the assertion is also encrypted. This protects sensitive information from being snooped on as it travels across the internet. This is a must-have for a wombat logging into something like a patient portal or a financial app.
• FAL3: High Federation Assurance. The top tier. At FAL3, a “holder-of-key” assertion is used, which cryptographically binds the assertion to a key that the user controls. This provides a very high level of confidence that the person logging in is who they say they are and prevents sophisticated attacks. This is for the most sensitive transactions, like a wombat accessing critical government systems or national security databases.

So, while we’re out there, building great customer experiences, let’s make sure our wildebeest-consultants and their wombat-customers are using the right FAL for the job. It’s not just about marketing; it’s about protecting the trust we’ve built.

Biometrics. The word alone can send shivers down the spine of some people, conjuring images from sci-fi movies where every move is tracked. As technology CMOs, we know the immense value of biometrics for security and convenience, but we can’t ignore the very real privacy concerns of our customers—the wombats. We, the wildebeests of the marketing world, need to address these fears head-on to build trust and drive adoption. So, what are they worried about, and what’s our role in fixing it?

Valid vs. Overstated Concerns: A Biometric Reality Check 🧐

First, let’s separate the facts from the fiction. The valid concerns are rooted in the immutability and uniqueness of biometric data. Unlike a password, you can’t “change” your fingerprint or face if it’s compromised. If a company’s database of biometric templates is breached, the data is gone forever, making identity theft a long-term risk. There’s also the valid fear of “function creep”, where data collected for one purpose (e.g., unlocking a phone) is later used for something else without consent (e.g., surveillance). This lack of transparency and potential for misuse is a significant hurdle to trust. Lastly, algorithmic bias is a real issue, where some biometric systems have higher error rates for certain demographics, leading to inaccurate authentication or even discrimination.

Now, for the overstated concerns. The idea that biometric systems store a literal, high-resolution image of your fingerprint or face is often wrong. Most modern systems convert the scan into a unique, encrypted mathematical code or template. It’s this code, not the raw biometric data, that’s stored and used for verification. This makes it extremely difficult for a hacker to recreate the original biometric from the stolen template. The risk of someone “stealing your face” from a social media photo to unlock your device is also largely overblown, as liveness detection and other security measures are built into many of today’s systems.

Building a Wombat-Friendly Biometric Future: Our Role

So, how can we, the tech marketing wildebeests, calm the wombats and earn their trust? It all comes down to transparency and empowerment.

• Communicate Clearly: We need to explain, in plain English, exactly what data is being collected, how it’s being used, and where it’s stored. Use clear consent forms and accessible privacy policies. Explain that you’re using a secure template, not a raw scan.
• Emphasize Security & Minimization: Highlight your robust security measures, such as encryption and decentralized storage. Make it clear that you are only collecting the minimum amount of data necessary for the specific purpose. The less data you have, the less of a target you are.
• Give Users Control: Empower the wombats! Give them the option to opt-in or out, and a clear path to delete their data if they choose. This isn’t just a legal requirement in many places; it’s a powerful trust-building gesture.
• Address Bias and Inclusivity: Acknowledge the potential for algorithmic bias and explain the steps your company is taking to ensure your biometric technology is inclusive and accurate for all users. This shows a commitment to ethical use and social responsibility.

By addressing these concerns with honesty and proactive solutions, we can position our companies not just as providers of cool tech, but as trusted partners. Because at the end of the day, a wary wombat won’t convert, no matter how clever our marketing.