Another, absolutely brilliant move by Ableton was to host a MOOC, https://www.coursera.org/course/abletonlive
Not just for companies, but for cultural organisations and public bodies too.
For example, the Royal Opera House in London has an active and popular Youtube channel. They are a publicly-funded organisation but opera and ballet are still seen as somewhat elitist and expensive. Their Youtube channel gives them an opportunity to showcase their productions and behind-the-scenes footage. The videos are well-made and informative. And it undoubtedly helps bolster their reputation.
https://www.youtube.com/user/RoyalOperaHouse/videos
Another example: a well-known supermarket retailer in the UK (Waitrose) who also have a very polished Youtube channel (of mostly recipes)
https://www.youtube.com/user/Waitrose/videos
I think audiences are savy enough to know when a video has an element of promotion in it. What turns them off is if it feels like a self-congratulatory puff piece. Or if it feels too scripted and fake.
> Being awesome? Being too humble? Pushing for that last 5% of perfection when I should call it a night? It is really a toss up, I have so many.
I'm sorry but I believe you're mistaken. I googled and could not find any evidence that Ableton had anything to do with the Coursera MOOC whatsoever.
Most of what I did find suggests that it's run by (and for) Berklee College of Music. (So our point about MOOCs as marketing could still be valid, as Berklee has a big online program, most of which is not free.)
Then a video of them 'jamming' (a suspiciously well-produced jam, but I'll let that one go) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgiL7lsIATA
Then the genius part. The third video had the band describing their philosophy to making music, and to life. One commenter wrote "This changes everything" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58BHEAleNHs
I can see that there would probably be concerns with conflicts of interest, etc. But if done right (ie. keeping the marketing branch separate but connected) I think it would be a great match.
My reasoning? Companies don't just want commercials anymore. They want their story told. Who are better equipped to research and tell a comprehensive story than journalists?
The danger is letting companies influence sections that are believed to be objective and honest. One example of this is Michael Arrington the founder and former editor-in-chief of TechCrunch who is famous for investing in start-ups that his blogs would then cover. Not only that but he was partner in two investment funds during his tenure and now has his own fund, CrunchFund. All this to say that he has special interests in dozens of companies at any one time. When AOL bought TechCrunch they eventually let him go because in part of his conflicts of interest.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the kinds of marketing that companies want these days is going to be far more immersive than your run of the mill ads. This, I think, was one of the main points of the parent comment. As such, I would postulate that the skillset necessary to write a good article, or in-depth (eg. investigative journalism) story, is very similar to the skillset necessary to create (or find?) the stories a company wants people to know about it.
Now, the tricky part would be to engage in both journalism and marketing so as not to uproot the integrity (or give people reason to think your integrity as a news organization has been compromised, or that you are engaging in business with clients who clearly create a conflict of interest.
For example, suppose you are a newspaper / magazine who has a reputation as being a "watchdog" publication for the oil industry. Now suppose that while that branch of your business has established a reputation as a "watchdog" publication for the oil industry, the marketing arm of your business has clients like Exxon or Shell. To maintain the integrity of your journalism branch perhaps you should be working with clients seeking marketing services from other (eg. retail) industries.
The only reason this synergy sounds reasonable and even plausible to me is the well documented "crisis" news organizations worldwide are facing these days.
[1] http://digiday.com/publishers/huffington-post-branded-conten...