Marketers need to break down the NFT bandwagon
When it comes to NFTs, SKMG co-founder and partner Andrew Knowles suggests there’s more at play than overpriced JPEGs.
After two years Cannes Lions is finally making a comeback, in person, in the Riviera, bringing with it the slew of anticipation as to what the world’s greatest advertising minds will have to show off. The irony is that many of the winning ideas in Cannes this year may not have anything to do with a physical presence – yep – this is another metaverse article. Specifically, it’s about NFTs.
Before you audibly groan, stick with me. The discourse around NFTs and what they mean for the future of our online engagement, at least in the media and marketing space, has been mired by debate over whether exchanges of inordinate sums of money for a jpeg are fad or real option for wealth generation. That, or you’re dismissed at the mere mention of an NFT because it’s, “too confusing”.
I’m not about to profess to be an expert in this field, honestly I’ve only just started to scratch the surface after a few months of research, but when the likes of the venerable Mark Ritson calls NFTs “idiot magnets” while plating up something as derivative as a series of photos of himself on the toilet – thinking he’s proven some sort of point when they don’t sell – it makes me nervous that even some of our industry’s greatest commentators are sending the wrong message. The intention of this article isn’t to lecture, it’s to pose a question: are we missing an opportunity by not making more of an effort to understand the NFT space?
How can you write an article on NFTs without mentioning either the unbelievably wasteful environmental impact of all the crypto mining, or the overwhelming number of scammers and grifters present in the space?
How can you uncritically report on OpenSea’s trading volume without acknowledging that most of these trades are probably wash trades (trading with yourself) designed to increase the perceived value of something before scamming some unfortunate punter?
How can you talk about play-to-earn without mentioning the overwhelming rejection of NFTs by the broader community of players (as evidenced by the half-dozen high profile examples of major companies retreating after a backlash)?
Why is there no mention of the utterly dystopian horror stories coming out of third world countries with guild-masters threatening the livelihoods of their underlings if they aren’t grinding in their shitty pokemon-clone mobile game well enough?
What about the collapsing economies of some of the most hyped up titles?
The only people who like NFTs are techbro weirdos, gullible rubes, and so so many grifters. It’s a pyramid scheme that also destroys the environment, we don’t need more articles glorifying their existence.
Dear Mumbrella – is it somehow possible to repost this comment with an audio backing track of the Foo Fighters singing “There goes my hero” at top volume.
Hey Michael – just wanted to drop a line here as I think it’s important to both acknowledge the validity of your points and the fact that they don’t detract from the potential of NFT technology itself.
The way I read the article, there wasn’t an attempt to conceal that the world of crypto, Web3 and NFTs are fraught with danger and lack perfection in their infancy.
You are absolutely right. There are scammers and fraudsters. I operate in the space and I personally don’t know anyone who hasn’t been stung by some sort of scam, be that a rug pull, pump and dump or fraudulent ICO. Nobody is denying this. It’s the wild west and anyone getting into the space must be judicious in their decision making and wise to the charlatans.
You’re also correct with regards to the environmental concerns, too. However, this is a problem the community is working on and Sydney-based Immutable is leading the way, creating a system by which NFTs can be minted and traded carbon-neutrally (https://dailyhodl.com/2021/03/29/immutable-x-is-making-nfts-carbon-neutral-on-ethereum/). This is an issue with a solution.
Concerning the economies of P2E themselves, the article actually mentions that the economic rationale is not perfect yet. I’m assuming he’s talking about Axie Infinity and how it’s economy fell through the floor after a surge. You’re 100% correct, but has anybody ever got something like an economy perfect at the first go? There’s so many stories of positive change in the lives of people in underwhelming socioeconomic situations. To brush the entire space with a negative brush can’t help, can it?
I would love to see your reports of dystopian horror stories regarding guilds as they should be named and shamed as any other exploitative business is.
There are always going to be good actors and bad actors in any industry and using any technology. Web3 has a unique problem here in that it is not regulated and so lacks authority to stop bad actors. However, that does not mean there isn’t positive utility to the technology. To paint the space with a dismissive brush because of the way some people use it (whilst ignoring the good ways others do) doesn’t seem like the optimal technique for analysis.
Yeh how can the author not take into account every single situation out there and think about the argument on both sides then go into multiple articles and go through the philosophy and economics of all of it … just rude! Of course there are issues but just like the car, the computer, the internet before it, there are things that aren’t perfect and this thing that’s been created needs to improve… no one denies that. But he even says that this article is meant to say that marketers need to find those bona fide hits… its basically acknowledging that this space needs to improve. You have some very valid points but those things are already being looked at and many are trying to change it. Categorising anyone that is into NFTs as only being a weirdo, rube or grifter does nothing to stop the inevitability that technological innovation brings. Anyway, I think critiques are great but when it comes to moving forward in this space I’d rather not be the old man shouting at a cloud
I cant see how this rationale is more than “this thing no one understands is important because it’s related to a bunch of other things which are trendy”. Great PR though.