Now, although the article uses the phrase as its title, the authors provide no evidence that Sorrell actually said, “the medium is more important than the message.”
However, this opposition remains a common debate – and one that’s fundamentally flawed.
Communication cannot occur without both medium and message – they’re entirely co-dependent.
Rather than being in opposition, both elements need to be carefully woven together: we’ve seen before that the most effective communications deliver the right message to the right people in the right places at the right times.
But maybe I’m missing something.
Could the medium really be more important than the message?
I’d love to hear your thoughts.