While a website like wtfqrcodes may poke fun at what could be/is a very useful technological application for enabling consumers to engage and interact with a brand or product, my question is, where is the accountability? Who's ultimately responsible for allowing these campaigns to come to market? (And, my thoughts don't stop here, because I continually ask this question for just about every automotive and beer commercial on television, but I digress.) Is it the CMO, creative director, digital director, interactive director, mobile director, media buyer, etc.? Is it the brand, the agency or both? Or, is it a matter of there being no clear delineation of responsibilities when a 2D-based campaign is decided upon and tasks (e.g., code generation, code testing, campaign design, user experience, etc.) simply fall through the cracks?
Another aspect to all of this, and this is something that I have written about before (read article), is the apparent lack of campaign goals and objectives. For me, it is very easy to see that, for a great number of 2D-based campaigns, there couldn't possibly be any goals and objectives or concern about ROI, as it relates to the use of the technology and/or the advertisement as a whole. Without goals and objectives, a 2D-based campaign, or even a traditional campaign, is doomed from the start and, I believe, most would agree that goals and objectives are Marketing 101.
Getting back to wtfqrcodes...I wonder if a site such as this will scare brands and/or agencies straight on how to correctly and effectively make use of 2D technology. Time will tell. Stay tuned.