Luminaries like design guru Wayne Hemingway and neuroscientist Baroness Susan Greenfield extolled the virtues of print and how it connects with people. While speakers from the worlds of advertising and publishing spoke on a range of subjects that all had a common conclusion: namely that print still has a key role in the marketing mix.

But one worrying undertone seemed to be that many marketing agencies had an unhealthy obsession with digital and social media marketing to the point that some completely overlooked print.

The reason, apparently, was that they believed that digital marketing offers the moon on a stick when it comes to campaign metrics to make the board or clients swoon with admiration. And even better, those metrics are free. Whereas with print their perceived wisdom apparently is that it’s an unmeasurable luxury.

Of course, we all know that the more enlightened agencies all realise that the most effective campaigns combine print with other channels.

But it seems that a worrying number only care about a traffic spikes, likes or trending on Twitter.

But, and it’s a Kim Kardashian-sized one, is that really what marketing is for? Surely its central role is to, well, sell stuff? And isn’t the impact on sales the only metric that really matters?

I can’t help but think that one day soon in a swanky boardroom somewhere, a marketing director will reveal the eye-watering metrics of their latest digital and social media campaign and someone will ask: but what was the sales uplift?

And then it will be the case of the emperor’s new clothes – and the only thing going viral will be the marketing industry’s blushes.