Second Life — the media darling of 2006 — is now being roundly criticized by publications left and right. Wired and Forbes have both recently posted articles about Madison Avenue’s “wasteful” involvement in the online world. Yes, backlash is inevitable for any popular web application. (MySpace has already been through this.)

There are some basic truths here: Marketers, by nature, always want to ride the wave of what’s next. SL represents an exciting shift in how we communicate online, making it chum in the water for advertisers and brand managers worldwide. There was a point where just establishing a presence in SL alone was enough to get hype for your organization, even if you did nothing with it.

My advice with Second Life is that you can’t put your virtual toe in the water and then run away a week later when things don’t go as expected. Remember, SL is still relatively new-ish technology. For a brand to successfully make a splash in-world, creativity, curiosity and (*gasp!*) patience are required. And, quite simply, it’s just not for everyone. Using it as a mainstream, broad-stroke marketing vehicle will never work.

I’ve said it before, but Pontiac truly *gets* it with Motorati Island: an immersive, branded experience. Meanwhile, Second Life remains relevant to the millions of residents who call it their second home, while fostering a vibrant, growing micro-economy — with or without the presence of outside marketers.

Perhaps SL’s biggest proponent/critic is Warren Ellis, who writes a weekly Second Life dispatch for Reuters. I highly recommend it. Reading Warren’s column, I always learn something new, bizarre and/or exciting about the possibilities contained within virtual worlds.