While the article makes some nice (if broad) points, I wish people would stop conflating the disciplines of marketing and advertising. Advertising is a subset of marketing -- one of many. The two terms should not be used interchangeably, as this article does.
The article does a nice job of comparing "growth hacking" (which, by the description, does sound like something more akin to marketing) with traditional advertising, then attempts to make generalizations about the marketing field. Granted, this is a piece in Ad Age, which is focused on advertising.
It's just ironic that the piece asks us to think of marketing as more than just advertising, while proceeding to interchange the two terms.
The article has a reference that I think does a much better job describing the role:
http://andrewchen.co/2012/04/27/how-to-be-a-growth-hacker-an...
But headline/article disagreement is just a reality of web journalism I suppose we have to get used to.
Bingo
I am glad the importance of growth is spreading to the mainstream but people need more meat these days.
So far, it sounds to me like today's term for "marketer".
They use different tools to accomplish the same task. It's time that marketers realize there is more at their disposal.
There is a product part of it as well - so my conclusion is that growth hacking is probably more about a different way to think about product management than marketing. The examples given of Hotmail and others fall into that bucket - making changes to the product itself to drive growth.
Brian Doll (Github -- and you thought drink ups were just for fun?): http://emphaticsolutions.com/2012/06/22/marketing-for-geeks....
Paul Willard (Atlassian): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyZOGJHl_a0
There's lot more out there, but these two were good overviews for me, and included more detail on how to do it.
See also: Unmarketing (http://www.amazon.com/UnMarketing-Stop-Marketing-Start-Engag...)