In the digital age and declining newspaper ads,  which media are most important to consumers for retail or “buy now” ads?  Television is perceived by consumers as most effective in persuasion and branding, image oriented communications.

But the majority of consumers perceive digital media as more effective  than traditional media for “buy now” ads. Men were far more likely to prefer digital media for buy now ads, while women were more evenly split on the issue.  No doubt consumers are doing last minute research on the right product to buy.

2020:Marketing Communications LLC has just released a brand new study of how consumers (men and women 18+) perceive the effectiveness of major offline and online media in addressing a variety of communications objectives. The surprising results will be presented in installments from  information from  the leading media textbook, Media Planning & Buying in the 21st Century (3rd ed.).  This third installment covered the results of consumers’ media effectiveness for “buy now” ads.

 "BUY NOW" ADS

What is “buy now” advertising?  While branding advertising normally strives to build a favorable brand image, “buy now” advertising is directed to people who are currently shopping for a product/service and the intent is to sell the product now (or soon).  Frequently, advertisers will add incentives such as sale prices, free bonus product, extended payment terms, or cash back offers.  During the shopping and information gathering stage of the purchase process, consumers often conduct online research, visit stores, and talk to family and friends to get needed information and opinions prior to making the purchase.

In order to sell more ads, advertising media often claim their superiority as retail/buy now media. Newspapers have traditionally been the number one medium for retail advertising. The theory is that once branding advertising has created demand for a product, retail/buy advertising is needed to close the deal.  To explore the media implications of the buy now objective, we used the following question in the study:

Q3: Which advertising medium  best motivates you to BUY NOW?

 FINDINGS

The findings of the study are summarized as follows:  Digital media were named by two-thirds of the men and almost half of the women surveyed. 

Among men, media preferences for retail ads included:

o   Search engine listings (27%)
o   Online display ads (24%
o   Online video (10%)
o   Mobile (5%)\

Traditional media were secondary media for men:
o   Only 15% preferred television as a source of “buy now” advertising
o   10% preferred magazines
o   Radio and newspapers were preferred by 7%, suggesting that newspapers at least among these consumers has lost its primacy for retail advertising..
o   Magazines (print & online) were rated most effective in buy now  by 10% of respondents.

Among women ,  digital media appear to play an important but somewhat lesser role in retail/buy now ads, according to female respondents. 

o   28% selected search engine listings as having highest branding influence
o   12% selected online display ads
o   2% selected mobile advertising
o   5% voted for online video advertising

Traditional media were perceived by more women as important
o   Television (33%)
o   Magazines (12%)
o   Radio (2%)
o   Newspapers (6%)

CONCLUSIONS

There is a clear indication from this study that consumers are more reliant on digital media than traditional media for “buy now” advertising messages.  Men were most likely to prefer digital media, while women had a slight preference for traditional media, primarily television. Women also rated newspapers higher.

CONTACT
2020:Marketing Communications LLC
For more  information, please visit our website: www.MediaPlanningBuyinginthe21stCentury.com.
Email us at marketing2020@aol.com
Ronald Geskey/Publisher & CEO

Which advertising  media are most important in branding? 

Television has had the default position as the branding medium. But in the last couple of years, the digital advertising community has been busy selling digital’s role in branding. 

What do consumers have to say?  

2020:Marketing Communications LLC has just released a brand new study of how consumers (men and women 18+) perceive the effectiveness of major offline and online media in addressing a variety of communications objectives. The surprising results will be presented in installments. Additional information is available from  2020’s leading media textbook, Media Planning & Buying in the 21st Century (3rd ed.).  The first installment covered the results of consumers’ perceptions of the persuasiveness of media. The second installment will look at what consumers had to say about media influence on “branding.”


BRANDING

First, what is “branding”? Branding is the process of creating the right brand image for a product or service, even political candidates.  Far more than just a physical product, a brand image represents the multidimensional “meaning” of a brand.  For example, what do consumers think of when presented with a question like, “When you think of prestigious automobiles, which one make comes to mind first?  Why do you say that?” Clearly, brand images are walking around in peoples’ minds, and advertisers are  trying their best to change certain brand perceptions to gain a competitive advantage.

In order to sell more ads, advertising media organizations often claim that they can best assist in providing branding solutions to advertisers (a questionable premise).  Nevertheless, digital media have recently made branding a major selling proposition-- in recognition that the objective of advertising is often “branding’—i.e., to create or reinforce the right brand image. To explore the media implications of a branding objective, we asked consumers the following question:

Q2: Which advertising medium do you believe has the biggest positive impact
on an advertiser’s BRAND IMAGE?

 FINDINGS

The findings of the study are summarized as follows:

·         1. Television was the undisputed champion in terms of having the biggest perceived positive impact on brand image:  61% of consumers voted for Television and another 5% voted for digital video commercials.  This suggests that two-thirds of  consumers believe that audio/video communication is the most powerful kind of branding communication-- and by a wide margin.

·         2. Magazines (print & online) were rated most effective in branding by 13% of respondents

·         3. Radio was not perceived as an important branding medium receiving only 2%

·         4. Likewise, newspapers were not seen as important in branding, also receiving 2%
·         Digital media appear to play an important but somewhat lesser role in branding according to these consumers.

·        5.   Only about 30%  selected digital media as having the highest branding influence including  search engine listings display ads,  mobile or video as having higher branding impact.  

              o   7% selected search engine listings as having highest branding influence

              o   12% selected online display ads

              o   6% selected mobile advertising

              o   5% voted for online video advertising

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this study, there is a clear indication that the vast majority of consumers believe that media with a large audience==  which convey a lot of imagery and realism— primarily television—play the strongest role in branding. Digital media play an important but comparatively minor role.

CONTACT
Company: 2020:Marketing Communications LLC
For more information visit our website:  www.MediaPlanningBuyinginthe21stCentury.com.
Email us at marketing2020@aol.com
Telephone: 248-894-1151 (leave message)

Is advertising in television more persuasive than advertising in digital media? The digital community would say no.

2020:Marketing Communications LLC has released a brand new study of how consumers (men and women 18+) perceive the effectiveness of major offline and online media in addressing a variety of communications objectives. The surprising results will be presented in installments from Media Planning & Buying in the 21st Century, a leading advertising media textbook.  The first installment will cover the results of consumers’ perceptions of the persuasiveness of media.

OBJECTIVE #1: PERSUASION

The ultimate objective of most advertising is some form of persuasion. Persuasion attempts to convince consumers of product superiority, better value, durability, sex appeal or other physical or psychological benefits.  To address that objective with media options, we used the following question in the study:

Q1:  Please indicate the advertising medium you think is MOST PERSUASIVE
in creating purchase interest for a quality product or service.

 FINDINGS

The findings of the study are summarized as follows:

·         1. Overwhelmingly, the top rated medium was television with 40% of respondents indicating their belief that television (“prime time program”) is the MOST PERSUASIVE medium for creating purchase interest in a quality product or service.

·       2.   In second place, search engine listings were ranked most persuasive by 19% of respondents. The importance of search engine advertising was not unexpected given their role in helping consumers research product purchases.

·        3.  Magazines (print & online) were rated most persuasive by 10% of respondents which should give magazines a step on the purchase consideration ladder.

·         4. Internet video advertising was in third place also with 10% of respondents saying it was most persuasive and creating a definite pattern in these consumers minds that television and internet video ads are not interchangeable
 
         5. Online display was in fifth place with 9% of respondents saying online display is most persuasive.
 Radio (“my favorite radio station”) was in sixth place with 6%. Mobile advertising was in seventh place with 5%
Newspapers (print/online) came in last with only 2% support

CONCLUSIONS

1.       An important thread in these findings is that while consumers rated television #1, online video advertising was also rated importantly as an adjunct to television.  The audio/video presentation likely the means likely super ceded the differences in how the message was transmitted.

2.       38% of respondents included digital media on their list, mostly search. Mobile garnered only 5%, while display received support by 9%.

3.       Magazines were perceived as an important medium for addressing this objective with 10%, while newspaper ratings showed continued a struggle for non retail advertising with 2%.

More information is available on television and digital media in Media Planning & Buying in the 21st Century (3rd ed).

CONTACT

Author: Ronald D. Geskey
Company: 2020:Marketing Communications LLC
Web Site: www.MediaPlanningBuyinginthe21stCentury.com
Email: marketing2020@aol.com

In the 7 Habits of Highly Successful People, Stephen Covey cited one of his key rules for success: "Begin With the End in Mind."  OK but, what is he end in mind one should expect from programmatic media buying?  "Garbage In, Garbage Out."

Whether buying programmatic or traditionally, media selection decisions are always based on three key inputs--Audience, Impact, and Cost. The problem is that the models  or algorithms used to project the most efficient media are based on garbage audience data. At this point we have to deal with the issue of "garbage in, garbage out.") The garbage I am referring to, of course, is audience based on Viewability estimates.

So the first question is, what is Viewability?


What is Viewability?
Viewability is defined for display ads as having at least 50% of the web page containing your ad is "in view" for one second or more and two seconds or more for internet video. Really?  A one second view is the literal blink of an eye, not providing enough time to communicate much of anything. 

Research from several well known research companies has found that ads need 5-10 seconds of screen time before they can raise consumers'awareness of or attitude toward a brand.

Issues
Some additional issues regarding Viewability include:

• Viewability overstates size of audience.
• There is a correlation between programmatic and decreased levels of viewability.
• There is an increased incidence of fraud
• Overstated audiences can make bad buys (inefiient) look like good buys (efficient)
• "As an advertiser I want my ad to perform...the problem with programmatic is that you buy, but you don't know what you are buying."  (Campos Silva/Google Program Manager/Brazil) 
• So after filling up your bag full of viewable impressions, what do you really have?  For example, if the computer output says you have just bought 100,000 target impressions.  Thinking about the end in mind, what exactly did you buy-- 100,000 what?

Garbage in, garbage out.

Qatar broadcaster, Al Jazeera America posted an average audience of 24,000 viewers in April 2015, down 24% since January. By comparison, Fox News Network generates an average audience of over one million viewers.
Al Jazeera management is in turmoil.

According to Al Jazeera America, it is a U.S. news channel that provides both domestic and international news for American audiences.

The name "Al Jazeera" means "peninsula." Al Jazeera America's distinctive logo is a calligraphic design spelling "Al Jazeera" in Arabic.

Headquartered in New York City with bureaus in 12 cities across the United States, Al Jazeera America is available in more than 60 million homes in the U.S. across major television providers, including DirecTV, Comcast/Xfinity, Time Warner Cable, DISH Network, AT&T U-Verse, Verizon FiOS, and Bright House Networks. To find Al Jazeera America in your area

Programmatic Media Buying is computer assisted and directed media buying. An increasing share of digital ad dollars are moving toward programmatic.. The majority of inventory available through programmatic is non-guaranteed, auction traded during the ad call.  More premium inventory is expected to increase in the future.
As the word suggests, "Programmatic" buying and selling of ad inventory typically has little or no human involvement. Programmatic emphasizes buying the right inventory with algorithmic optimization.

eMarketer  recently disclosed that US programmatic ad spend will top $10 billion in 2014 (about half of all digital display) advertising compared to a projected $20 billion by 2016. In addition to display ads programmatic buying can also be utilized for digital video and mobile buys.

Like many new developments, programmatic buying has advantages and problems.

Advantages

1. Highly Targeted Audiences - Audiences may be for more targeted than is possible with most traditional advertising media buying techniques.  For example, with programmatic buying you could target people who visited your website in the past three months or purchased a particular product.

2. Efficient Buying Platform - Programmatic saves agencies and media organizations money by cutting out the "middlemen" from the buying process. You no longer have to deal with publishers, salespeople, or ad networks to negotiate the pricing or inventory or placement. The lack of humans involved assumes that there is little or no value in human involvement, marketing, creativity or buying/seling strategies.

3. Better ROI - Advocates of programmatic cite better ROI as an advantage. Buying the cheapest and often low quality ad space from auctions with little creative thinking is not necessarily the route to improved ROI.

Problems

1. Fraud - Digiday identified fraud  as the biggest challenges for users of programmatic-- including agencies, clients, and buyers. Programmatic advertising fraud is generated primarily by "... non human traffic, botnets,  and traffic exchanges which allow impressions to be stolen from innocent computers while you sleep or they set up a black market system where fraudulent impressions  are generated by a network of willing conspirators."

2. Paying for Unviewable Ads - Vindico, an ad management platform company estimated that 57% of two billion video ads surveyed over a two month period were unviewablle. That is, half of all these ads were never seed by a human being. Also, display ads which load below the viewable area of the screen are often counted without ever being seen. And this doesn't include the estimated 86% of consumers who have banner ad blindness.

3. Brand Safety - When you buy ad inventory directly from publishers you can require that your ad be positioned next to content that supports the brand image and association you are trying to reinforce. Or you can be placed next to terrible content, e.g., the case of a video link for a "mom product"  on a porn site despite specific instructions from the agency to place the video "above the fold.". Programmatic buying is not transparent and does not guarantee placement.

4. Lack of Human Involvement - The downside of having a more efficient buying platform is that humans are mostly not involved. This limits creativity and negotiating strategizing. 

Let the Buyer Beware.  Every advertising medium-- online or offline-- exists in the eyes of its owners as a way to generate revenue and profit via advertising sales.  To win sales, reps with below average CPMs will often present a competitive comparison of CPMs to buyers (including computerized forecasts).

CPM refers to the cost of reaching 1000 target audience persons with an ad in a media vehicle, online or offline. A $20.00 CPM on adults 18-34 means that it will theoretically cost $20.00 to generate 1000 adult 18-34 impressions. By comparing CPMs across media you can theoretically get an idea of which media are most and least cost efficient.

Sellers of online time and space often pitch low CPM as a reason for the advertiser or media buyer to buy. In reality, lower CPM is likely to be untrue.  For example, those selling online video as a more cost efficient alternative to over the air or cable TV may get caught in a numbers trap.  If the online video proposal is priced at  $20-$50 CPM the seller may have a tough time selling against television priced for $5.00 per 1000 to broadcast buyers with far more accurate audience estimates behind the numbers.

The problem is that comparing online and offline media CPMs is kind of like comparing apples and oranges especially if convoluted audience estimates are entered into the equation.

There are many additional factors which are part of the cost efficiency equation. CPM comparisons are valid only if they are based on the same kind of audience definitions. Why?

First, the definition of audience is different for different media and the numbers are not  comparable even for broadcast TV and internet video. For TV, Nielsen measures audiences in a fairly sophisticated manner using set top boxes and surveys to gather continuous ratings data, even taking DVR behavior into account.  Nielsen measures real time average minute viewers on a continuous basis, 24 hours a day.  Example: The Superbowl generated a 44 rating among US men, meaning that during the average minute 44% of men were tuned to the Superbowl.

In contrast, the online industry puts up a very questionable metric called "viewability" which purports to measure the number of people who have the ad on their browser for 1-2 seconds.  Whatever that translates to vis a vis other media, I'm not sure, but  it is definitely not a rating based on a random sample of respondents whose sets were tuned into programs around the clock.

In magazines, the audience concept of average issue audience is utilized. The measurement methodology attempts to estimate  how many people saw or picked up the average issue of a magazine in home or out of home.  Clearly, magazine audiences can get to be extremely large if the out of home passalong readers are counted as part of the total audience (e.g., People Magazine has 18 readers per copy).  But magazine average audience is still nothing like the online definition of display ad audience, where all that is required is a theoretical 1-second view of an ad on a webpage.  And by the way, what can be meaningfully communicated in one second?

Digital audience measurement company, ComScore, just published an interesting piece on Non-Human traffic, part of their effort on combating industry issues of fraud, non-human traffic, and viewability.

The key takeaway is that if your audience and viewability measurement includes hon-human traffic everything is contaminated. Inflated statistics which include non-human traffic might look good in the short term, but they actually hurt long term performance. This is because artificially inflated numbers into marketing mix models will pull down campaign ROI calculations, making campaign performance seem lower than it actually is.

Keep in mind that viewability measurement does not necessarily remove non -human traffic. This can mess up your analysis, demographic profiling, and much more.

It is always worth repeating-- to keep in mind that  the goal of most advertising is to elicit feelings, emotions, and/or behaviors among target consumers, but in order to do that, the ad() must first reach the target persons who have an opportunity to actually see the ad.

2020:Marketing Communications is completing a unique new survey of consumer perceptions of advertising effectiveness, e.g., "most persuasive," in a variety of digital and traditional media. 

Media surveyed include prime time television, favorite magazine, search engine listing, online display, favorite radio station, online video commercials, and my local newspaper.

We will soon be publishing the results as individual blogs.

A recent article in the New York Times by David Segal ("The Great Unwatched") highliights an achilles heel of internet video advertising. A substantial body of research now indicates that at least  half of video ads are not seen by live human beings.  The ads are buried, appear low on web pages, run in tiny and easily ignored video players or may run simultaneously with other ad its pixels not visible to humans.

Vindico, and advertising management platform company, reported that 57% of two billion video ads surveyed over a two month period were not "viewable."  "Viewability," of course, is the new audience measurement standard. To be viewable a display ad must be able to be seen on a web page for at least one second, and a video ad must be able to be seen for at least two seconds. 

In comparison, broadcast and cable television audiences are measured much more accurately with a combination of set top boxes which monitor audiences continuously and with supplemental demographic surveys.  Research also shows that ad exposure averages over 50%.  So, the good news is that at least there is some, albeit flawed, methodology which measures audience in terms of viewabiliity (better than nothing?)

The  bad news is that internet ads are fraught with fraud. If 56% of online video ads are not viewed because of any one of a number of fraudulent schemes, you the advertiser have been bilked out of half of your budget

Ironically, online video ads have been selling at a double digit pace and may increase from $2.8 billion to $8 billion by 2016. If you are an advertiser you should also be concerned because online ad fraud is ripping you off.