[opendtv] TV vs online ads
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 17:25:51 -0500
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> The best examples of targeted ads are for ordinary web searches. Here
> Google and others have developed the technology to track your behavior
> and insert ads that are appropriate. We just bought a car for my wife
> and spent several months looking at several brands and models. I was
> amazed at how many targeted ads I started to see for these products.
I've been disputing the basic premise that ads over the Internet are more
effective than TV ads for quite a long time. It's hard to get a good measure of
this, and there are way too many articles on this topic from self-serving
sources. However, in the recent past, I have seen a little bit of skepticism
finally emerging from that industry segment. Even my wife has commented on
this, from reading articles on the subject.
Not that Internet ads are likely to disappear, by any stretch. For one thing,
they are apparently a lot cheaper (and by the way, IT SHOWS!). For another,
they reach audiences in different ways than do TV or magazine ads.
So here's an article that explains the differences as I think they should be
explained, rather than using the "common wisdom" that a certain type of
Internet "targeting" MUST be the most effective, overcoming any other possible
liability.
By the way, the online fox.com catch-up programming has now reached about 2 1/2
minutes of ads per ad break, and the same number of ad breaks as the OTA
program has. But the online ad breaks are run in what has to be the most
incompetent of possible ways.
- There are very few ads, repeated over and over again.
- With a few exceptions, Sprint being one exception, the ads are CHEAP.
Nothing is quite as annoying as being subjected to the same cheap ad multiple
times in a single show.
- Many of the fox.com online ads have an annoying habit of freezing
periodically, just during the one ad, so that what should take 30 seconds ends
up taking more than one minute, often.
- And worst of all, how incompetent is it to consistently run the very same
CHEAP ad, two times in a row, during an ad break?? It would be bad enough to
see the same ad twice, interspersed with others, but Fox really goes for that
one-two punch.
Since I watch the online catch-up shows by default, on the large screen TV, the
difference in ad quality between broadcast TV and online is glaringly obvious.
The main advantage of online continues to be the still shorter ad breaks.
Bert
--------------------------------------
http://www.marketingvox.com/magazine-tv-ads-more-effective-than-ads-online-043704/
Magazine, TV Ads More Effective than Ads Online
In a half hour period, magazines deliver more than twice the number of ad
impressions as TV and more than six times those delivered online, according to
a study by McPheters & Company conducted in cooperation with Condé Nast and CBS
Vision (via MarketingCharts).
The research, which employed an experimental methodology to explore the
relative effectiveness of ads on TV, in magazines and on the internet, also
found that though TV doesn't deliver as many ads per half hour as magazines,
net recall of TV ads was almost twice that of magazine ads. Meanwhile,
magazines still had ad recall almost three times that of internet banner ads.
The study was designed to provide comparable measures of ad effectiveness
across multiple media, using 30-second TV ads, full-page 4-color magazine ads,
and internet banner ads in standard sizes. Eye-tracking software also was used
to determine whether - and under what circumstances - internet ads were seen by
respondents.
Matched groups of respondents were recruited to spend 30 minutes with a single
medium in a laboratory setting, where they either watched a choice of sit-coms,
read a magazine they selected, or surfed the internet at will. At the end of
the period, they filled out similar online surveys that asked whether they
recalled seeing four ads which appeared in the medium they consumed. In order
to establish the level of over-claiming, which is known to vary by medium, they
were also asked whether they recalled seeing four ads that had not appeared.
These results were then used to calculate net recall or ad absorption for each
medium.
Additional study findings:
- 85% of internet ads served appeared on-screen and could be identified by
brand.
- Among web users, 63% of banner ads were **not seen**. Respondents' eyes
passed over 37% of the internet ads and stopped on slightly less than a third.
- For internet ads, almost all net recall could be attributed to ads that were
seen.
- Internet video ads appeared much less frequently than banner ads, and
exposure skewed heavily toward young men. When they did appear they were twice
as likely to be seen as banner ads.
When study results were used in combination with other information on
probability of exposure, a full-page 4-color magazine ad was determined to have
83% of the value of a 30-second television commercial, while a typical Internet
banner ad has 16% of the value, McPheters & Company said.
"Because different media deliver ad impressions at vastly different rates, this
study provides clear evidence that time spent with a medium does not translate
into value for advertisers," said Scott McDonald, SVP of research for Condé
Nast. "It also indicates that magazine advertising is undervalued relative to
its effectiveness."
"As more and more advertisers try to figure out how to communicate their story
across media platforms, this form of experimental research will become an
increasingly critical element in pre-campaign planning," Dave Poltrack, chief
research officer for CBS and president of CBS Vision.This study reports similar
findings to one recently announced by the Magazine Publishers of America, which
found that magazines reap the most ad value per minute compared with other
major media.
About the study: The study used McPheters & Company's AdWorks methodology, and
was conducted in CBS Vision's Television City facilities at the MGM Grand in
Las Vegas. According to McPheters & Company, the effort represents an unusual
example of collaboration on the part of companies with competing media
interests.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] TV vs online ads - Manfredi, Albert E
