Advertising Mistake: Why Visibility And Engagement Still Fail

Most advertising professionals know that targeting audiences works. And most know that highly visible ads attract attention.

However, new findings from a joint study conducted by the professors at the University of Toronto and MIT's Sloan School of Business suggest that pairing highly visible advertisements and content-linked ads can reduce purchase intentions. The study will be published in a future issue of Marketing Science.

"If targeting works and visible ads work, you'd think visible, targeted ads would work even better," said Avi Goldfarb, an associate professor of marketing at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto. "But they don't."

Goldfarb, together with Catherine Tucker, drew their conclusions after analyzing data from 3,000 Web advertising campaigns.

Why Does Ad Effectiveness Diminish?

Goldfarb and Tucker attribute it to mistrust. The more aware consumers are that the advertisement is attempting to "sell" them something, the more likely they are to mistrust the content and the ad. Their conclusions may even indicate why Google Adsense tends to outperform affiliate programs and "paid posts" supplemented by advertisements.

According to the study, the highest drop off in consumer interest occurs when companies ask consumers to fill in information prior to making a purchase or subscribing to an online newsletter. Ironically, such lead generation tactics are commonplace in the industry, with most businesses unaware they could be turning customers away. There are other important findings:

• Most banner ads only increase purchase intent by less than one percent.
• Increased ad exposure only increases recall by approximately 5 percent.
• More campaigns aim at increasing recall than attempting to increase purchase intent.

Other findings are are available from the study. One that is particularly interesting for social media professionals is that two-way communication is sometimes seen as obtrusiveness.

Making Tactical Decisions Strategic.

Assuming this analysis proves valid, advertisers would be best served to rethink how they approach online advertising, especially as it relates to how consumers behave. Generally, contextually-targeted advertisements capture an immediate response (clicks) whereas highly visible ads (including the solicitation of two-way communication) capture higher recall (awareness but not necessarily equal clicks).

Since pairing the two tactical considerations diminishes effectiveness, advertisers may be better off establishing presence around contextual ads and increasingly the visibility of ads when there is no match. Contrary to most social media tactics, there might be enough evidence to suggest while customers prefer two-way communication and customers may be willing to fill out an online survey, prospects may not want two-way communication and are less willing to purchase products when the marketer also wants to capture demographic information prior to the purchase.

All of this suggests a greater need for strategic planning associated with online advertising campaigns. Marketers have to do a better job prioritizing the the intent of the communication.

Making Business Choices: Fresh Content

While most fresh content picks listed today could fit under the banner of social media, they also provide a common sense approach to something beyond the online trappings of the Internet. They're all related to the choices companies make and how they impact customer relationships.

Do you want a quick transaction or lifelong customer? Is social media as simple as talking to people or does it only look easy? Are you willing to sacrifice short-term expectations in order to deliver long-term value? Did you ever consider too many eyeballs at the wrong time might hurt your company? Here are four posts with answers.

Best Fresh Content In Review, Week of May 31

• Build A Customer Community, Gain Loyalty.
Valeria Maltoni shares her insights on flipping the funnel and building a sense of customer community. Just a few points include: rewarding customers with exclusive benefits, providing access and knowledge before anyone else, supporting issues that will help them improve their business, opportunities to share and discuss ideas without you, multiple touch points beyond short-term transactions, etc.

• 7 Common Social Media Marketing Problems and Their Solutions.
Lee Odden not only nails seven social media problems, but also offers some solutions to help fix them. He's right. Many companies struggle with social media because they tend to "try" to follow in the footsteps of everyone else while missing the finer details that help make it work. He provides some worthwhile solutions, while sharing some additional sources to back up his solutions. Best of all, Odden frames up one very simple truth about social media. If it looks effortless, it's only because it isn't.

• Why I'm Writing This On An iPad.
Dave Fleet does something only a few bloggers do now and again. He wrote a post why he was wrong, and did it on the product he was wrong about. It seems certain the iPad lacks a few technologies at a glance. But when weighed against the strengths, some those deficiencies evaporate. However, that isn't why it ended up as a fresh pick. While not billed as such, this post is a great case study in the process of how skeptics become fans.

• Exposure and Visibility.
Do you think eyeballs are the end all answer to social media? Think again. Pitching to as many people as possible might help a company earn a small percentage of sales, but what is lost in the process isn't measurable. When ten thousand prospects push the button on a pitch only to find no real value exists, then you might have lost them forever. Valeria Maltoni helps put this thinking into perspective while inspiring a post we'll be working on this week.

Considering Intentions: You Can't See Into Another Person's Heart

"Is it because I'm black?"

"Pardon me?"

"You're looking at me funny. Is it because I'm black?"

That was part of an exchange I had at a retail outlet the other day. It really took me by surprise. It's been some time since someone accused me of being racist, given that some of my best friends are black and how I long I'd been an NAACP member.

So, I had to tell the clerk the truth. I was looking at him funny because his breath stunk so bad it burned my eyes. He was pretty embarrassed. I told him to never mind being embarrassed, while wondering why his coworkers were waiting for some random customer to help the guy out.

It's one of the lessons I include in my classes to underscore how it's better to be up front with coworkers. But there is another lesson I wish more people would learn too. How we process information often has much more to do about our own insecurities (if we have them) then anything someone doesn't mean to communicate.

Communication isn't always about you.

It was one of the first lessons I learned about public speaking. While all speakers love the idea of students and audience members leaning forward and hanging on our every word, it's mostly a fantasy. And it has nothing to do with the speaker.

You can't guess intentions. At a conference, some attendees are going to stay out too late the night before. Some might have personal or work-related issues distracting them. Some might be covering your talk on Twitter. And maybe a couple of folks really will be bored.

Who knows? It doesn't matter. Unless, of course, the entire class checks out. It won't be narcissism in that case.

A caution about over-sensitizing issues.

I recall reading a news story a few years ago where the reporter was offended because his coworker invited him over for a barbecue and enthusiastically mentioned there would be fried chicken. The reporter was offended, asking the coworker what made him think he liked fried chicken. The remainder of the story was about subconscious racism.

I couldn't find the article, but I did find an interesting forum discussion about something similar. The discussion may have followed the KFC advertisement that was banned. Some Australians were confused by the banning of the commercial. They were unfamiliar with the stereotype.

The communication challenge that I find interesting, assuming the reporter's coworker had no ill intent, is that the coworker might have enthusiastically mentioned fried chicken to white colleagues too. Suppose he did. Still racist? Or, what if he mentioned it to everyone except the black reporter for fear of offending him. Still racist?

It gets very convoluted. So much so that it seems to me that over-sensitizing issues may inadvertently reinforce them.

It seems to be turning out that way in Arizona. Even officers who would never employ racial profiling have reported that Hispanics have changed their behavior. They say many Hispanics are more elusive around officers because they (the officers) are predisposed to racial profiling. And yet, one has to wonder. Isn't assuming a black or caucasian officer will employ racial profiling racist as well? Given racism stems from fear, maybe so.

One thing is certain. Even if I don't think most of America is racist, it certainly is obsessed by racism. The media knows all too well. Racism headlines attract eyeballs. It's sad, especially for CNN.

The "anger" thing has nothing to do with being black. In 2006, Ken Mehlman, then Republican National Committee chair, said that "I don't think the American people, if you look historically, elect angry candidates." He was referring to Hillary Clinton. Remember Howard Dean? Joe Wilson?? Hmmm ... there may be some truth to that.

To date, I've only found one easy self-test to tell if you're prone toward discrimination. If someone close to you (son, daughter, brother, sister) started dating someone with a different racial origin or religious background, would it bother you? If the answer is yes, you have some work to do.

Being Creative: Five Tips To Find Inspiration

I might be teaching "Editing and Proofreading Your Work" at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, this weekend, but past experience tells me to expect one off-topic question. It makes sense, I suppose.

Despite my adopted style for blogging, which leans more on journalism, students tend to notice how much acrylic I've accumulated for creative work. (That was before I grew tired of dusting symbols of affirmation and stopped entering.)

"How do you find inspiration?"

I never really liked the question. Or, more accurately, maybe I never liked my answer. Since I have hundreds of techniques that work for me, but not necessarily for you, the best answer always seemed to be that it becomes part of your nature. And chances are, if you are going to be any good at it, it's already in your nature. Yeah, I know. Sounds like a cop out.

So this year, I decided to craft an answer and share it here first. Hope it helps. Or, if you're so inspired, offer something better.

Five Tips To Find Inspiration.

• Embrace Pop Culture. Advertising can be, but doesn't have to be, like original literature. It often blends in pop culture or builds upon what is already resonating with people. Keep tabs on the top ten everything: books, movies, television shows, recording artists, plays, fashion, trends, politics, etc., etc. It's the single best way to gain insight into millions of people.

Trust me. The movie The Blind Side (2009) was a hit for a reason. It's a story of hope, honesty, and perseverance. We need some of that nowadays. It's also quite the contrast with Apocalypse Now (1979).

• Find The Fringe. You can't always rely on what is popular. You have to pay attention to what is bubbling below the surface. Stuff that never quite makes it to the mainstream, but has an undiscovered quality that is unmistakably refreshing or long since forgotten.

More importantly, you have to consume content well beyond your personal preferences. I usually have a long list of things on my future reading list. Some are are recommended by friends. Others are just shots in the dark. Books aren't the only tool. The fringe can be found anywhere. You know, stop ordering the same sandwich at your favorite restaurant for once.

• Listen Everywhere. If you want to know what people are thinking, take some time to listen. I touched on the difference between hearing and listening yesterday. Don't limit yourself to online conversations. Listen to how people interact: in a grocery store checkout line or in a restaurant.

The real advantage to the skill is that most people don't even hear other people, let alone listen. They are too busy talking. Trust me on this. If you're always talking, you'll never learn anything.

• Experience Life. Go out and do things. I tend to adhere to a rather rigid schedule. There have probably been too many weeks in my life that blurred together. Even so, I try to sneak in some random stuff every now and again. For example, I'm not a ballet buff by a long shot, but I was happy to go when my wife suggested our kids could use some culture in a city not known for it.

But there are plenty other things out there if ballet doesn't strike your fancy. I've done a lot of different things, ranging from rafting to horseback riding (in search of wild mustangs no less). My family tends to plan vacations the same way. We take at least two small vacations every year. At least one of them is someplace we've never been. And even if we have been someplace before, we load up on sights and experiences we've never done before.

• Become An Insider. This has practically become pat in my Writing for Public Relations course. Stop hanging out with communicators all the time and hook up with the people in your industry. You'll often learn more from them anyway.

I once met a communicator who worked at a utility. He always told me that he had a hard time relating to the non-corporate side of the company. (Utilities are cool. They have two very different cultures in one company.) It was fair, I suppose. The non-corporate guys had a hard time relating to him too. Me, on the other hand, I toured every power generation plant in southern Nevada. And when I needed to interview anyone, I did it in person. (It was a great excuse to get out of the cubicles and hang with dynamic and sometimes salty people).

Maybe my initial answer wasn't a cop out.

Looking back over the list, I suppose my answer wasn't such a cop out. If you do those five things, creativity will likely become part of your nature. If you follow some of the more popular advice, on the other hand, you'll likely kill it.

At least, that was my conclusion on those the heaviest hit by inspirational advice posts. One suggests stealing ideas outright. Another pointed toward finding purpose in life. And yet another was just a big long list of my first tip, expanded to include blogs, quotes, and all that.

Those tips are so far away from the truth, I couldn't bring myself to link to them.

Real creativity isn't an exercise in transposing things on top of one another. It's much harder than that. You have to see beyond the surface and focus in on what really makes things tick. Simply seeing an abundance of floral patterns and deciding floral patterns are "in" is not enough. You have figure out why floral patterns are in and then work from there.

Or better yet, try those five tips on for size. Like I said, if you do them enough, you probably won't have to look for inspiration. It will already be bottled up inside you, waiting for the right moment. At least, I think so.

Listening: The Most Important Lesson In Communication

Yesterday, Nevada held its primary elections. If you were listening to pundits, it was a night filled with surprises. If you were listening to the public, most races played out exactly as expected. And despite a few upsets, some people still aren't listening.

Listening isn't only about politics. Listening is about business too.

There are dozens of studies and hundreds of surveys making the rounds right now. All of them are hoping to catch a snapshot of how consumers might behave. Most of them have useful data, but most people don't listen. They only "hear."

There are several developing stories that underscore the point. It's why Utterli died. It's why Digg is struggling (but probably not dead). It's why the BP oil spill response has eclipsed Hurricane Katrina as the worst response in American history. It's why not everyone is cheering Santa Clara, Calif., for banning Happy Meal toys. And, there are dozens of more examples.

Politicians are "hearing" constituents. Business executives are "monitoring" social media. But few are "listening."

Utterli heard Utterz turned some people off at a glance, but they didn't listen to how people came to love their enduring cow mascot. Digg heard that being allowed to share content among a Digg network fueled some spammers, but they didn't listen to understand that people love to share social media while tuning out spammers anyway. There are several other social networks in jeopardy too.

BP and the Obama administration hear that people don't think they did enough, but they are not listening closely enough to understand the public wants them to admit their mistakes and that they don't have anything under control. Santa Clara elected officials that heard parents wanted something done about childhood obesity, but they didn't listen to responsible parents who consider McDonald's and Happy Meal toys a once-every-few-months treat. They can make decisions about Happy Meal toys with their own pocketbooks.

Even researchers are becoming deaf nowadays. There is another portion of the Harris Interactive poll I mentioned yesterday that proves the point. Harris Interactive couldn't understand why 70 percent of Americans gave the Constitution high marks, but low marks to the government (43 percent) and political system (23 percent) it empowers. They heard, but didn't listen.

Most Americans think that the political system to driving government is operated well beyond the Constitution, which was originally written as the people's contract with its government. This also set the stage for a volatile election cycle because people don't believe politicians are meeting their commitment to protect the Constitution.

How a lack of listening undermined several campaigns in Nevada.

If you want to understand how this all played out in Nevada, never mind what the pundits say. Sue Lowden, who is a dynamic business woman I had the pleasure to do work with years ago, didn't lose the primary because of her chicken comment. The gaffe could have easily been corrected, but her campaign didn't know how (we did, ho hum).

But what really underscored the race was that she wasn't listening. Candidate Sharron Angle was listening. People are tired of hearing about what establishment representatives want to do for them. They want elected officials to represent them.

U.S. Sen. Harry Reid isn't listening. Almost immediately after Angle won (he'll face her in the general election), Reid's campaign launched a release attempting to label her ideas as "wacky." Someone didn't think to tell his staff that the block who voted for her might be put off by it. At least she's representing Nevada, some might say.

The story played out the same in the gubernatorial race. Gov. Gibbons could have turned his time in office around, but he consistently didn't listen. It wasn't the economy that cost him his incumbency. It was how he handled the economic downturn. While he made some of the right decisions, he only "heard" people didn't want tax increases. That's true (they can't afford them). But what he didn't hear is that they wanted him to demonstrate leadership. By the time he did, it was too late.

In the one race I was engaged with, it was much the same. Tim Williams was an underfunded underdog. His opponent was "anointed." Some insiders were so convinced that he could not win that they advised him to directly attack his opponent. He refused. The public is tired of games. Williams listened.

Are you listening or are you hearing?

Whether it is a political campaign or consumer product, the public is much more sensitive to who is listening and who is not. Generally, you can tell the difference in whether they react to what they hear or respond because they are listening.

Case in point: the Obama administration thinks that they didn't communicate their response to the BP oil spill clearly enough. So, he reacts by defending what the government did do. He's not listening. People don't care about what they did do or whose "ass" he intends to kick. They want someone to clean up the spill. Use hair. Use hay. Use air filters. Just clean it up and stop making it worse.

Writing Skills: Public Trust In Education Falls Short

Harris Interactive, one of the world's leading custom market research firms, recently conducted a poll to determine how Americans feel about 16 quality of life issues across the country. What was especially striking to me was that colleges and universities ranked high (65 percent), but the public school systems ranked low (32 percent).

Keeping in mind that SAT and ACT scores are not meant to test for achievement and are generally taken only by students considering college, the public might have a case. We took a look to see how well the brightest students were performing.

Between 1990-91 and 2008-09, SAT test scores peaked between 2003-05 and then began to decline. Writing has steadily declined since 2006 across the board. Contrary, ACT scores peaked sharply in 2007, before declining again in 2008.

2009 SAT Test Scores

• National Critical Reading Average 501
• Nevada Critical Reading Average 501

• National Mathematics Average 515
• Nevada Mathematics Average 505

• National Writing Average 493
• Nevada Writing Average 479

2009 ACT Test Scores

• National English 20.6
• Nevada English 20.5

• National Math 21.0
• Nevada Math 21.4

• National Reading 21.4
• Nevada Reading 22.0

• National Science 20.9
• Nevada Science 21

Specific to my state, Nevada has consistently dropped in SAT performance, with 42 percent of the students taking the test last year. And while it scored 21.5 on the ACT, only 30 percent of students took the test. This represents a relatively low percentage of college bound students, especially when compared to some states where up to 70 of students test.

Is The State by State Public School System Broken?

Some people think so. In fact, the public school systems rank low enough in public opinion that national initiatives, such as the Common Core State Standards Initiative, are working toward standardizing the educational system on a national level on a voluntary state-by-state basis. I'm not writing about this in depth today. It's a complex issue. At a glance, I can say I had no issues with the recommended literature.

More to the point, people in Nevada clearly feel the school system is broken, particularly in Clark County. And from my own perspective as a parent with a child in the public school system, I've noticed the best teachers tend to deviate from the system that is currently in place. The least effective tend to adhere rigidly to the system. So do systems really work?

In addition to being a parent, I also teach a few educational outreach classes part time at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. In most university settings, teachers are generally free to teach the subject matter any way they would like. And from what the students tell me, the educational process is hit and miss as a result. Some teachers lend nothing to the experience. So maybe the real problem is the teachers?

Modern Solutions For Teaching Education.

It seems to me, much like any communication program, you need to balance educational goals and needs. You need a solid system; but you also need teachers that know when to deviate or supplement that system based on the needs of each class.

This Saturday, I will be teaching a half-day program on "Editing and Proofreading Your Work." The class is designed to improve clarity, consistency, and correct usage in your personal, literary, commercial, or business writing. The class was constructed from scratch, but I deviate from the material every year based on in-class feedback. The result is a program that never repeats.

It seems to me that the structure of the class works much the same way modern education works best. While much of the foundation is built upon grammar basics, the class is adapted toward communication, integrating the Associated Press Stylebook and The Elements of Style by Strunk and White (among others).

For example, given the limited time I have with students, I might mention subordinate clauses, independent clauses, antecedents, etc. in passing. But that is not the focus of the class. I really want students to be able to apply the instruction on a daily basis by thinking about the sentences they write. Memorizing terminology or rote memorizing rules tends to be less effective than learning to analyze a single sentence for clarity and by exercising critical thinking skills.

Over the years, however, I found something else. Students that learn to apply the examples tend to learn the grammatical terms anyway. So, it allows the students, especially those that lack proficiency in writing, to learn by application as opposed to memorization.

In other words, if this was a class in a public school system, they would first learn to write better essays and then learn what an antecedent is through the application. The problem with many systems today is they attempt to do it backward, stressing the importance of the antecedent first.

Think of what we're asking student brains to do with traditional instruction. It requires us to strip a sentence of comprehension, overlay unrelated semi-memorized terminology, reconstruct it, double-check with comprehension, and then repeat. Instead, I like to teach students to recognize when a sentence lacks clarity, pinpoint the problem, and correct it based on style suggestions. In the process, they learn the terms anyway.

Anyone interested in the class can register online or call 702.895.3394. You can also contact Michelle Baker if you have any questions (check the class listing for her contact information).

But, in closing, I'd rather leave people with a different thought. Public education is failing if the majority of high school students score just better than 1,000 on an SAT, and 21 on the ACT. Most colleges won't accept those scores. So we might prize our universities, but what good are they if only about 20 percent of all students can be admitted without an educational handicap? Your guess is as good as mine.