bizsolutionsplus Featuring Solutions to Grow Your Business

Skip This Ad

Image via Wikipedia

This week, Alan Wolk wrote an excellent column for Adweek online called, You Are Not My Friend: Why consumers only want to hang with the prom king. He lays out the argument that advertisers using social media to score sales don't get it. I agree. But I take it one step further--online publications are not my friend either. They are a source of information.

Unfortunately, Adweek doesn't seem to get it. In order for me to read Alan's column, I first had to get past a popup ad, twice. Hello! One would think that Adweek would understand that interruptive advertising online or in social media sucks and mostly just pisses us off.

Here's the deal: banner ads, column ads, even advertorials give us choice to notice or not. If I am looking to purchase something and you are advertising it, I will pay attention. If I am not shopping, I won't notice your pitch, even if you slap me across the face with a popup ad. As soon as those pesky and annoying ads hit my screen, I look for the "skip this ad" button. So your intrusion into my purpose for visiting (and the publication's annoying habit of selling popups) merely anger me.

Get a clue! Popups don't work. They merely serve to hurt your brand.

Related articles

• Online Video Ads: Relatively Less Annoying [via Zemanta]

Help! I Can't See... Free Content vs. Paid Advertising

I need your help. I don't know what to do. Recently, the request for advertising space on this blog has grown from a trickle to a small stream. What to do?

My original blogging strategy calls for no advertising. My thinking was that keeping this space completely free to my readers was best for me and for my readers. On the other hand, advertising when done well offers value to readers, especially when it ties into a medium's focus, which at this blog is business growth based on the Lead With Your Heart principle of always putting people first. Does a banner ad violate that principle? Is the appeal of creating an advertising revenue stream blinding me/us?

Dig into this dear readers? Help me see the pros and cons. I am too close to the issue to see the answer. How would you feel if banner advertising appeared on the blog?

P.S. For an interesting "free" perspective, check out Seth's The thing about 'free'. The following sentence from the post both resonates with my dilemma and adds to it: "When you bring money into the equation, everything changes."

UPDATE: I have received more than a dozen offline replies to my question, posing a variety of points of view. The suggestion that advertising can be a good thing and done well if it is a good fit with my values and this blog's content makes a lot of sense. I have just declined the most recent request for advertising space but will remain open to the idea if approached by the right fit.

David Armano Coins The Application Economy

David Armano is a ThoughtLeader: He is an original thinker who comes up with business ideas that we should notice and pay attention to. Recently, he posted on the Application Economy. To the left is his visual of how advertising in the Application Economy  should work if it is to be useful to consumers.

"The biggest threat to advertising is useful," David writes. "It's that simple. Useful is a time and attention grabber. 

"It's truly the application economy....  So marketers are indeed faced with a challenge. Continue to cram Ads (noise) into multiple digital platforms (phones, web, GPS—anything with a screen)—or they can try to figure out how to be useful", he adds.  "Right now—the marketing industry is at war with the people who create useful experiences. These experiences "distract" us—more accurately, they reward us. The application economy is as "un-sexy" as it sounds—and that's exactly why advertising needs to take it seriously."

Here in a much abridged format is how David defines each category:

Usefulness
Any experience is useful when it's meaningful and serves a purpose.

Utility
Utility = interaction that delights us in some way. 

Ubiquity
We are living in a fragmented world with what seems like infinite touch points available to us. Brands and businesses who can distribute value across these endless touch points in effective ways will tap into new markets and solidify existing ones.

Truth in Advertising Crashes Head On

Head On, apply directly to your head. Head On, apply directly to your head. Head On, apply directly to your head. Please, I'm getting a headache. And that may not be an exaggeration. According to one neurologist interviewed by ABC News, applying butter to your forehead might work as well as Head On.

Apparently, some believe, the only truthful thing about Head On is that its commercial is annoying. According to Dr. Richard Lipton, director of the headache center at the Montefiore Medical Center in New York, the much-hyped product may not work at all.

"I've seen a number of patients who've used Head On," he said. "Some people say that it's very beneficial to them. Other people actually say that it makes their pain worse. I've looked for scientific evidence that shows that it works, and I haven't been able to find any studies." (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=2695490&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312)

According to the article, the manufacturer says the proof is in Head On's sales. In less than a year, more than six million tubes have been sold at about $8 each. But there's no science that offers proof it works. The only evidence we have that it might work is that 6,000,000 tubes have been sold. I suspect that I could sell $48M of almost anything if I ran enough ads. Head On crashes through our TV screens more than a few times on any given day. They run more than enough ads to get us to remember the name of the product and to invite an impulse buy.

Here's the problem: Before a business touts its product, isn't it a good idea to sell a product that works? Oh, and by the way, Head On no longer can tout its benefits since it has no proof the product works, and they were ordered to stop saying it works in their commercials.

Solutions:

• Advertising is usually designed to sell you products, whether or not they meet your wants and needs. You are responsible for doing research before you buy, if you don't want to get burned.
• Always put people first, ahead of profits. Shop with businesses who follow this practice. Because they put your wants and needs first, they won't screw you.
• Be smart. Advertising generates emotional responses to get you to buy. Recognize that fact and get control of your emotions before you spend your hard-earned money.

Are Advertising Agencies After the Wrong People?

I don't get it. Time and time again, my generation is ignored by advertising. Yet Baby Boomers are the  largest generation by far in America, with the most expendable income. Doesn't it make sense to "follow the money?"

Today, Tangerine Toad asks a similar question over at the Daily Fix. However, he is motivated by the inevitable loss of his Creative Director position to someone younger. This is the paragraph that inspires my post:

"As I’ve noted before, our industry is driven by a misguided belief that every ad needs to be judged by the standards of an, upscale 30-something white, male hipster And so ads aimed at Boomers will be written in accordance with an aesthetic that isn’t their own," Toad says.

Why? Most of the time, I don't want the product and I have no idea who the pitch celebrity is. Although I am on the leading edge of the boomers at 61, I think I am still pretty hip. I attend rock concerts, eat out frequently, travel, buy gifts, read books, buy DVDs and CDs, but still advertisers create ads that I cannot relate to. Nor can the people I hang with.

So what's up? What's the deal? Why aren't boomers being targeted by advertising agencies, with rare exceptions such as investing, insuring and luxury items?

Unaffected by Bad Marketing

Because I am in the biz, I like to think that I am unaffected by marketing, particularly the advertising wing. Wrong! The truth: I am unaffected by bad marketing, which I think is best represented by much of today's advertising.

Don't blame the creatives. They are just as innovative as before. Blame the executives who are out of touch with their customers.

Read the entire article and see the ad that fires me up at the Daily Fix.

Bunnies Color the Big Apple in Stop Motion

I have to admit, this Sony Bravia advertising is entertaining, engaging, creative and innovative. But will it sell TVs? Will most viewers even get the connection between colorful bunnies, a great song and Bravia? In order to get the connection, do we have to know in advance what Sony Bravia is?

Anyway, super entertaining. Enjoy!

Sony Bravia Bunnies Posted on YouTube by sazeone http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9aALd3wVT0

Dennis, Where Did Easy Rider Go?

Dennis Hopper and the Ameriprise ad campaign say more about us Baby Boomers and proper market segmentation than the creators of the campaign may realize. Aimed at Baby Boomers and Generation X and created by Saatchi & Saatchi and MindShare, the advertising campaign is brilliant in terms of targeting the right audience and using a spokesperson who so many of us relate to. But as a Baby Boomer, what is it about Hopper that we love and, although the targeting is broadly on target, has it assumed something that might not be true?

Ameriprise sells financial planning and its ads are about bringing dreams to life. I love the connection between our wild side (Hopper), flower power and the music of our generation. But do I relate to financial planning and is it too late for me to make my dreams a reality if I still see myself as a free bird and didn't begin planning until late in life, and then only grudgingly?

The question relates to audience segmentation. Generation X probably never suffered from the Easy Rider syndrome. And parts of the Baby Boomer generation were more about disco and consumerism than riding free, with our long hair trailing behind us (men and women), and seeing life as a moment-to-moment experience, which is how so many of us born between 1946 and 1956 saw and continue to see life. So while we may love Ameriprise's ads, will they move us to action?

Before I share two of the ads, I also want to discuss the most recent step in this campaign. The Ameriprise Financial advertising campaign and LifeDreams has grown into an integrated, multi-platform approach developed in conjunction with National Geographic. The program showcases three stories of real people who are pursuing their respective dreams.

In an attempt to to drive consumers to an online site, new network and cable television ads, print ads, online ads, and radio spots drive the "we must plan to make our dreams a reality" message. National Geographic programming complements advertising. The LifeDreams program features all original content, including photography shot by a National Geographic photographer, commissioned specifically for this project. A microsite features weekly webisodes and podcasts of the stories. In addition, print inserts will launch in the October issue of National Geographic Magazine and on-air vignettes will run on the National Geographic Channel.

For your review, here are two of the ads featuring Hopper. What is your reaction to the campaign? And if you are in my segment of the Baby Boomer generation, are the ads mere entertainment or can they drive you to invest?

How Should We React to Advertising Spending News?

According to a post by Harry Fuller (Internet advertising: Going up, up, up) at CNET News Blog, "More  advertising dollars are flowing to the Internet, in a trend that started years ago. Adage.com has come out with its annual look at the United States top 100 advertising spenders. There are few surprises, but it's confirmation of what you've probably been seeing and expecting. Internet ads now account for 5.5 percent of total spending by the top 100 advertisers in the U.S. That adds up to nearly 10 billion dollars, and the Internet's about even with radio and ahead of outdoor."

This is interesting, but how does it affect we marketing and/or advertising firms that do not represent the top 100 advertisers? Should we be urging our clients to advertise online? Should we be advertising online? Is this data significant enough to do anything other than wait and watch? What's the bottom line here? Is there one?

Don't Call Me, I'll Call You

According to a study published in January 2007 by ChoiceStream, 70% of respondents said they were interested in receiving personalized advertising via the Internet but don't call them. The following is borrowed from The eMarketer Daily: