Everyone's Business But Our Own

The ad industry is a mess. We don't even know who we are or what we do anymore.

This point was made embarrassingly clear in two articles this week. The first in AdAge was called "Adland's Identity Crisis Leaves Clients' Heads Spinning."

The point of the piece was that 

"...ad agencies are fighting harder than ever to stay ahead of the curve. But a funny thing has happened: They're now meeting in the middle."

The second, in Adweek, entitled "Marketers to Digital Shops: Diversify or Die" held that...

"...digital shops that don't diversify their offerings face the same creeping irrelevance as traditional agencies that give lip service to digital..."

The essence of the problem was nicely summed up by David Lubars of BBDO who put it this way:

"Everybody is trying to race up the hill from either side."

One of the things agencies always preach to clients is the critical importance of differentiating their product. And yet, in contradiction of that advice we all try to be everything to everyone.

Is there a type of business that is less competent at differentiating what it does from its competitors than an ad agency?

I have a tag line for us...

The Advertising Industry. We know how to run everyone's business but our own.

Sick Of The Click

One of the principles behind the enthusiasm for online display advertising is the idea that it is "interactive."  Advocates for online advertising make the case that interactivity between a person and an ad makes the ad more engaging to the consumer and therefore, more powerful.

It's an argument that, on the surface, has a great deal of logic to it, and is hard to dispute.

However, the argument hinges on the notion that online advertising really is substantially more interactive than traditional advertising. If it is not, then the argument falls apart.

The one factor that makes an online ad more interactive than say, a newspaper or magazine ad, is that it is hyperlinked to other, deeper material -- in other words, it is clickable.

It is in the click that the essence of interactivity resides. Without clickability, an online ad is no more "interactive" than a magazine ad.

Consequently, the argument for the power of online display advertising rests on the inclination of consumers to click. If consumers are not inclined to interact, we have no reason to believe an online ad has any more potency than a newspaper ad.

A recent study demonstrates the astounding disinclination of consumers to "interact" with online display ads.

You can find the study here. Here's a summary:

• The study "examined the advertising interactions of over 100 million anonymous user profiles and over one billion advertising impressions served in the first months of 2011."

• They "reviewed the action lift of 100 campaigns, and brand lift reported in 400 campaigns."

• They found "...a tiny fraction of people ever click on an ad. In fact, 99% of stable cookies examined never click on an ad. "

• "Nearly 20% of ads that received any click activity received multiple clicks within the same impression, suggesting that these clicks were unintentional. 

• "An examination of who tended to click paints a picture of an audience that may not be attractive to most advertisers. 

• They may be exactly the people you don't want. "Users who are economizing click 65% more often than users who purchase frequently online."

• Here's one you'll love. "...optimization of campaigns to achieve higher CTR may in fact be reducing brand ROI." In other words, the higher the level of "interactivity" the lower the ROI!

• "Conclusion: ...This study should serve to caution marketers, that relying on CTR means being comfortable targeting low income, older, technologically less sophisticated consumers and recognize that most of the click ‘leads’ will go nowhere, as they were generated by unintentional clicks or will not result in a post impression action nor brand."

It should come as no surprise that the online advertising community is running as fast as it can and as far as it can from the idea of "interactivity" as measured by clicks.

The same type of revisionism that has polluted the "advertising is dead" crowd has now infected the "interactive advertising" crowd.

What once made them click, now makes them sick.

Thanks to Terry DeVoto and Sharon Krinsky for making me aware of this study.

When Marketing Geniuses Agree, Run For Cover

Today, we are posting a few quickies...

When Marketing Geniuses Agree, Run For Cover
Some follow-up to yesterday's post about how the ad pundits have been so wrong about TV.

• TV spending accounted for about 57% of total advertising expenditures in 2010
• TV ad spending grew 60% faster than advertising spending in general
• TV viewing was at its highest point ever

Social Media and Business
We all know that social media is a huge cultural phenomenon. What we don't know is exactly how much its impact on business has been exaggerated by maniacal web monkeys.

According to an article in Fast Company called "Facebook Places, Foursquare: Social Media's Tiny 2% Impact On Businesses."

...Based on new data from APT provided to Fast Company, it's clear that location-based services like Foursquare and Facebook Places have--so far--had a minimal impact on businesses.

"In the tests we've seen, we generally haven't seen much of a lift in performance," (Jonathan) Marek (senior VP at at Applied Predictive Technologies) says. "There just isn't the reach in these things today to actually be able to drive the level of change in business..."

Shameless Self-Promotion
In addition to the agency thing, I've been doing some consulting lately. And surprisingly, I'm liking it. I've even hung a new shingle under that stupid dog cartoon at the top of the page.

My pitch is this: There's no shame in being confused by advertising and marketing -- they have become very confusing . But there is shame in squandering money on strategies and tactics you don’t have confidence in. Click here for clarity.

This Web Really Is Worldwide: Once in a while I like to check and see where readers of The Ad Contrarian come from. I'm always astounded. I checked yesterday. Here's where you came from:

United States, Peru, Australia, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Canada, India, Portugal, Germany, Spain, Romania, Argentina, Ireland, Slovenia, Italy, Russia, Norway, United Kingdom, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, Malaysia, Lithuania, Mexico, Switzerland, Kenya, Bolivia, Barbados, France, Japan, Singapore, Finland, United Arab Emirates, Croatia, Vietnam, Kenya, Denmark, Ukraine, Dominican Republic, Pakistan, Belgium, Philippines, Thailand, Hungary, Korea, and South Africa.

Thanks for visiting.

I've Come Up With A Name For My Autobiography
Ever since this quote from Vinny Warren appeared here Monday,"There and then I knew I had the title of my autobiography -- Marlon Brando's Monkey Is Dead," I've been thinking about what I should call my autoboigraphy. 

Last night, I got it -- "Artificial Intelligence."