Mele’s Musings

Using Digital for Local Advertising – The Lost Opportunity

I have been in several meetings and conversations over the years with seasoned media and advertising veterans (usually those more focused on traditional media than digital) who have a strange attitude toward local advertising. For some reason, local advertising is considered to be the domain of offline advertising – radio stations, newspaper sites, etc. Digital, if it is considered, is an “add-on” a nice to have.

Big miss!

A recent report I recently read about on BizReport from the The Media Audit should help to those of us who want to put that attitude to bed. The report outlines two pretty interesting facts, one of which was a big surprise.

From the article: On average, American adults are now spending just under 4 hours each day online; that is an 81% increase over 2006 numbers, according to a new report from The Media Audit. Researchers have found that the Internet now accounts for more than 30% of a ‘media day’ for adults in the US.

Ok. That one was not a surprise. But this one is the eye-opener: For many, the bulk of their online time is being spent with local or national newspapers. More than one hour each day is spent with online papers, according to the report, and the reach of these papers just keeps growing.

If you are still one of the holdouts who believes that local advertising is a decidedly offline exercise, it’s time to change your mind. Everyone pines about the demise of newspapers as if local news were dying. But that’s just plain wrong. People want local news. They just are buying fewer newspapers.

In fact, tons of the time that people are spending online is for local information. How many times do you use the internet to search for local things – restaurants, stores, used goods, etc.? Ever heard of Craigslist? Ever done a Google or Yelp search for a local restaurant?

The truth is that digital may be one of the most effective places for local advertising. Plus, it’s infinitely more trackable – to a point. One thing that I think makes people wary of local advertising is that metrics can be uncomfortable. Most local based campaigns are not going to lead to online sales. Which makes sense. If I am searching for a local store, I’m probably going to go to the store. But, when our metrics are tuned to myopic measures like online sales, we are going to miss the value of local digital advertising completely.

If you have not started focusing on local advertising, here are some things that you should think about:

1. Local newspapers, radio stations, etc. are natural places to start. They are the most obvious corollary to offline local, and they can be effective.
2. Local search is a huge, inexpensive, and effective tactic that is too often overlooked. Any company trying to reach local users must use local search. In fact, Google reports that over 82% of consumers use search to find local businesses.
3. Geo-targeted ads are hugely effective, too. Most third-party advertising systems as well as many sites offer the ability to geo-target ads.
4. Mobile may be the biggest missed opportunity. What’s more local that apps or search on a mobile device? Texting programs, etc. can be tuned to local consumers as well. This article from BayNewser.com outlines it well “Old Media Giants Take New Media Step.” Here is a link to another one outlining a report from the Kelsey Group: “Kelsey Forecasts Mobile/Local Search Growth.”

In fact, Borrell Associates estimate that “locally placed search advertising in the U.S. is projected to grow 30 percent over the next five years, from $4.1 billion in 2008 to $5.3 billion in 2013.”

So, the next time you hear people talking about local, and they are not including digital, you’ll have some ammunition.

Tags: craigslist, geo-target, geo-targetting, local, local advertising, local search, mobile advertising, mobile marketing, mobile search, newspapers, time online, Yelp

Posted in Digital Marketing News | No Comments »

Is Anyone STILL Using Click-Through Rate?

Are advertisers still measuring success by click-through rate?  Apparently so.  The fact that there is ANOTHER report out that there is a measure beyond click-throughs solidifies it.  OPA, comScore Teamed to Tout Banner Ad Value

And I thought we put that to bed in 2001.  Seriously.  But I guess we shouldn’t be surprised when the New York Times publishes articles like this one Put Ad On Web.  Count Clicks.  Revise in 2009- that seems to treat measuring and optimizing online advertising like it’s something new, and talks mainly about clicks.  Ugh.  As my colleague Reeder said when he sent me the link to this article - “how is this news?”

Here is a link to white paper created by our colleagues at the Atlas Institute on the topic.

Note to everyone doing online advertising who are still measuring by the click only, or by click-through rate, or by the last action after the click - you are doing it wrong.  There are better ways to do it, and we work with clients everyday to move them to more advanced ways of measuring.

Why is it that we still see a huge number of advertisers measuring by click-through?

1. It’s easy.  The simplest way to measure online advertising is using a post-click methodology.  It’s easy to explain, and it has little ambiguity.  Someone saw an ad, clicked, and bought.
2. The tools are out of date.  Most ad reporting tools are not equipped to handle more than the last action post a click.  Minimally, ad reporting systems should include the last action post the view as well, but many don’t.  Few, if any, count anything more than the last ad exposure (view or click), and most are limited in the time horizon they measure - 7 days post click in most cases.
3. Not enough people care or have time to take the trouble.  The biggest issue I have seen in changing methodologies is client apathy and/or exhaustion.  Creating a more robust and accurate reporting system - one that looks at a more holistic history of a user’s exposure to ads before a conversion, that looks at conversions beyond a 7-day window, or that looks at more than online sales - takes time and money.  Because it’s hard to do, and hard to explain, and requires the client organization to cooperate across silos and business teams, and it means incremental costs to do the research into actual user behavior and the data surrounding it, and often means a change in analytics and reporting packages, clients often default to the standard ways of doing things.

So what, you may ask?  What difference does it really make?  We call it the Attribution Trap.

• Measuring only clicks, or last ad exposure (last click or view), or by a limited time horizon, or on online sales only (if you are a multi-channel retailer) results in UNDER COUNTING AND MISATTRIBUTION OF CONVERSIONS.
• Because conversions are under counted or misattributed you OPTIMIZE TOO AGGRESSIVELY.  What we often see, then, is that clicks and click conversions are over-counted, view conversions are under-counted, and conversions outside of the time horizon or that occur offline are not counted at all.
• The result of this is often A LOWER CLICK CONVERSION RATE.  Study after study we and others have done show that display ads increase the likelihood to search and the likelihood to convert.  Once these are removed, because the simplistic attribution systems says they are not working, you end up with fewer clicks, and a lower conversion rate.
• As a result, most clients REDUCE INVESTMENT IN SEARCH OR OTHER ONLINE ADVERTISING thinking that their advertising is not working - a natural reaction when you are measuring incorrectly.
• Finally, then, we see FEWER OVERALL CONVERSIONS AND RISING CPA OR LOWER MEASURED ROI.  As the wrong things are optimized out, clients begin to pull back or stagnate in their online programs because they feel they have maximized their opportunity.

Tags: analytics, Atlas, attribution, click-through, conversion, custom attribution, measurement, multi-channel, optimization, ROI, view-through

Posted in Digital Marketing News, Issues of Interest | No Comments »

Want to Reach Moms? Then Be Practical

A few months ago, Razorfish and Cafe Mom released a report on Digital Moms.  Recently, eMarketer released a report on moms online as well, and they refer to it in this article.  Guy Kawasaki had a good blog posting on it.

Link to Today Show on subject.

What have we learned?  Some things are not surprises - mom’s shop for their kids online, are highly involved in purchase decisions for the family, moms are multi-taskers and use digital technologies and tools to help them balance, and are often earlier adopters than other adults in their age ranges for new technology because they are actively trying to stay in contact with their kids - think texting, etc.  While they may not exactly be digital natives, if digital allows them to be more effecient and effective in their life, they are not afraid to take it on.

All these things make a ton of sense.  There were some surprises, however, when it came to how moms look for the information that helps them make decisions.

My reflection is that we too often miss some some great opportunities because we are focused too much on the obvious - the media properties that are overwhelmingly female.  The result is that we create plans and ads that are focused on “reaching moms,” rather than on the practical tools and utilities that moms actually use to make decisions.

The truth is that moms are highly influenced by search and are very open to emails and direct communications from brands they trust.  They also are keen to hear the opinions of others, whether those are customer reviews or trusted bloggers.  And while mom magazine and TV sites are legitimate places to reach moms, the best way to connect with them is to think beyond the ads themselves.  They also use social media, not just to update status, but to stay connected to the things they care about.  For instance, my wife, who would never consider herself to be particularly digital, is highly involved in groups related to the food allergies my children suffer from.

Moms, at the end of the day, are practical and pragmatic.  Because they are time starved, the seek efficiency and value.  This is not to imply that they don’t find ways to escape (moms are also online gamers, for instance), but when it comes to getting things done, moms are all business.  When moms want to make a purchase decision, they are not watching TV commercials.  They are actively seeking out the best information they can find - whether that is through search engines, or customer reviews, or “mommy” bloggers.  (A good article on mommy bloggers can be found here.)

That should deeply influence the way we choose to market to moms.  It’s not just about appearing on TLC.  It’s about providing useful, valuable, and effective information and applications, and the helping them find the information we have that can help them make decisions.  Blogger outreach, strong presence in search, useful tools and content distributed to the places where moms seek information are all examples of techniques we should use.

Tags: blogs, cafemom, digital moms, female bloggers, mommy bloggers, moms, online research, search, Women

Posted in Digital Marketing News, Digital Trends | No Comments »

Are Banner Ads Dead?

A recent Ad Age article notes how publishers and advertisers are starting to think beyond the banner ad. That’s a good thing.  But does it mean banner ads are dead?

Link to worst banner ad ever?

It’s easy to disparage the banner.  It’s omnipresent and often ignorable.  It follows (mostly) standard guidelines, and to grab attention, needs some sort of attraction.  Kind of like print ads and TV commercials.  Or any other advertising format, for that matter.

Do I think there are better uses of ad dollars?  Yes.  And no.  And I don’t believe thinking beyond the banner is new news.

Let me be very clear - I am a HUGE fan of my clients and advertisers thinking beyond the banner.  Very often, the best examples of advertising are those things that don’t look like ads - they are experiences that drive users to interaction.  I encourage and applaud our teams when they come to the table with ideas that have not come from sales reps at publishers, but from true coordination and creativity between us, our clients, and the publishers.

But there are valid reasons to not hate the banner.  Here are a few:

1) Reach - Currently, common banner sizes are the currency in the market.  They are easy to find and ubiquitous, which means that if you want to drive significant traffic at a reasonable cost, there are few substitutes that work as well.

2) Cost - While we all want to do things that have never been done before, it comes at a price.  Creating a new experience on every publisher property is hard to scale, and the commoditization of ad space allows us to keep costs down.

3) Rich media - Through strategic and thoughtful uses of “common” banner space, we can create ads that are interactive, useful, even allowing transactions.  The “space” of the ad is simply the initial starting point.

So, don’t hate the banner.

At the same time, advertisers and their agencies must seek new ways to get their messages out to their customers, to find more useful and entertaining ways to communicate, and to stretch their thinking.

I think what makes this hard, and the end of the article alludes to this, is that media planners and buyers often think in terms of impressions and what space ad reps will sell to them.  Truly exceptional planners consider the target customer’s needs first, and then seek new and innovative ways to reach them.  As we like to say, media is as creative as the creative that runs on it in the digital space.

The truth is that good advertising can be found in any size space, and in any place.  We just have to be clever enough, and strategic enough, to use the spaces and places well.

Tags: advertising, banners, digital advertising, display ads, media, online advertising, online media, rich media

Posted in Digital Marketing News | No Comments »

Watch Out Cable! The Coming Paradigm Shift in TV Watching

A great article last week explains how broadband and streaming services are putting the fear of God into the cable companies.

You can read the Wall Street Journal article here.

We are all aware of the growing trend happening in the telephone space. More and more consumers are cutting back on phone bills by killing their land lines and relying solely on their mobile phones. We can now see this trend on the horizon for television, and it will forever change the way we consume content.

I was amazed to find that last year there were already almost 1 million households that relied solely on Web TV last year. While still only a small percentage of total households, it’s still a big number.

We all know about YouTube, Hulu, and Netflix. These services make viewing video entertainment on PCs simple and easy. And, with the right connections, you can watch all of these services on your televisions as well. There are still a few key tipping points that need to happen before they change forever the way we view television:
1) Sports and other live TV shows coming online. It’s still a fact that watching sports is really something that needs to be experienced live. I would argue the same goes for shows like American Idol. When these shows can be streamed in real-time, things will change.
2) Faster in-home broadband. While many homes have broadband, you need a much faster connection that 1 or 2 megabits. When average speeds hit double digits, delays will no longer be an issue.

Cable companies are scared to death of this, but in some ways this is their fault. First, their service is expensive, it offers very limited choice, and service has been crappy. Second, they are training us to feel comfortable with downloading movies and entertainment directly to our TV’s via VOD services.

Of course, it is important to note that Mark Cuban disagrees.

The big question for marketers is how does this impending change alter the way that commercials and advertisements work? The current answer - pre-roll commercials - is simply the way that the industry has decided to deal with it for now. My guess is that this is a solution that is already dead - once smart advertisers figure out a better solution, pre-roll will go away quickly.

How do I know this? Because my 10 year old son was watching video online the other day, and as an pre-roll add came up, he screamed “I hate these stupid ads, I wish they would just go away.”

When advertising really gets in the way of me and my content, when it doesn’t add to it, but distracts from it, and I have really alternatives, I’ll be gone. And so will most people.

So, how will marketers tell stories in the future?

Will commercials simply be doorways to deeper experiences?

Will we see more and more product placement? Perhaps even the ability to hotspot within TV shows? In other words, if I really like a product being used in a show, will I be able to click on that product and learn more about it, buy it, etc.?

Will we see more sponsorships?

It’s a great question, and one that will evolve over time. Advertisers and agencies will go kicking and screaming into this future. There will be much resistance. There will be much insistence that the standards stay the same. For many firms, TV ads will still be the killer app - until it just no longer is.

I am in no way saying TV ads are dead. But we have to get more clever and smarter about how we get our messages to consumers. It won’t happen overnight, but it will happen.

Tags: cable, iptv, storytelling, streaming, television, TV, TV online, TV watching

Posted in Digital Marketing News, Digital Trends | No Comments »

Some Good Controversial Articles to Read!

Papa John’s unveils a campaign using webcams.  Is it merely banner tricks, or a push into creating new branded experiences for customers?  Read about it here.

How important is it for a company to have strict social networking strategies? Read about it here.

Will accessing the internet without a browser become more common?  If you use Google Chrome, creating a desktop app is exceptionally easy (I am a big fan of Chrome). Read about it here.

Who should own social media campaigns?  Traditional agencies?  Digital agencies?  Social specialists?  PR firms?  Internal marketing? Read about it here.

Tags: applications, apps, banner tricks, banners, browser wars, Google Chrome, internet browser, online advertising, Papa Johns, social, Social advertising, Social Media, social network, webcam

Posted in Digital Marketing News, Digital Trends, Issues of Interest | No Comments »

Hey Dad, Can You Buy This for Me?

A new service called BillMyParents offers retailers a whole new way to get kids to influence their parents.

Ok, so the website is awful - but the idea is great.  Cnet does a quick review of the site and there are some good comments about it that follow.  Here is another article from reuters.  As a parent, I love it.  I don’t have to give my children a credit card, and they have to run purchases past me first.  This is, in essence, social shopping at its purest - the service encourages the right kind of dialogue between parents and kids, and hopefully makes kids more responsible and aware of how much things cost and what their parents value.

As a marketer, I like it as well.  There are lots of studies that point to the influence of kids on their parents - one of them from Harris is found here.  By bringing this into the digital age, retailers can bridge the gap that has existed between the media that kids use (digital) and the fact that they can generally only purchase in stores with cash.

Tags: kids, millenials, online shopping, social shopping, youth

Posted in Digital Commerce News, Digital Marketing News, Retail and Product News | No Comments »

Is Geeky New Search Engine WolframAlpha a Google Killer?

If you have not yet heard about WolframAlpha, it’s time to get in the know.  Launched last week, the new search engine could be the middle ground between Google and Wikipedia that we never knew we needed.

A couple of really good articles explain how WolframAlpha works, and why it actually may be a Wikipedia killer rather than a Google killer.

The engine itself is interesting (although some people are saying it’s not really a search engine at all - see this NYT article).  It combines the computational power of Google with the people power of Wikipedia.  It also invites users to type in “natural language” queries.  But, I have to agree with the author of the PCMag arcticle that it can be tricky to figure out the right way to ask a question.

My experience is that it is wickedly quick at finding factual answers and looking at them in some fascinating ways.  Doing a query on McDonalds and Burger King, for instance, automatically shows comparative charts and data comparisons against stock prices, P/E ratios, etc.

Asking it questions that I might want to know the answer to, like what is the average cost per click on Google, yielded nothing - which might be more of an indication that I have not yet figured out the right way to ask a question.

What will be interesting to see is if the average person will find WolframAlpha usabable.  The name could certainly use some sprucing up.  I am not the first person to acknowledge that the name sounds like a bad horror film.

Because it is so technical and so geeky, it may be something used more by academics, students, researchers, and consultants (or marketing data nerds like us).

I suspect we will continue to see new tools coming in the next few years that try to be the next Google killer.  The big question for Marketers is if there will be any impact on how we market or advertise, of course.

Not sure on the answer as of yet.  WolframAlpha has embedded a featured sponsor module in its code according to Forbes, so it plans to sell advertising or sponsorships in the future.  But there is nothing yet for marketers to do.  If the new engine takes off, there will be a mad scramble for ad inventory.

My sense, however, is that the search engine will be less likely to monetize in the way that Google does.  No proof, just a guess based on the fact that it has human interaction in its results rather than just an algorithm which may make it less palatable if it appears to be “fixing” results in any way.

What will also be interesting is how much information it unleashes about businesses in general.  As it becomes easier and easier to find information on the web, it will become harder and harder for brands to hide from information.

It will be fun to watch.

Tags: Google, natural search, online research, search, search engines, wikipedia, Wolfram Alpha

Posted in Digital Marketing News, Digital Trends | 1 Comment »

Twitter Quitters?

A good article from some of my colleagues at Razorfish on the Twitter Quitter phenomenon.

Copied from here.

Find the article here.

The story will be an interesting one to follow over the next 12 months.  The once mighty MySpace is on its knees, and how many of us have already forgotten Friendster (or never even heard of them?).

Will Twitter hold on, or will it be a short-lived fad?

Tags: social applications, social influence, social marketing, Social Media, social network, social tools, Twitter

Posted in Digital Trends, Issues of Interest | No Comments »

Twittering for Brands

First, I apologize for not updating the blog more often.  I am in the process of starting a new blog and will link the two together when it is up.

Now, to the business at hand . . . Among the many, many articles coming out on Twitter, I found a few that were particularly intriguing.  The first is called Meet the Brands that Get Twitter.  What struck me the most about the article was the myriad ways that companies are approaching Twitter.

Some claim that the right approach is that Twitter is a not for broadcasting but rather for conversation.  Others claim that it is a feedback mechanism.  Some feel that it is for product support and service.  Others use it to simply send out interesting information.

But can it be all of these things?

I think the answer is yes, but it really depends on what the company is and how consumers relate to and feel about their products and services.  In most cases, what customers really want is information, service, and help, and this should influence how companies approach Twitter.

I think the whole “it’s about conversation” or “it’s about a relationship” thing can be overplayed or misunderstood.  Do I really want to know what Steve Jobs has for lunch?  Not particularly.  But I do want to know what his latest products are going to be, when they are coming out, and when I can get my hands on them.  I have a particular kind of relationship with most companies which is pretty different from the relationship I have with the people in my private life.  I don’t want to necessarily be friends with a brand, but I do expect their respect and their honesty which are important aspects of all relationships.  And I might even be willing to have a conversation with a brand in a public forum if I feel it is important enough or relevant enough.

And this is consistent with findings in a new study by MarketingProfs which indicates that Twitter is less social network than it is information network.  Which sounds a little bit like a broadcast network - but with a twist.  In this broadcast network, consumers can not only turn you on or off, they can respond to you.  (The referring article is from BizReport and can be found here).

And the importance of companies figuring out their unique path, and understanding the power of the information and conversation they dissmeninate on networks like Twitter is that the “conversation” is public and searchable.  Very unlike how you and I hold most of our conversations.

MarketingProfs also has a good article on the The Dark Side of Twitter that addresses this truth.  Because all digital communication takes place in a public forum, there is nothing to hide once the words are typed, tweeted, emailed, or blogged.  We want them to be private, but they are not - too easy to forward, digg, or post.

So what is a brand to do?  Think carefully about what service you want to offer to consumers on Twitter, and consider how you will support it.  At the very best, you provide useful information and a forum for feedback with consumers.  This requires attention to detail and resources. The risk for not doing so is that you may you bore them, insult them, or confuse them.

Tags: open social, social, social influence, social marketing, Social Media, social network, Twitter

Posted in Digital Marketing News | No Comments »