Canadian Marketing Blog

Ad Persuasion

Sometimes I find myself watching an episode of Ad Persuasion on television. It’s an interesting look at the world of advertising, where notable creative folk discuss its various forms; rationalize award winning work and salute the wunderkinds who captivate us during the commercial breaks. During the show, I was enjoying listening to art directors and copy writers discuss what they think about the clients they develop work for. In last week’s episode, a creative director from a US advertising agency went so far as to say “if only they (clients) would get out of the way of the creative process and let us do our jobs, the calibre of creativity would increase and there wouldn’t be a need for TiVOs anymore.” Is that what they think? If only the answer was that simple.

Yes, look at the adoption rate of TiVOs (in the US) and PVRs in Canada – but for another answer. The super cool digital cable TV box allows the viewer to control their experience… right down to zapping out the commercials. It’s true, experts estimate upwards of 70% of us actively look for ways to block advertising. Is it because the creative is boring? No. It is because we want something more unique and personal than the advertiser – sponsored content model of today. Young viewers who have been raised on the Internet demand they control their media viewing experiences – and they’re showing us how they intend to do it. Welcome to the world of user generated content.

Recently, a colleague and I listened to a keynote address by Hunter Madsen, head of marketing for Yahoo! Canada. He talked about how media companies like Yahoo!, MSN, and AOL are trying to make money in the user generated content world or social networks - where traditional advertising is verboten. Madsen spoke about three ways to get invited:

1. Crash the party – place commercial messaging into video streams and other online content – the most basic and least liked form but still effective
2. Hold a party yourself – Develop an interactive area for users (blogs, Q&A, question submits, etc.) and introduce answers by “industry experts”
3. Be a party promoter – employ viral marketing, blogging – even pay cool bloggers to show up – and generate buzz and interest around your event

To be heard and remembered in these forums, advertising (I mean sponsored content) has to engage, compel and provoke. Opinions matter. Production values not as much. Take for example the Doritos commercials aired during last year’s Super Bowl – each created for less than $10K a piece - now highly circulated on You Tube. The Dove beauty spot is another. Admittedly more costly but an innovative and captivating piece of film. It became popular, I believe, because it delivered more comment than commerce.

As we watch user generated channels enter and evolve in the market at lightening speed, the creative team that figures out how to develop relevant, breakthrough creative I’m sure will be featured on a future episode of Ad Persuasion. And I plan to watch it.

Robert, great post. But I feel like I want to clarify something. You quote a U.S. Creative Director who says, "If only they (clients) would get out of the way of the creative process and let us do our jobs, the calibre of creativity would increase and there wouldn't be a need for TiVOs anymore.". You go onto say ask, quite rightly, "Is that what they think? If only the answer was that simple."

On behalf of Creative Directors everywhere who aren't egomaniacs, I would like to clarify that our job as creative people is to be creative within the context of selling products and services. Not just producing creative for creative's sake. Sure, you'd have funnier, kookier creative. But would anyone remember the product being sold? Or would people just be entertained? Nice, but not the point, and not why we're paid.

As for TiVo's (or DVR's as they're called in Canada), it might suprise you to know that in Canada, DVRs have a penetration of only 4%.

I think this blog posting brings up a great debate… A debate that will divide marketers that were trained in the “traditional marketing era” versus those trained in the “social media era” – what is the real definition of creative?

As a recent graduate and someone who runs a campus marketing agency, I look at the traditional view of creative as being a more outdated model. The typical creative process consists of trying to make a message that is based solely on the product interesting to the viewer. However, in today’s culture, product driven messages are seen as an interruption and get a lower response rate.

Representing the first generation raised in the internet-era, I believe the new creative process consists of figuring out a way to integrate the brand message into something that is appealing to the target market - whether it is based on events, causes, beliefs or anything else that resonates with them.

Bryan, I agree with you, the difficulty lies in balancing relevancy vs. getting the brand message across, but hey, that’s where the creative comes in.

Josh, I think we're actually saying the same thing. Ask anyone from the old fogey generation, and especially Direct Marketers, and they'll tell you their job, whether they're creative people or not, is to speak to their target in a way that's relevant to that target and reach them in a way that they can hear and respond to the message. (That's the difference between "Direct Marketing" regardless of channel and "Junk Marketing" regardless of channel.) It's interesting that you think this exercise is new or unique to the "internet era". Direct marketers have known this all along and have applied that thinking in every channel from television to mail to, yes, the internet.

I do not want a world without commercial breaks. When am I supposed to go to the bathroom?

Ads are "hated" because they get in the way. To me, about 90% of the time, the words "corporate sponsor" evokes an image of amoral executives trying to monetize art. I am sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. and this is funny to me because I can see myself as one of those executives one day.

I love what Yahoo is doing. They're transforming the image of the corporate sponsor, at least in my mind, from suit-who-shows-up-at-closing-ceremony to participant-and-collaborator.

I don't think the answer is in compelling creatives. Get real. You can't expect people to watch ads during daytime game shows like it was the Superbowl ad parade.

Thanks for that Bryan, I want to elaborate on my comment so that the message I was trying to get across is clearer. The point I am trying to make resembles very closely to Dave’s post.

The bottom line is the next generation - especially the youth - do not want to be bombarded with irrelevant advertising content – they simply change the channel, change the station, phase out banners, etc. It will be the marketer’s job to come up with a new creative approach that integrates the branded message into something more appealing to the audience.

An interesting example of this is Pepsi’s new UGC campaign. Pepsi is letting its consumer design pop cans that will be produced globally. Every few weeks a new winning entrant’s design will be produced and shipped out to store shelves. To support this, they are using out-of-home media, internet media and social media to not only appeal to the youth, but also to engage them. By having this unique contest as the main selling point of its advertising message (rather than a product-oriented message) the youth are listening and Pepsi is getting its brand message across more effectively.

My opinion (which is shared by many of today’s youth) is that if marketers want their advertisements to be viewed, they have to change the way they think about creative.

Great post and comments.

Marketing to the uber tech savvy, information rich, always connected viral world in which today’s consumer lives, demands that we craft ideas, messages, and campaigns that, at the end of the day, are relevant to people. Many firms have heard and responded to the clarion call of user-generated content. People enjoy and are proud of creating their own content. They have free global distribution channels for their oeuvre. How individuals and corporations choose to facilitate their marketing initiatives using these new channels is proving to be an interesting experiment.

Great comments and feedback!! What I'm hearing loud and clear is that how we define great advertising is changing- fast. Because technology is empowering the user - giving them tools to block or accept advertising messages. This shift in power to the consumer's hands is getting marketing people thinking furiously about how to build new selling tools aimed at the next generation of consumers that will work. Cool.

I have seen Ad Persuasion twice, and, regardless of the fact that they do show us brilliant ads, I'll never watch it again.
It's as though the programme itself conforms to the normal, dreary, world of tv advertising (at least here in North America). As well, it treats us the viewer, as though we're imbeciles, walking us through every step of the ad before showing it. Have they never heard of a spoiler alert? They approach each ad pork-fistedly, and, not always with the eye for detail that they should have, in their field.
When commenting on the Tiger Woods ad, which portrayed Tiger Woods as a child, a female ad exec said that 'then you hear Rod Stewart in the background'. The song was 'Ooh La La' - you heard Ronnie Lane & Ronnie Wood in the background, Ooh La La was a Faces song. Yes, Rod Stewart was in the band, but that wasn't his song.
It's just too tedious & laborious listening to them pick a clever piece of advertising to shreds, before even seeing it, and/or seeing it in bits before in its entirety.