Brands are like Tinkerbell: Stop believing in them and they die.
by Stan Faryna
Never Never Land
Mark Pesce, an Australian entrpreneur, recently tweeted:
Brands are like Tinkerbell: If you stop believing in them, they die.
Pesce’s tweet reminds me of the ancient proverb about the things that we believe:
Seeing is believing.
That’s what comScore and Pretarget are suggesting. That a parlay on online display ads pays handsomely. Because brands get seen online. Clicks, They are also suggesting, are not the last word in conversion: transaction, interaction, conversation, and/or community. In other words, online measurement and metrics are suspect. Say What?
Who’s calling shenanigans on who!?
Saint Germain, Sure Thing
If online measurement so easily lends itself to deconstruction, it is only because online measurement provides significantly more useful data and insight than traditional media measurement could ever offer. Duh.
Such is the state of never never land.
Online advertising and marketing has never been more confused about its value and offer than ever before. Most of that confusion, however, is a consequence of economics. Hello!
We are in the third year of the GD2 (Great Depression Two). There’s four more years (more or less) of GD2 ahead. It is what it is.
Adding to the confusion is the propaganda from a fearful and loathing traditional media – they too are strained by the screeching economic down-shifts and their instinct is to kill the online competition because acquisition is beyond their means.
Traditional media often touts size of ad spend as an indicator of preference. But what about performance? Size of ad spend does not correlate to the performance of ad spend. Duh.
With certain irony, comScores’s mixed messages are suspect.
Relax, TV people. You’re not losing the big ad spend anytime soon. Or will you? Brands need to be seen and TV is a visceral triumph – as long as advertisers don’t know much about video. Print, however, is an unavoidable tragedy beset by it’s own environmentally destructive process and vanity – in case you missed Rupert Murdoch’s eulogy. Join the disruption, go digital, or die.
And Radio. What can be said about Radio? Share with me…
The Problem of Online Ads
Undertone, a British digital agency, asks an interesting question:
What’s the last ad you remember seeing online?
Here’s some answers they got:
On the other hand, there are several online ads that are memorable to me. Here’s two:
1. Sapporo Beer (Paulo Coelho loves this ad too)
2. The Three Little Pigs Video (Guardian)
Undertone’s point, however, is not lost on me. The average online display ad is just not good enough. The big problem, hello, is not measurement or targeting; the big problem is that the average online display ad sucks – says ChargeAds. Is this why the Ad Age crowd is chanting that the future is not display ads?
The creative of the average online display ad sucks monkey balls. That’s what I heard was said at the recent ad:tech San Francisco. That is a poignant comment that I find difficult to refute.
Indeed, a bad ad is a bad ad – anywhere. TV. Online. Anywhere. A bad ad just doesn’t get seen- even when it’s in your face.
A solution for better, cheaper, and beautiful online ad creative and copywriting is demanded.
27 April 2012
If you think that this blog post sucks, let me know in your comment and don’t forget to include a link to YOUR favorite blog post.
If you think this blog post rocks, tell me why it rocks in the comment. “Awesome,””Great post,” etc. works for me. Don’t forget to include a link to YOUR most recent blog post.
Subscribe to this blog if you would enjoy keeping up with my thoughts and commentary. Like it, rate it and share it – if you want to give me some love.
If you want to fuel my self-esteem and help me to one day negotiate a fair and handsome contract for my epic science fiction novel, please like my fan page on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Faryna.FanPage