Online Display Advertising

it has long been argued that display advertising is less effective than search. whilst this can't be denied - the facts are there to be compared - the effect of online display is nonetheless an important element of the media mix.

we generally use search as a support medium for TV, print or radio advertising, and we can measure the effect of this activity with overall site analytics - particularly if we are testing a regional campaign.

we have recently run a TV campaign for a client in the north west and have seen web visits increase by over 200% since the campaign went live. we have also seen brand related search terms increase and therefore the cpc's have lowered as a result by up to 30%.

can online display have a similar effect? there have been very few studies undertaken on this subject, and it's an area that we're looking at researching, but display is a vital ingredient in the media mix. not only does it drive brand awareness, but it also works with search to deliver results.

there are few mediums that have the reach of the internet, and being able to buy millions of quality impressions at low cpm's is surely an advantage especially when you compare to tv costs of buying premium programming.

the targeting technologies involved with many of the networks are also now very sophisticated, so it's important that the industry understands the impact of online display which we're able to track in a lot more depth than we can with, say TV advertising.

getting view based conversion data (or conversions from people that have seen the display activity) demonstrates how people are using the web - click based conversions are less prevalent these days and some London agencies are starting to dismiss view based conversions as part of their CPA deals.

cpa deals are no longer what they were a year or two ago, working to effective cpa's are a better way of working. getting our clients to understand this and the fact that view based conversions are important and does demonstrate the effectiveness of online display.

it's our job to educate our clients on this effectiveness and having online display support tv or radio campaigns is vitally important as it provides another gateway to clients' sites.

the effectiveness of search won't be questioned for sometime in the same way that online display has been, but used in the right way and in line with other media, it can be an extremely powerful tool that delivers results.

Sonics are ace

I was walking past the Golden Arches today and I heard somone whistle McDonalds sonic logo and I whistled it back without even thinking. Just goes to show how important sound and inparticular, melody is when it comes to getting a message remembered. Now that's viral. Putting ideas and stories to music has long been recognised as an effective method of passing oral tradition.



At the weekend I am going to stand near a McDonalds whistling the sonic, and see how many people whistle it back, or turn around and head in!

Spotify: something changed

something weird has happened, i've gone from spotify evangelist / advocate / the bloke who won't shut up to spotify part owner. What I mean by this is that somewhere in the last couple of days of listening, the ads have really started to grate, music as free has lost it's excitement and now feels like the norm. I guess this is how the brand monetise things but I'm not giving in that easily, afterall with roots in record collecting I still believe in the ownership of music as a wonderful thing.

the reason I say part owner is that I feel that because i've travelled up and down the long tail searching, compiling, sharing that when some punk nips in with 'hi i'm adam from spotify' it no longer feels right but spotify stepping into my personal space.

Is this something that's happening to other users? spotify seems to have now reached the critical mass, what are the next steps? will users get annoyed enough to pay for premium? hard to tell - for me it depends on their previous behavior. It's very hard to sign up for premium if you've spent years of your life trawling through dusty record shops looking for that elusive sonar kollectiv 12"

the beginning, not the end

love this idea that the release of a creative project into the public domain is not the end of the creative period but merely an invitation to develop it further, remix and in will.i.am's words 'flip it.

excalty how they're going to do this is TBC but it will surely excite and engage their most serious fans to a level that we haven't really seen yet in mainstream music.

the whole thing would have Beardsley wriggling uncomfortably in his grave...

1 million dollars

The medias take on illegal downloading seems to me completely ignore any questions around elasticity of demand or the wider positive effects of an individual downloading for free (somehow) a bands track. Thank god for people like Ben Goldacre to set the record straight on whats really going on.

It's simply not the case that when a person downloads a tune illegally they are making the statement 'this is a tune that I would pay x for'. They are instead simply saying 'this is a tune I'd like to download for free', no question has been asked about their preference at a higher price. Therefore when the Sun bounds a figure around of £120 billion, it might sound impressive but it's in no way correct.

The reasons why we're even here debating it right now are two fold

- the music industrys inability to understand consumers behaviours and motivations due to their reluctance to give up on the cd as cash cow/tour as promotion for cd business model
- the speed with which all things digital have changed the world we live in

Footnote - yesterday was mostly spent compiling and sharing spotify playlists, all made possible by invention and a willingness for some labels out there to understand the new music industry business model. I might even download the rhythm and sound album tonight via itunes.

extra footnote - think it's going to have to vinyl - need the bottom end

Getting closer

Mark Herd's excellent article on how things spread got me thinking, if you combined Faris Yacobs 'talent imitates, genius steals' mantra, Charles Leadbetter's 'you are what you share' and Herd's 'pull not push' then we're getting a lot closer to understanding what spreads, what doesn't and how.

The three schools of thought overlap and complement each other well, afterall we can't possibly say that ALL dissemination of ideas or content is down to copying (Herd). There are other factors at play, most notably the constant quest for personal identity (leadbetter) through sharing and communication. A really interesting case study for all of this is the fixed gear communinity who have taken recominant culture to a new level. Just check out the 350 pages of bike porn here. what started out as functionality and a search for identity within the bike world is now a fully fledged creative movement with numerous brands trying to get their dirty paws on it (anyone noticed how vans have checked tack recently?)

Heads in the sand

journalists seem to think they're exempt from the ongoing debate over how newspapers are going to reverse their fortunes. Afterall, no journalist should have to let those toxic commercial thoughts even cross their mind during the writing process.

Well those with their heads in the sand waiting for the big hitters to come up with a solution are missing a trick.

Building up yourself as a brand through the various web 2.0 opportunities could create the kind of model that papers have to look at as we see the gradual unbundling of media. If I now look at the toolbar across the top of my screen, it features ten of my favourite writers and two newspapers. If I was forced to pay, it would be a genuinely hard decision as to who I'd cut off the list. These individuals have gained a position of trust and have been promoted in my own little world to become my filters on business, media, culture, music etc etc. There is a value here which could be expolred further.