advertising

Mediacenter_green_ball_logo_300px Spotted over on the always good (as long as you're really into HTPCs) TheGreenButton.com media center blog by Chris Lanier, it seems that Microsoft are introducing "interactive ads" to it's Media Center platform, through the currently USA only "Internet TV" plug-in.

This is very interesting.  Why?  Well, because in the UK we've had so called "Red-Button" services for some time in advertising, providing interactive ads for viewers of digital satellite and OTA TV - but it's not worked well, and the reactions from the audience have been poor ot say the least.  So much so that one of the main OTA TV channel, Channel Five, has decided to quit offering it as a service for prospective advertisers.

So, what's interesting is that MS now start to implement what looks to be a more advanced, but very similar  in some ways, interactive ad platform to it's Media Center environment (US only so I can't test it annoyingly).

It may be that the environment and audience types that you get in a media center are more open to this kind of placement, certainly right now in an early-adopter and I am guessing mainly male, way, but I wonder if MS know something that the TV channels over here in the UK don't with regard to interactive "want to know more?" style ads?  Perhaps they will work better in an environment that feels more like a PC than a TV?  Who knows - but it's a brave move for something which hasn't worked well at all so far.

Howard
--
cross-posted from a comment on Chris Lanier's blog

Chinwag_logo Earlier this week I attended another of the Chinwag Live events in Soho.  The topic this week was "Tomorrow's Ad Formats" and the panel of guests chosen to kick off the debate and impart their expert opinion was comprised of five people:

Priya Prakash - Creative Director, Hachette Filipacchi
Rhys Williams - Co-founder, agenda21
Steven Hess - Managing Partner, weapon7
David Burrows - Ad Operations Director, Phorm UK
Mat Morrison - Digital Planning Director, Porter Novelli

and the whole event was chaired by Guy Phillipson - CEO, Internet Advertising Bureau.

In this first post I'll try to summarise each of the panel member's introductions and the key points they set out when making their opening statements...

Priya
Priya is a proponent of user centered design and believes that it will play a key role in the future of marketing.  Agencies are limited by their briefs to some degree, in what they receive as instruction from the client, and the client's own vision of what they think the future of marketing is going to be. Agencies need to be able to separate themselves from this to help stretch the true boundaries of future marketing.

Quoting The Cluetrain Manifesto as a key influencer (there's a lot of that in this Chinwag -  maybe everyone rediscovered their copy of it sitting on a dusty shelf somewhere) she stated that in her opinion marketing has to start adding serious value to the customer and their experience in order to be valid, otherwise ads will serve as nothing but an interruption (a Disruption?) to what users are doing and they will ignore it.  In this way she thinks brands themselves are too narcissistic, thinking only of their own needs and ignoring the needs of the customer, and this is what really needs to change in order for them to stop getting in the way and increase relevancy.

Rhys
Rhys sees there being three things in the industry right now which are driving us towards more and more complex media spaces and format choices.

Stating in his first sentence that the problem with digital advertising right now is that everything is driven by jargon, Rhys thinks the media landscape is becoming more and more complicated all the time driven primarily by clients (advertisers), media owners, and lastly by the users themselves.

For a start, some clients, and often some agencies, always want to try and get some advertising Kudos by having a "media first", to appear to be the cutting edge and are always asking during a lot of briefings "what's the next big thing?"  This mentality, of associating new formats with cutting edge creative, is part of the problem with why the media landscape is getting so diverse and complex.  But it shouldn't be. He questioned why new format opportunities are so important to some clients, why do they see everything in that way as a first being so important?

Rhys then gave an example in Facebook at this very moment which goes for a media first but results in a run of the mill campaign - referring to the rash of experian search ads which have started to appear inside everyone's profile pages whenever they log on (yeah! Why are they SO annoying?)  He believes that advertisers who do this are actually being lazy, going for the cheap clicks through a misguided sense that being first will lend their (annoying, interrupting and unimaginative - my words) campaign some extra legs.

Secondly, another problem he sees is that media owners try to push new formats on their space in hope of getting increased CPM, as is the case right now for video formats which can often top £25 CPM as opposed to around £1-ish CPM for a banner placement.  Clients then see these formats as an answer to the problem of getting stand out in a crowded environment (certainly though there is some evidence to suggest this works I guess seeing as the CTR on video formats is way higher than on static formats?)

FInally, Rhys said that he thinks often creative agencies want to push the boundaries themselves in terms of formats available to get a creative edge, often resulting in nothing more than a larger amount of real estate with which to play, and that media planners often get pressured by creatives to create plans full of new, larger, more invasive formats. 

Steven
Steven said he finds new formats very confusing.  He thinks that often lots of things emerge into the spaces available which are simply nothing but technical innovations which are built for no other reason than because they can be - and certainly bear nothing in relation to them being useful for campaigns of customers.  He strongly believes that formats don't fuel the creative brief, and never will.

He raised the question that in this climate, how do we, the people working inside the digital industry right now, express creative ideas for a client that users and customers will be able to understand?

Technology in his opinion should be used as an enabler to meet a client's problems, and not as a stick to beat problems with until they fit into a technical shaped box.  In the past ten years or so, the digital industry has had a sense of entrepreneurism that's helped us all drive towards more innovative and creative solutions with what tools we had available to us at the time.  He fears that this mindset will disappear if we continue down this current path.  We must resist the urge to continually give names to all new shapes, formats, ideas and inventions that we all come up with in an attempt to commoditise them and sell them on to others for more and more profit. 

He thinks we need to demonstrate solid returns for clients for all of the ideas we give to a client, regardless of the format or what it is, rather than continually trying to turn new spaces we discover into extra formats.

David
Dave thinks that customers right now are fed up being bombarded by endless streams of junk and irrelevant advertising, and that the problem with advertising on the internet is that the signal-to-noise ratio is far too high.  For every good ad there are a hundred bad ones for IM smileys or a free iPod. (Oh come on Dave! If it weren't for those ads we would never have been blessed with "Smack The Monkey" banners).

Phorm, for who Dave now works having left Yahoo! for them recently, aim to help users strip down the junk and address the signal-to-noise problem.  Because 50% of ads don't work, but no one right now knows which 50% of the ads it is, phorm think they can start to target in a much more effective way than has been previously achieved.

Dave also believes that in the past there has been "an arms race" in terms of banner real estate sizes, for which he holds his hands up to some degree during his time at Yahoo!, and that all media owners, by behaving in this way, have been causing a lot of the problems.

He thinks that Phorm again have the key to this, and through their OIX targetting platform, they can help customers receive the ads which are most relevant to them, in turn helping the agencies and clients as well. 

All this with a very anonymous system in which privacy is apparently a key issue which Phorm have taken very seriously.

NOTE: At this point Dave was heckled by a member of the audience who shouted out "You're an advert!" (or something similar, it was hard to hear) basically making the point that Dave was here to talk about Tomorrow's Ad Formats and not just plug Phorm as the cure for cancer.

Mat
Mat claims he really doesn't have much to say about Tomorrow's Ad Formats as he has only worked in PR for about 6 months (perhaps he meant in relation to PR?  Because surely if he is ex-AKQA he would have something to say? To be honest I didn't quite understand what he meant here).

What he does think though is that the current climate feels a bit like the late 90's and that worries him.  He went on to quote from a press release circa 1997 from the IAB claiming that the 468x60 banner was the future of advertising and better than TV ads.

He wanted us to consider this ten years down the road and be careful of what claims we all make incase they come back to bite us in another ten years.

---------------

That's it for now.  Tomorrow (well, hopefully but it is a bank holiday!)  I'll post details from the discussion part of the evening where the panel went on to discuss some format specifics in more detail.

Howard
--

Ghosts_160x600_1 Grabbing hold of current trends in both music sales/distribution and digital advertising/marketing, Trent Reznor's band the Nine Inch Nails (disclaimer: I am and always have been a very big fan) have launched their new instrumental album, Ghosts I-IV, online in a variety of both digital and physical formats with prices ranging from free for the 9-track DRM-Free sampler album to $300 for the Ultra deluxe package.

With a nod towards Radiohead's recent launch of In Rainbows, which they offered online for the price the user felt they wanted to pay and was covered alongside the future of the music business as a whole in great detail in an article by David Byrne for Wired Magazine, Reznor has changed tack slightly by providing a large range of options to suit all pockets.

Free music being what it is recently, with a lot of artists testing the water one way or another, such as Prince with his Daily Mail (gah! must clean mouth out after saying that paper's name) free CD, there are lots of discussions ongoing as to whether this is a solid new approach or simply something already established artists with a loyal fan base are able to exploit at this time.

What really interests me in this instance is what Reznor has done alongside the variable pricing structure for his latest work - which is providing a whole host of other formats to the usual MP3, as well as material specifically designed to act in a marketing context.

When you download the album (I got the $0 version for now, although I will be getting the full thing on pay day!), you get a couple of folders full of wallpaper, the cover art for the album as a JPG, a PDF document which acts like the insert in a CD (some lovely photography contained within) and, most interesting in some ways for us digital marketing types, a whole host of pre-made banner, button and blog header images.

Reznor is doing something very intelligent and interesting here.  Not only is he experimenting with the free music approach, something which in itself will generate a load of PR one way or the other, but he's giving the music itself away in multi-track formats to encourage people to play with and remix his work (something he did previously on other albums, giving it away in Apple Garage band format at least), and by providing the ready made blog and banner formats, he's giving people a way to show their loyalty to the band, and in turn generate a viral style effect for the album which he couldn't possibly hope to achieve on his own or through an agency with a media plan.

By giving away so much stuff, stuff which fans will firstly think is way cool and want to put all over the internet, Reznor's actually giving the fans control over his marketing campaign, truly putting it right into the hands of the people who know and love the most about the band in the first place.

User generated advertising was a buzz word a short time ago, and perhaps still is in certain bars around Soho on a good night, but handing over the control of the campaign, utilising free media space in highly targetted areas with an applicable audience, is IMHO a master stroke and a perfect example of where marketing is possibly going in terms of control and transparency.

Undoubtedly the freedom NIN and the like are now experiencing in terms of no-label is also extending itself into their thinking for no-agency marketing and no-control PR.

In more ways than just my musical taste alone I have to say right now Trent, I am a big fan.

Howard


Picture_5

Thiago de Moraes, digital creative director at CHI & Partners has notched up a very impressive four gongs at last night's 2008 Revolution Awards from five nominations. The awards include the grand prix creative award for the Carphone Warehouse X Factor Challenge. The Carphone Warehouse site is no longer live but you can read all about it here.

You can also check out Thiago's blog for more examples of his creative genius. Congratulations Thiago!

Jonathan

I noticed an interesting post over on the Advertising 2.0 blog today (I believe by the way that we have a mutual friend in Vincent Thome who has mumbled something about combined bloggy drinks?) commenting on a BrandRepublic article about an IAB survey which states that 72% of purchasers of luxury goods did so as a result of seeing an Internet ad, whilst only 70% named magazines and 62% television.

I'm both surprised and not surprised by this.

My own strangely offline gutt instinct is to assume that magazines rule the roost in terms of recall for luxury goods purchasers (classed by the IAB as individuals with an income of £40k+).  The sheer number of magazine titles which contain nearly nothing but full page and double page ads for the sector is astronomical - lifestyle and beauty titles for both men and women are filled with them.  I have no problem with TV being last - the fact that luxury goods really aren't the domain of most prime time viewing ad slots tells me it's not going to be the top of pile.  But Internet beating mags is a surprise to me I must admit.

But, I am also unsurprised by it, and this is perhaps because I cut my digital teeth on luxury goods and I have a lot of fond memories for them and indeed I think I harbour a probably not so secret desire to return to that side of things in some way or other in the future.  Luxury goods, and the style of photography and creative often used in advertising them, works particularly well IMHO when translated from print to digital.  I've done handbags, watches, cosmetics, cars and travel, all in the luxury sectors, and all of them worked well in a kind of brand awareness ATL glossy static late 1990's kind of way.

I remember very clearly from the spring of 2001, post dot-com bubble, discussing some sites I'd worked on with the MD of now very successful web startup that the creative I was showing him looked like magazine ads, and I had to really persuade him I wasn't trying to pull a fast one by just showing him a DPS. I believe his phrase was along the lines of "I didn't know websites could look that good" which was a phrase I loved relaying back to the creative director who did them!

The article goes on to say that according to the IAB luxury consumers spend more time online than they do with any other media, spending a lot of it during the research phase before they go and execute their actual purchase in the real world - where's that changing funnel-to-tumbler research Yahoo!?

I really think that luxury goods helped to pave the way for the massive uptake over the years in Internet advertising, certainly being one of those product sectors along with cars and travel (of which some also fall in the luxury category of course) which really translated naturally into the online space and helped to make digital marketing & advertising the industry it is today.

I'd love to see a similar report on all product categories to see what the percentages associated with recall are across the board but some how I suspect it might not match the scale of the luxury sector, certainly not right now.

Howard

Picture_1 I've only just come across this campaign when Bob at work pointed me in it's direction.

it's a really nice execution for the new Fiat 500 car - very cute by the way and the TV ads are nice IMHO - where comedian Danny Wallace has made a collection of "Everyday Masterpieces", design classics that get overlooked but without which modern life would be rubbish.

Well worth checking out - the flash work is very nicely executed, and the video work revolving around the cult and classic aspect of the original and new 500 car is carefully thought through and delivered.

www.fiat.co.uk

Howard
--

Orange2 Orange are pushing up a new web site to build on their "unlimited" bundles brand theme.

The site, which appears to be from Poke and via Ian Tait of the great blog CrackUnit, is itself never ending, running vertically for as long as you would care to scroll.

And believe me, it appears to be just that - never ending - as I tried to scroll for five mins or so and got nowhere (probably says something about my state of mind!)

beautifully crafted with some lovely illustration, the site's authors state that it's...

"Crammed full of fun stuff and lots of surprises. Some are online, some are mobile things. But all of them demonstrate the notion of ‘unlimited’."

Ian, in his post, goes on to say...

"it’s one of those sites which is really about exploration and experience."

Orange1 And it's great. It really is fun to play with and it makes people interact directly with the brand in probably the most literal way I've seen in a long time.

I've always had my reservations about sites which don't have clear and concise navigation - which make the user hunt around for the content they really want to get to - but I feel that in this case, the navigation probably is the content - and the whole point of it is to just play around and get lost in the weird illustrative world it provides.

As well as just being a good looking piece of creative, it has excellent social network and tools integration, something we are seeing more and more of from brands, but it's still not everywhere so it's a pleasure to see Orange and Poke embracing this trend.  Facebook, StumbleUpon and Del.icio.us are all represented to the full.

There's also good widget integration, with countless embed codes for all sorts of little widgets.  Like this one...

 


It's certainly going to get orange a hell of a lot of PR about it in the blogosphere and beyond - so I'd count that as a success in itself in terms of brand awareness.

Good work Ian and team (I like the trees btw!)

Howard

Found on Advertising 2.0

Blogged with Flock

Tags: , , , ,

Oka_hp OKA Direct, the last site I produced whilst at TEQUILA\ London, just got reviewed in the NMA this week.  It scored a pretty healthy 88% overall.  Congratulations to all the team still at TEQUILA\ as well as those moved on to different strokes. OKA was actually three sites produced at once, RAPT direct and Cath Collins (although CC appears to be down at the moment for some reason) being the other two, all based on a common architecture.  NMA particularly liked the idea of being able to buy a whole room at once, rather than selecting items individually.  Good - that was my idea :) Well done OKA and TEQUILA\ Howard --

Blogged with Flock

Tags: , , , , , ,

How many times have you heard a creative director, MD or other senior manager say in an all agency pep-rally meeting "We're all creatives in this agency - no idea is a bad idea"?

Quite a few times I'll guess.

Well, I want to add to that.  Expand on it if you will...

We're all planners in this agency. No strategy is a bad strategy.

Now, I don't mean literally we all sit around blogging all day waffling on about the planosphere (vincent! :P)- no, what I mean is that in some ways, planning is as much a group activity within a healthy agency environment as is creative thinking.  As is good client relations.  As is wanting to make a profit.  The list goes on....

I was chatting with a planning colleague of mine, and we were talking about the relationship between different departments, and how, to borrow from Logic+Emotion a bit, we all need to overlap, not be silos.  Planning and digital, for example, can work amazingly well together, and insight into the ways people use digital in their daily lives really is something both "departments" can add to.  There's a lot going on right now about combining creative and planning.  Everyone is merging them together again in some way or another. 

For me, the best results on any project happen when you get excited, passionate and informed people together from the start and they all input into the big idea. 

Something I've mentioned a couple of times recently is that, for me, digital strategy in terms of planning a campaign falls into two distinct phases.  The first is the more traditional channel planning phase, overall marketing strategy - what is it we're trying to do, who are we talking to, what's going to fire them up, all that stuff.  The stuff that helps good planners and good account teams write creative briefs that really help creative teams come to life.  The kind of brief that creative teams so often complain they don't get. It's during this phase that it's driven by planners but with others adding value.

The second phase, is the one where we look at digital itself and the whole host of different channels and executions it can contain (see the previous digital ecosystem chart I made which is, quite probably, already out of date!).  This is where digital teams, planners and creatives can all add value, working out what specifically it is in the digital field that is going to best address the requirements identified in phase 1 - the part where we already worked out we want to use digital, but were not sure how exactly.  It's in this phase that it's driven by digital specialists with others adding value.  See the subtle difference?  Both (digital?) strategy phases, but with slightly different drivers.

Phase 1 - what are we doing and, by association, do we want to do it in digital?

Phase 2 - what bits of digital do we want?

To many people these stages can appear to be one and the same - often, when I talk to people about marketing strategy in relation to digital, the distinction isn't clear for them to make.  But make it I believe we must.  They do two different tasks. Both of them essential to good creative output.

We're all planners in this agency.  No strategy is a bad strategy.

Doesn't mean we'll use yours though...

:D

Howard
--

Blogged with Flock

Tags: