Being direct... AdVantage Jan 2002
Are we making our Customers the 'Victims' of our Advertising efforts?
As I write this particular column - it is holiday time, and from a geographical point of view, I am amongst the crazy traffic jams and the 'we're full' signs that is Plettenberg Bay between Christmas and New Year. I am also mentally aware of the fact that whilst I might be enjoying my holiday right now, I am going to be faced with the deadline for the column - the day I return to work on January 7th 2002. So, what's to write about…at a time when your head is filled with the sounds of the sea - but you also know that your readers will be long back at the 'daily-grind' by the time that they read this?
Then I remembered a fascinating item that I had read about a so-called 'phenomenon' taking place right now in the US, and thought that I would share it with our AdVantage readers. I subscribe to a e-list that keeps me up to date with happenings in the world of US Media (and particularly the Internet), and a recent item had brought my attention to a fairly new web-based service called 'Gator' - the acceptance of which has been described as 'phenomenal'.
Gator is a company that produces a 'cool' wallet-type computer application, which combines with your Internet Browser. It does a couple of things, like filling in forms and remembering passwords, but we're also told that it also 'replaces' ads running on a particular website, with some of its own. Well, according to my source, this fact had the US advertising industry in rather a tizzy - calling the service a whole bunch of names ranging from an 'unfair trade practice', to 'being in violation' of the American constitution.
Intriguingly enough though, the guys at Gator may indeed not be 'interfering' with the distribution (or publishing) of ad content on a particular site, because the application sits on the users computer and apparently switches out 'the stuff' that the customer/user has elected not to have. This makes website advertising pre-emption a personal issue based on the preferences of the individual. The various threats of legal action by the ad-selling community have, we are told, so far come to nothing.
One of the more important aspects of the impact of services like Gator is the consumer response to their perceived ability to 'shut-out' advertising that they would prefer not to have. The 'opt-in' audience targeting allowed by the Gator application, provides messages that are more relevant to such audience, and this is confirmed by the difference in click-through rates being experienced by Gator. Instead of the usual .5% currently being delivered by websites in general, Gator is apparently delivering click-through rates in the band between 6% and 26%.
The report summarized this issue by suggesting that it's actually quite hard to tell why an individual would choose to load the 'free' Gator application. For many it is because they can avoid having to fill in the many laborious forms that virtually every Internet site wants you to complete these days, before they will give you access to whatever it is that you want. For others it's about the targeted advertising, for yet others it may be about the specific promotions that may be on offer from time to time, via Gator. But in the end, all of the users of the service seem to have opted out of the normal industry chain of advertising - simply because they can be a lot more selective. This says a lot about the market's attitude towards advertising in general, and may be a bit of the 'chickens coming home to roost' effect of even more and more and more and more advertising!!
What intrigues me is exactly the point that consumers (OK, we recognise that we are talking about the somewhat over-hyped US market) could be giving us a somewhat subtle message. (Even though we are, in some respects, a little behind the times here on the Southern tip of Africa - the principles do remain the same). Consumers may well be getting a little 'gatvol' of the idea that the marketers and media owners have all the 'rights' and that they must simply carry on 'reward less' - having their every waking moment interrupted yet again and again - by some or other commercial message. In my humble opinion, the backlash may already have started. If we're honest with ourselves, the level at which the commercial desires of marketing companies now impact on the lives of ordinary people - really is getting a little one-sided, and when people feel that they are being taken advantage of: Guess what? They rebel. Lower response rates to advertising stimuli may be early signs of this backlash.
Does this mean the death of advertising? No, of course not. From my personal viewpoint, I do think that it does mean that we have to be more mindful of the lack of respect demonstrated by much of the advertising that 'attacks' us via the media these days. Much of it assaults the senses in its quest to communicate. It shouts. It cajoles. On television particularly, the frequency of exposure - particularly of station and programme-promo's, can and often has, become nauseating. Anybody who watches Discovery Channel will know exactly what I mean!
So, as we contemplate the new calendar/business year, let us also take a moment to think about how, in the interests of the customer relationship with our brand, we can try and avoid using advertising in such a completely one-sided way. The people who consume the media in which we place our advertising are often also our customers, and so why spend your own perhaps limited money, simply pissing-off the very people that you are trying to encourage to be positive towards your brand. The growth of services like Gator gives real substance to the issue of advertising overload. We should pay it heed!!
When you get to read this, the year will already be at least one twelfth down the toilet - but have a great 2002 anyway!