Filed under: Online Advertising, Online Branding, Online Video, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising

Yesterday, on Twitter, new follower Mike Keliher (@mjkeliher) pointed out how he wouldn’t tolerate being forced to see an pre-roll ad in order to view a 15 second story. When I asked him why he felt so strongly, his answer was:

@jptrenn 99.9% of the time: entirely irrelevant. More importantly, disrespectful of my time.

I’m no where nearly as absolute on that. I realize that these media properties need to make money and I see pre-roll as a legitimate concept in theory. Still, I don’t blame him for feeling that way. Media properties apply pre-roll entirely wrong, with no concern for the viewer. So here’s a few suggestions. Strong suggestions.

1) Above all, don’t put pre-roll on tragic stories

The last thing I want to see when I click on a story about that tragic accident that killed 68 people, including 23 children, is a frigging commercial for indigestion. While other times pre roll ads are inconvenient, at times like this, it is completely offensive.

2) Don’t put pre-roll on breaking stories

Sorry, but while these stories are the ones most likely to be clicked on, when people click on them, they often so so with as sense of urgency. To the viewer, the content is compelling and they don’t want an interruption. It could hurt the advertiser as it hurts the viewer experience.

3) Make the ads relevant

If I go to view an add about baseball spring training, give me a travel ad to Florida or Arizona. Or one about sports. Don’t just something up there. As Mike says, 99.9% irrelevant.

4) One pre roll per user session please

Otherwise, it begins to ruin the experience.

5) If more than one…

…then make sure there’s about 4-6 news stories viewed between ads. And don’t show the same one twice.

I write all of this because I understand a believe that most news sites thankfully don’t come with subscription fees. They make their money by advertising. So I’m trying to find a reasonable balance.

What are your thoughts?

5 Comments » Posted on March 7th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: Ad Budgets, Ad Buys, Ad Sales, Advertisements, Advertising, Brand, Brand Advocacy, Brand Intelligence, Brand Promotion, Brand Reputation, Branding, Branding Online, Commercials, Internet, Internet Culture, Internet Strategy, Market Research, Marketing, New Marketing, New Media, New Media Strategy, Old Marketing, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Online Brand Promotion, Online Branding, Online Collaboration, Online Copywriting, Targeted Advertising, Technology, Technology Strategy, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising, Web Applications, Web Apps, Web Metrics, Web Services, Web Strategy, Website Design, What About Clients?, ads

In my last post, I talked of the coming disruption of the three way relationship between marketer, agency, and media property. Essentially it centers on the idea that marketers (who are often behind themselves) are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the lack of digital savvy of their agencies and are now turning to media properties for strategic ideas and creative capabiliites. And these media properties are making themselves all the more ready, willing, and able to carry out the needs and wishes of the marketers.

I believe that that’s happening. But there’s still a big problem with that model. Consistent brand messaging

On a micro-level, this new way of doing things makes perfect sense. Crafting an marketing campaign tailored to the offerings of an online property could maximize the effectiveness of the campaign itself. For that media property.

But last I looked, most advertisers don’t use all their spend on one property. They’ll pick many properties in many channels. They’ll test here and there. They’ll sometimes concentrate on branding, sometimes concentrate on direct , sometimes (and the web makes this more possible, concentrate on both.

If the marketer - the company that is the end client - has to tailor each of its marketing messages to that of the publisher, chaos could result.

Publishers will need to realize this and further expand their services, sort of becoming almost full service for their advertisers. But still, this still could run into brand confusion as each publisher will owe it to their paying client to create the most effective campaign for their specific property or properties, leaving potentially different and confusing brand messages across several media properties.

Wise agencies should see this as the window of opportunity and work with publishers before they even get clients to formulate the framework for effective marketing campaigns that can perform very effectively over a cross section of properties and platforms.

2 Comments » Posted on March 6th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: 2008 Elections, Ad Budgets, Ad Buys, Ad Sales, Election Strategy, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Political Strategy, Web Ads, Web Advertising, Web Strategy

In showing a sharp contrast that reflects the different mindsets of the campaigns of the two remaining Democratic candidates, Kate Kay of MediaPost writes:

Senator Barack Obama wants voters in Texas and Ohio to vote early, and his campaign is running huge video-enabled billboard ads to promote the convenient option. Yet, despite a desperate need to beat her Democratic opponent in the two states in Tuesday’s primaries, Senator Hillary Clinton’s camp doesn’t seem to be running Web display ads at all.

Not for anything, but one of the complaints about the Clinton campaign is that hit has been too top down. To me, this is another reflection of that. Now, it seems she is running negative ads versus Obama, a somewhat necessary tactic but hardly inspirational.

Web ads don’t necessarily show dispersed control. But the lack of them shows me that a campaign is run by traditioanlists who see TV and direct mail as the only way to go. TV and direct mail are vital, but not as vital as they used to be.

Obama’s team is smartly placing ads on newspaper sites. Like here. And here. Truth be told, they’re not great ads. They show reconstituted TV ads - a bad idea. But at least they’re doing something.

No Comments » Posted on March 3rd, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: Abraham Harrison, Abraham Harrison LLC, Advertisements, Advertising, Brand, Brand Advocacy, Brand Promotion, Branded Entertainment, Branding, Branding Online, Broadcast Advertising, Commercials, Firebrand TV, Firebrand.com, History of Advertising, History of Marketing, History of PR, Intellectual Property, Internet Culture, Mainstream Media, Marketing, Marketing Conversation, Media Purchases, Messaging Online, Mobile, Networks, New Marketing, New Media, New Media Marketing, New Media Strategy, New Technology, Old Marketing, Old Media, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Online Brand Promotion, Online Branding, Online Facilitation, Online Marketing, Online Media, Online Messaging, Online Pitch, Online Video, Shameless Self-Promotion, Streaming Video, Super Bowl, Super Bowl Ads, Super Bowl Commercials, TV Advertising, TV over IP, TV-on-Demand, Television, Television Over IP, Traditional Media, Traditional PR, Video Over IP, Viral Marketing, Viral Media, Web 2.0, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising, Web Applications, Web Apps, Web Strategy





Yeah, I know. You hate commercials. You hate the sudden interruption of your favorite show to see three, four, or five thirty-second poorly created hard-to-differentiate video presentations on a product you don’t like, don’t want, don’t need, or don’t use.

Me too.

You want to get back to the show, the game, the newscast. See the bad guy get his ass nailed, the final two minutes of the tight game, or news on the latest scoop on the election cycle. The last thing you want to see is a series of presentations about pills that can make you pee better, a car that supposedly makes you cool, and a law firm that chases ambulances.

Me too.

But every once and a while, you’ll watch something that will catch your eye. It will make you laugh. Chuckle inside. You’ll be able to relate to it. Or you’ll be impressed because it’s impressive, not because the commercial is trying to pretend that it’s impressive with itself. Or you’ll think, shit, how did they do that?

Me too.

If that’s what happens, then that’s a commercial that will likely end up on Firebrand.

Read more…

No Comments » Posted on January 30th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Filed under: Abraham Harrison LLC, Ad Budgets, Ad Buys, Ad Sales, Advertising, Brand Promotion, Branding, Branding Online, Broadcast Advertising, Broadcast Radio, Business 2.0, Facebook Beacon, Facebook Social Ads, Internet, Marketing, New Media, New Media Marketing, New Media Strategy, New PR, New Public Relations, Old Media, Online Ads, Online Advertising, Online Brand Promotion, Online Branding, Online Marketing, Social Meda, TV Advertising, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web Ads, Web Advertisers, Web Advertising, Web Strategy, Website Design

Two articles caught my eye earlier this week.

One was an AdAge article entitled “So Much for Engagement; Buys Are Still Based on Eyes”. It talked about a recent study by Advertiser Perceptions. Marketers and media buyers are looking to spend more and more dollars online. That’s because their first and foremost metric is reach - and that’s were people are going today. Online. But they see it more as a results oriented medium and are not doing it for engagement purposes as they don’t perceive that the online is good for engagement. This study was based on a survey of 2047 marketers and their media buyers.

The second one was a press release of a report put out by the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) Council. It described how measurable ROI is becoming an increasingly important factor for marketers as they transform dollars online. Accountabilty is of prime importance as marketers look to measure the value of the programs they’ve created and the investments they’ve made. A result of this trend in 2007 was the relative high turnover of the agencies used - ad, web design, and PR - to carry out these programs. The reasons for the severing of relationships was often tied into “lack of innovation” and “no value-added thinking”. Hmm…

Read more…

5 Comments » Posted on January 18th, 2008 by Jonathan Trenn

Next Page »

  • blog advertising is good for you