by: Alain Thys
Imagine you’re a consumer and you leaf through your favourite magazine. Suddenly you see a brand that interests you. Hey, maybe it’s that product you always wanted but never thought existed. Living in the 21st century, your instant reaction is to go online and find out more about it. But have you ever noticed that in spite of all the web two-point-naught hubbub, most of the ads you look at don’t carry a URL?
I’m working on a remake of I Am the Media, so I asked one of our bright and diligent researchers to do a count of the last 4 months of print campaigns on Ads of the World. And the gut feeling was confirmed. 70% of them didn’t contain any URL.
Note: click the image to read the report
Now what does that say about brands? Don’t they want us to interact with them? Are they afraid we might do something drastic and - after a few online clicks - actually buy the product that was advertised.
Or about the agencies? After all the talk about “being digital”, are they forgetting to advise their customers about the multi-channel reality? Or have they become so cynical that they assume a print ad is not going to have any effect anyway?
I cannot believe that I’m writing this in AD 2008 but: “A URL on a print advert should be the default option. Only if it really doesn’t make any sense, it should be removed.” If you manage to capture a potential customer’s attention, you don’t want to let go.
It does make me wonder though. Is all this talk about conversations, communities, engagement, … still in the fringes? Are we just a little in-crowd of believers talking to each other? Do the customers I deal with live in a parallel universe instead of the real – more traditional – market?
Should I tone down I am the Media 2009, and get back to basics? Any thoughts are welcome.
UPDATE: Based on the - correct - comment by Stan that Ads of the World is not a representative sample of print advertising I have changed the title to this article to "on AOTW". Also see comments section below for a wider reply.
I'm merely a client side guy so probably a bit slow in getting the ad crowd logic.
But what I'm hearing (incorrectly?) is that the AOTW disciples in their heart care more about creativity and aesthetics than impact and results.
Considering almost every major agency on the planet is on their books, this is worrisome. Perhaps the 2009-2010 agency shakeout will not be such a bad thing after all.
70% of ads on Ads of the World are spec, too. But they also represent an entirely different market, within the advertising community.
Hi guys, Great comments.
First things first. Stan is right. AOTL is not necessarily representative of the rest of the world. I did a spot check myself using two magazines I had handy. On the plane from Hamburg I went through the Economist which hit a straight 100% URL score. Coming home I did the same with a Belgian TV-magazine which hit - give or take a bit - 45%. While there is probably variance, the point is noted and - as you can see in the post update - corrected.
While I don't want to go as far as saying that every ad "must" have a URL, I do maintain it should be the "default" option. If only to "force" the multichannel conversation. At least so there is a conscious "decision" not to include it rather than forgetfulness.
As such I believe Denise's point on integration is very valid. The only thing I’d argue is that imho “every” campaign should be integrated into one overall brand approach. Which essentially means at the core we’re saying the same.
As for “people will find you” … well, that assumes that the brand is easy to find online, which in our experience is not always the case. This obviously goes beyond the “print/URL” issue and is probably a symptom of brands ignoring their online relevance (deliberately avoiding the word SEO :-) But that is another story.
The call to action point … yes and no. As a former shopkeeper I'll be the last to say that a call to action has no value. I made quite a bit of money with it.
On the other hand it is often a relic of the marketer's desire to describe how they want consumers to behave based on the brand impulses that are given to them. But if my mother wants to behave in a different way (and believe me she has a point of view), that should also be possible. We shouldn’t close ourselves to the opportunity of ANY communication.
My summary point being:
A. Stan, you're right about sample selection so it's probably not as dramatic as posted (thanks! and frankly I’m happy about it)
B. While I’m not saying there MUST be a URL, it should be the default option. If a consumer WANTS to engage, we should make it as easy as possible for him. Including a URL is part of that mix
But then again, that's just my opinion ;-)
Thanks for the views !
I agree and disagree:
- yes, marketers should include URLs in print ads when they are running an integrated campaign -- and by integrated, I mean using the different strengths of different media to move people through the purchase decision-process
- no, marketers shouldn't just automatically include their URLs -- most anybody knows that if they see a print ad for say, Ketel One Vodka, and want more info, they can either go to ketelone.com or they can do a quick search and find the page easily -- unless the URL serves a specific purpose (as in the integrated campaign point I've made above, then it's not necessary
Agree on Stan's point. On top of that, 75-80% of all internet users don't go URL browsing. Instead they Google whatever they want. This means recognition is KEY.
BUT, that said. Of course Integration should be extremely important. Meaning that once someone Google that product they read about, the landing page should in some way resemble what they were communicating in that print ad. This is usually totally overseen...and if it's not the integration is about sending people along to another campaign when the visitors to a site actually has completed their search
I suppose it partly depends on the purpose of the advert, and whether the advert is intending to make a call to action performed online.
Shampoo adverts, for instance, are just trying to raise awareness about their product so they're front of mind when you eventually make your decision (in the shop, physical or online). You're hardly going to type in a URL to find out more about the shampoo before making your purchase.
Having said that, it does no harm having a URL and I think it lends a product or company credibility that they have an online presence backing up whatever is being advertised.
I agree with Stan Lee. This research will be more accurate if the experiment contains more different magazines and ads.
However, I DO believe that far to much companies don't understand and use multi-channel advertising. The integration of different mediatools is crucial!
Whilst I don't wish to dispute your findings, I would like to question their accuracy.
Ads of The World is not the best source for research of this type.
It is run by creatives for creatives. So much of the print work shown there carry small logos in the bottom right hand corner and not much else.
I don't like to use the term scam so I won't. Many of the ads on AOTW have been tailored for award shows and the folio. Not the client.
I suspect if your researcher used magazines for their research, the results would be somewhat different.