When targeted web ads aren't as good as untargeted ones
Jeff Jarvis made an interesting post to BuzzMachine this morning that got me thinking.
There's an underwear ad currently in the upper right of his blog. A reader made a comment about it not being relevant. (See screenshot of the ad, and reader's comment here) Jeff's witty response was, "Isn’t underwear relevant to us all?"
The man has a point. I'm sure most people reading his blog use this product known as "underwear" on a regular basis. But I also understand what the reader is getting at -- why an underwear ad on a business blog?
This is a perfect example of an untargeted web ad. The company selling the underwear isn't serving the ad based on searches for underwear, nor do they seem to be targeting a certain demographic or psychographic profile with this ad. If they wanted to target, they'd be buying Google AdWords or Facebook ads where they could choose the age, gender, education, location, and a bunch of other factors. This is something Facebook does particularly well -- see Matt Dickman's post and brief video tutorial on Facebook ad targeting.
For selling many products and services, targeting is great. In the case of Facebook targeted ads, you can reach only the buyers who match your pre-defined profile of a potential customer. This type of advertising eliminates waste, and it can make your ads more relevant to the potential customer. With Google AdWords displayed within search results, you're reaching customers who are actively looking for something. Google does a wonderful job of bringing together buyers and sellers, and that's what's turned the company into the powerhouse it is today.
Targeting too finely can sometimes hurt your marketing. What if you're wrong about who your potential customers are -- or should be? What if you think 18-24 year olds are your prime audience, but it turns out that 25-34 year olds end up loving your product while the younger crowd doesn't like it? If you're targeting ads solely to the 18-24 set and the 25-34 audience never sees it, your campaign will flop.
What if your product has mass appeal? Is targeting necessary? Hmm...
But getting back to the underwear ad on Jeff's blog. Is the ad really selling underwear? I say no. If it was selling underwear, a click-through would take you to a product category page that lets you choose underwear, or maybe even to this specific pair. But it doesn't. A click-through takes you to AmericanApparel.net -- that's right, their home page. Gasp!
I can't tell you how many times I've coached advertisers not to link their ad to their home page. It's accepted wisdom in the online ad industry nowadays. But in this case it works, because the advertiser isn't selling underwear. They're selling their brand, their style, their image.
They're also looking for buzz. Look, it's already generated several blog posts, a bunch of thought by readers, and no doubt plenty of click-throughs. Hmm...that's exactly what they were trying to accomplish. Their ad gets "extra legs" because there's a small controversy surrounding it.
The only question mark in my mind about this ad is its appropriateness in the workplace. I noticed the ad yesterday on Jeff's blog. I remember seeing it, being surprised that it was appearing on a business blog, and intentionally scrolling farther down the page so nobody saw it on my screen. So in that sense, it might be a little too edgy.
Overall I like the advertiser's untargeted approach here. Sure, a targeted ad on Facebook could have helped them reach the right demographics. A Google AdWords search ad could have put them in front of people searching for clothing. And they might be doing one or both of those things. But there's a lot to say for buzz and branding to a wider audience -- and this ad accomplishes those goals well.
There's an underwear ad currently in the upper right of his blog. A reader made a comment about it not being relevant. (See screenshot of the ad, and reader's comment here) Jeff's witty response was, "Isn’t underwear relevant to us all?"
The man has a point. I'm sure most people reading his blog use this product known as "underwear" on a regular basis. But I also understand what the reader is getting at -- why an underwear ad on a business blog?
This is a perfect example of an untargeted web ad. The company selling the underwear isn't serving the ad based on searches for underwear, nor do they seem to be targeting a certain demographic or psychographic profile with this ad. If they wanted to target, they'd be buying Google AdWords or Facebook ads where they could choose the age, gender, education, location, and a bunch of other factors. This is something Facebook does particularly well -- see Matt Dickman's post and brief video tutorial on Facebook ad targeting.
For selling many products and services, targeting is great. In the case of Facebook targeted ads, you can reach only the buyers who match your pre-defined profile of a potential customer. This type of advertising eliminates waste, and it can make your ads more relevant to the potential customer. With Google AdWords displayed within search results, you're reaching customers who are actively looking for something. Google does a wonderful job of bringing together buyers and sellers, and that's what's turned the company into the powerhouse it is today.
Targeting too finely can sometimes hurt your marketing. What if you're wrong about who your potential customers are -- or should be? What if you think 18-24 year olds are your prime audience, but it turns out that 25-34 year olds end up loving your product while the younger crowd doesn't like it? If you're targeting ads solely to the 18-24 set and the 25-34 audience never sees it, your campaign will flop.
What if your product has mass appeal? Is targeting necessary? Hmm...
But getting back to the underwear ad on Jeff's blog. Is the ad really selling underwear? I say no. If it was selling underwear, a click-through would take you to a product category page that lets you choose underwear, or maybe even to this specific pair. But it doesn't. A click-through takes you to AmericanApparel.net -- that's right, their home page. Gasp!
I can't tell you how many times I've coached advertisers not to link their ad to their home page. It's accepted wisdom in the online ad industry nowadays. But in this case it works, because the advertiser isn't selling underwear. They're selling their brand, their style, their image.
They're also looking for buzz. Look, it's already generated several blog posts, a bunch of thought by readers, and no doubt plenty of click-throughs. Hmm...that's exactly what they were trying to accomplish. Their ad gets "extra legs" because there's a small controversy surrounding it.
The only question mark in my mind about this ad is its appropriateness in the workplace. I noticed the ad yesterday on Jeff's blog. I remember seeing it, being surprised that it was appearing on a business blog, and intentionally scrolling farther down the page so nobody saw it on my screen. So in that sense, it might be a little too edgy.
Overall I like the advertiser's untargeted approach here. Sure, a targeted ad on Facebook could have helped them reach the right demographics. A Google AdWords search ad could have put them in front of people searching for clothing. And they might be doing one or both of those things. But there's a lot to say for buzz and branding to a wider audience -- and this ad accomplishes those goals well.
0 comments:
Post a Comment