We just got home three hours ago from being away for two weeks. Stuck to our front door was a business card that simply said on the front: Better Homes Painting. On the back it read: "Better Homes Painting, Nicole Angeles, Edwin Rios, Painting and Lawn Care," (Then contact information was listed.) Valuable for me to know if I need painting or lawn care done. Especially if the painters will offer me a lower price that competitors.
But I want to reinforce one more point. Sometimes ads inform you that there is indeed a real qualitive difference between goods or services. Throughout business history entrepreneurs and businesspeople have produced "better mousetraps," so to speak. If you have, don't you want potential customers to know about it? Especially if the mousetrap will enable your business to do a better job for the consumer and do it more quickly. Or a new product no one else has thought of that will benefit consumers?
Sure, I use the TV mute button frequently and marvel at the inane content of many ads. But let's not throw the baby with the bathwater. The baby may be bigger than you think.
Great suggestions for questions to ask!! I also find interesting how social media changed how companies advertise. They send their products to people (with many followers) and have them do the ad. If you trust the person making the recommendation, that adds value to it.
Frankly, I'm more concerned about the effect of ads on would-be influencers than the effect of influencers on the ads. So many kids want to be influencers when they grow up because that's what they know. Sort of like half the kids think they're going to be pro athletes.
(Hey, this is a good subject for another post! Thanks!)
An interesting article. When I worked with students, I generally broke advertising into two major aspects/goals: 1. It provides information that a good or service is on the market, that is, something is for sale. Or, 2: It provides information to persuade you to buy a certain good or service on the market. Teachers often focus on the negative part of the second aspect/goal and train students how not to be deceived by certain types of ads. This can have some merit, but I think teachers often forget about the first component above, that ads truly do provide scarce information that is valuable. Examples abound, such as when you are driving on the interstate and are looking for a Starbucks or another particular restaurant. If there were no signs, how would you know which exit to take? (Now whether or not those ads should be on large billboards or on small signs showing multiple restaurants is another interesting discussion!) Maybe worthy of another Paper Robots?
Hi dad, I thought you'd answer like this! I think the information part of an ad is usually rather small, but it's there and it's important. The bigger part of it is connecting the ad to the brand--the story. The ad tells you the product is there and lets you know how the company wants to present itself and be thought of. Then the company has to act in line with its brand if the brand is to mean anything.
I added another paragraph to bring this association out more. I wish it was in the original that went out on email!
What percentage ads do you think are good by your definition? I’d think it’s basically zero percent. The product might be worthwhile, but they all go way beyond providing information. Even the ones where two actors have a contrived conversation about a product to flesh out the value — “And there’s no interest for a year!” “No interest, no way!” — it’s all manipulative, with half truths and carefully constructed scenes and unreadable caveats at the bottom of the screen.
To answer the question directly: I'd guess that 25% of what ads provide is informational (with wide variation between ads: some about zero and some more than 50%).
Honored to be thought of! I know about the brand personality thing — I just think it obscures rather than illuminates for the consumer, even if it helps discipline a company internally (which isn’t really my concern). The exact same product could get wildly different brand personalities depending on which marketing firm is making the pitch and whether the new CEO has different aesthetic intuitions than the last one. What we are buying isn’t the Coke; it’s the identity that the company is pretending you gain from drinking Coke. Which is to say, we’re buying the ad, not the product. So to me, a brand personality is itself a lie, generally speaking.
Regarding percentages, I meant how many ads reach the threshold of being good rather than how much of a given ad’s content is informational. All in all, I see just about every ad as falling below the threshold I’d like to see in an ideal world.
Great question. You know what's funny, I had both you and my dad in mind when I was writing thing, and you both were my first two commenters. Dad being accepting of ads, and you being skeptical, as I had supposed. I had to think more, and actually added a short paragraph above as part of the answer.
Here's what I wrote: "Think of brands and ads as similar to how a person interacts with other people. How we present ourselves and how we want to be thought of is our brand. Our clothes are like ads; a superficial but important introduction to our brand. If we wish to maintain our brand, we have to act in alignment with it in everything we do."
By this definition, not many ads strictly provide useful information, but almost all of them give an introduction to the brand. And the brand is important because it disciplines a company. I truly think this is a valuable economic contribution. In my own work I've experienced how the desire to maintain a consistent brand extends to all aspects of a firm's functioning. You don't want people to have bad associations with the brand, so you provide customer service, for example.
The ad is superficial, like clothing. For example, I still wear skateboard shoes, which is the one way that my clothing is anything other that urban business casual (attempting to be hip but falling short.) It's not a lie that I skate -- I still do a bit -- but the shoes message the brand more than anything. (I used to be cool! :-D )
We just got home three hours ago from being away for two weeks. Stuck to our front door was a business card that simply said on the front: Better Homes Painting. On the back it read: "Better Homes Painting, Nicole Angeles, Edwin Rios, Painting and Lawn Care," (Then contact information was listed.) Valuable for me to know if I need painting or lawn care done. Especially if the painters will offer me a lower price that competitors.
But I want to reinforce one more point. Sometimes ads inform you that there is indeed a real qualitive difference between goods or services. Throughout business history entrepreneurs and businesspeople have produced "better mousetraps," so to speak. If you have, don't you want potential customers to know about it? Especially if the mousetrap will enable your business to do a better job for the consumer and do it more quickly. Or a new product no one else has thought of that will benefit consumers?
Sure, I use the TV mute button frequently and marvel at the inane content of many ads. But let's not throw the baby with the bathwater. The baby may be bigger than you think.
Great suggestions for questions to ask!! I also find interesting how social media changed how companies advertise. They send their products to people (with many followers) and have them do the ad. If you trust the person making the recommendation, that adds value to it.
And I agree, wait to hit the buy button!
Frankly, I'm more concerned about the effect of ads on would-be influencers than the effect of influencers on the ads. So many kids want to be influencers when they grow up because that's what they know. Sort of like half the kids think they're going to be pro athletes.
(Hey, this is a good subject for another post! Thanks!)
That's true! Which also means kids having social media accounts too early!
Yuuup
An interesting article. When I worked with students, I generally broke advertising into two major aspects/goals: 1. It provides information that a good or service is on the market, that is, something is for sale. Or, 2: It provides information to persuade you to buy a certain good or service on the market. Teachers often focus on the negative part of the second aspect/goal and train students how not to be deceived by certain types of ads. This can have some merit, but I think teachers often forget about the first component above, that ads truly do provide scarce information that is valuable. Examples abound, such as when you are driving on the interstate and are looking for a Starbucks or another particular restaurant. If there were no signs, how would you know which exit to take? (Now whether or not those ads should be on large billboards or on small signs showing multiple restaurants is another interesting discussion!) Maybe worthy of another Paper Robots?
Hi dad, I thought you'd answer like this! I think the information part of an ad is usually rather small, but it's there and it's important. The bigger part of it is connecting the ad to the brand--the story. The ad tells you the product is there and lets you know how the company wants to present itself and be thought of. Then the company has to act in line with its brand if the brand is to mean anything.
I added another paragraph to bring this association out more. I wish it was in the original that went out on email!
What percentage ads do you think are good by your definition? I’d think it’s basically zero percent. The product might be worthwhile, but they all go way beyond providing information. Even the ones where two actors have a contrived conversation about a product to flesh out the value — “And there’s no interest for a year!” “No interest, no way!” — it’s all manipulative, with half truths and carefully constructed scenes and unreadable caveats at the bottom of the screen.
To answer the question directly: I'd guess that 25% of what ads provide is informational (with wide variation between ads: some about zero and some more than 50%).
Honored to be thought of! I know about the brand personality thing — I just think it obscures rather than illuminates for the consumer, even if it helps discipline a company internally (which isn’t really my concern). The exact same product could get wildly different brand personalities depending on which marketing firm is making the pitch and whether the new CEO has different aesthetic intuitions than the last one. What we are buying isn’t the Coke; it’s the identity that the company is pretending you gain from drinking Coke. Which is to say, we’re buying the ad, not the product. So to me, a brand personality is itself a lie, generally speaking.
Regarding percentages, I meant how many ads reach the threshold of being good rather than how much of a given ad’s content is informational. All in all, I see just about every ad as falling below the threshold I’d like to see in an ideal world.
Great question. You know what's funny, I had both you and my dad in mind when I was writing thing, and you both were my first two commenters. Dad being accepting of ads, and you being skeptical, as I had supposed. I had to think more, and actually added a short paragraph above as part of the answer.
Here's what I wrote: "Think of brands and ads as similar to how a person interacts with other people. How we present ourselves and how we want to be thought of is our brand. Our clothes are like ads; a superficial but important introduction to our brand. If we wish to maintain our brand, we have to act in alignment with it in everything we do."
By this definition, not many ads strictly provide useful information, but almost all of them give an introduction to the brand. And the brand is important because it disciplines a company. I truly think this is a valuable economic contribution. In my own work I've experienced how the desire to maintain a consistent brand extends to all aspects of a firm's functioning. You don't want people to have bad associations with the brand, so you provide customer service, for example.
The ad is superficial, like clothing. For example, I still wear skateboard shoes, which is the one way that my clothing is anything other that urban business casual (attempting to be hip but falling short.) It's not a lie that I skate -- I still do a bit -- but the shoes message the brand more than anything. (I used to be cool! :-D )