181–190 of 282 posts
In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've certainly looked at ads in magazines, billboards, tv commercials (before tivo) and even those small planes pulling banners at the beach. I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure…
If I have a new product that I want people to become aware of then digital advertising, appropriately planned and targeted, can be very effective.
In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've certainly looked at ads in magazines, billboards, tv commercials (before tivo) and even those small planes pulling banners at the beach. I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure…
In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've certainly looked at ads in magazines, billboards, tv commercials (before tivo) and even those small planes pulling banners at the beach. I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure…
It is effective, and cheap at that. I run a small-ish left wing FB site and Twitter account, and regularly do small scale advertising - either to rally people up for a demonstration, or to annoy right-wingers. Proper targetting makes this incredibly easy, and judging by the numbers it works out just fine.
I've worked in and around marketing/advertising for the last 6 years in different capacities and have found that the emphasis on audience hyper-segmentation and retargeting to the exclusion of other methods is the single biggest piece of bullshit out there. Targeting people based on what they are apparently interested in vs. places they go that reflect those interests doesn't give better results and can turn off your…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a pipe dream; but advertising/lobbying deserves regulatory hurdles much like other public health threats (e.g. tobacco). And before anyone shouts "freedom of speech" - we already do that extensively for stuff like fraud, libel, and incitement to violence/terrorism, so this isn't really anything particularly new. It's simply detrimental to the overall ability for us to think .
> And before anyone shouts "freedom of speech" - we already do that extensively for stuff like fraud, libel, and incitement to violence/terrorism, so this isn't really anything particularly new. So the slippery slope people were right after all.
It seems the issue is "overtargeting" of ads P&G ads don't work like that. Their products appeal to a broad range of people, same as their ads. Specialized targeting literally does nothing to improve conversion (and keeping their product in mind)
They sell a broad range of products, but not all of them appeal to a broad range of people. They can surely improve conversion by marketing men's razors to men and women's razors to women, for example.
It seems the issue is "overtargeting" of ads P&G ads don't work like that. Their products appeal to a broad range of people, same as their ads. Specialized targeting literally does nothing to improve conversion (and keeping their product in mind)
They sell a broad range of products, but not all of them appeal to a broad range of people. They can surely improve conversion by marketing men's razors to men and women's razors to women, for example.
What online ads allow you to target is "men between 28-32 from eastern Europe who like Formula 1 and Classical Music"
In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've certainly looked at ads in magazines, billboards, tv commercials (before tivo) and even those small planes pulling banners at the beach. I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure…
In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've certainly looked at ads in magazines, billboards, tv commercials (before tivo) and even those small planes pulling banners at the beach. I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure…
I haven't intentionally clicked on an ad nor have I intentionally look at an ad in magazines, tv commericals, etc. I've gotten rid of my magazine subs years ago and haven't owned a TV in years. > I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. Depends on the type. Certain google/facebook ads get far better traction than any traditional ad. The truth of the matter is all ads are ineffective. It's just…
digital ads are not always easy to track. a lot of malware is dedicated to filling your cookies with visits so that if you happen to buy something, they can claim you saw the ad prior and take credit. in many cases, a digital add campaign creates such a tiny blip in sales its hard to differentiate from randomness, were as a TV ad shows floods of sales.
> The best thing for ad industry is if traditional media dies and goes away and then they could focus their attention on "digital" rather than traditional/print.
traditional advertising, namely TV, is still the most successful way to increase sales for many companies. since digital ads leads to so few sales, even the platforms have often moved away from 'advertise to produce sales' to advertise for brand management.