The Future of Advertising: Fewer, Different is More
I didn’t grow up with a TV, so I wasn’t trained from an early age to sit through ads. Now, when I watch the tube (and I’ve been doing a lot of that these days), I have an almost allergic reaction to ads. I once cornered an ABC executive at a wedding and chastised him for how they rolled out advertising on their online player. Why would you interrupt Ugly Betty three or four times per episode with the same Nasonex commercial? Why would you let an advertiser do this? It’s terrible for everyone. He responded with a shrug, and mumbled something about “working out the kinks.” I never watched online again.
So imagine my surprise when the Harvard Business Review posted a study saying that people "reported greater enjoyment when shows were interrupted by commercials." The lead researcher concluded that interruptions, not the ads themselves, lead to greater enjoyment. Bathroom break, anyone?
I'd like to suggest an alternate interpretation: The commercials have a "framing" effect. If someone is sponsoring media, it must be of higher value. My interpretation isn't based in science -- it's based on personal experience. There’s a subtle cue when movies go straight to On Demand – they aren’t worth the marketing effort. And they probably aren’t worth my time either. But a blockbuster that gets all the extra playtime? Now you’ve got my attention.
Fine, so commercials add perceived value. Is that going to get me to watch them? Not entirely. But networks are catching on, and reducing the pain-points that get in the way of this framing effect. For A-level shows On Demand, Comcast’s commercial breaks show only one ad at a time, and ads vary over the course of the show. The result? I've started watching the ads. It's actually more efficient to watch one 30 second interruption than to fast forward, miss the start of the show, and then rewind and end up watching most of the ad anyway. (In related news, Comcast has also adjusted the response of DVR controls so that the play head drops back a few seconds from where I pressed Play. Not good for advertisers, but great for my relationship with Comcast.)
Comcast is helping to reconcile a core disconnect between consumers, advertisers and cable providers. They are giving me incentive to watch the ads that pay for the shows I love. And in the process, they’re adapting advertising for a future with much better potential.
5
Steve Portigal I wonder about the design of the media itself. In other words, TV shows are written/shot/edited for broadcast. They have a number of acts, and they fade out at the end of an act, and fade back up, with some sort of re-context-setting shot/dialog in a new act. It's a bit disconcerting when you watch a DVD or download of a broadcast show with the commercial cut out, because you still have the vestigial effects of that commercial, and it kind of pulls you out "oh yeah, that's where the commercial goes." I was watching a Japanese show (Paranoia Agent, by Satoshi Kon) last night and noted that they also include the bumpers - the visual branding post-fade but pre-commercial. So I wonder about the reassurance just putting SOMETHING in that space to cover the discontinuity and anchor you in the Gold Standard experience your watching refers to (i.e., this was broadcast on TV, yo).
30 September, 2010 - 12:05
Gretchen Anderson That's a great point, Steve. Certainly Mad Men is doing a lot to weave advertising into the story, at least in feel. Bridging the gaps, as it were, presents an opportunity for network/production company branding too. With On Demand and DVR, we're becoming less interested in, and aware of, who's broadcasting content. Seems like bumpers might become more valuable there.
4 October, 2010 - 16:55
alect71 via Twitter: The Future of Advertising: Fewer, Different is More | Punchcut http://goo.gl/uBr9
5 October, 2010 - 17:21
DM Cook I also never watched TV as a kid, so I've always been shocked at how loud and intrusive its ads are. Does it seem to anyone else like they've gotten LOUDER? As a result, I almost always watch shows when they come on DVD so as to skip the ads entirely (I'd rather pay once than be annoyed dozens of times for a service I already pay for). I really do respect product placement in TV shows, when done properly (and not in the case of an Alias episode I'll never forget--"There! In the Ford F-150!"). It can help make the world the characters live in feel like "something you could have" -- and isn't that the point of advertising? Now, Nasonex might be a hard sell on Mad Men, but you get the idea.
19 October, 2010 - 10:34
chrisunwin via HootSuite: I can't stand when the same ad plays between every clip while streaming a show. Frustration is well depicted by @gretared http://ow.ly/32k68
1 November, 2010 - 13:11
Responses