What Will Snapchat ads look like? The Company Isn't Sure

According to Advertising Age, Snapchat is pulling back on its first first ad format and rethinking its pitch to advertisers.  The current line?  "It's like traditional media -- but on a phone and with a big audience of people less likely to check out traditional media such as linear TV or print magazines."  AdAge may be joking, but either way, Snapchat has a little work to do.  



The company has stopped selling Brand Story ads that let advertisers pay to promote a standalone piece of branded content within the mobile app, the article says, and will potentially rework feeds to look like actual feeds featuring photos from live events as they happen -- name is still to be determined.

Snapchat's problem isn't necessarily having a platform that its user might love.  The issue is helping advertisers understand the value.

Watching Videos Watching You

How many people, if given the option, would allow an advertiser to control their computer cameras?

A good few, apparently -- between .5 and 3 percent.  Virool, a company built to help companies make their videos go viral, has launched a new tool that allows the emotional reaction of audiences while they watch ads through customer lenses.



Here's how it works: an Internet user starts watching an ad. A pop-up requests that the user grants access to the computer camera.  If user declines, the ad plays.  If user opts in, the ad plays, and the brand agency gets immediate analytics for every facial expression the user conveys through the camera.  Ideally, eIQ will help them answer "What are people actually feeling when they watch my video advertisement? Did we make them laugh? Did we tug at their heartstrings?”  And ultimately, help them target new audiences or adjust the ad if they get negative reactions.

But, I question the type of user who opts in.  Someone bored?  Someone savvy about what the brand is trying to ascertain?  Or someone who will put on a show for the camera, not knowing who is on the other side?  I think it's a great idea, but given that most people don't opt in, I wouldn't rely on the analytics collected just yet.

When Stores Stop Selling

Within the past year, online retailers Amazon and Birchbox have each opened their first brick-and-mortar stores.  This move is a sign that online retailers are acknowledging that many shoppers, at least for now, still prefer some sort of in-person buying experience.  But it also points to another trend..



Warby Parker, as called out by Advertising Age last week, uses one location to create an entirely new brand experience.  The Company's store in Soho, New York, looks like a library.  Not at all like a store.  Why?  Because Warby executives think it's a turn off "to be sold to."  In a store?  Yes.  The way they see it: physical stores are just a part of the marketing channel to promote the brand.  They are not always just a location to actually SELL.  So Soho strollers can come in, take a load off, crack open a book and relax a little.  That's it.



Amazon, Birchbox and Warby Parker have all been moving in a similar direction, the opposite of conventional marketing wisdom: rather than creating digital campaigns to drive customers to stores, stores are being built to drive buyers online.  The in-person experiences are meant to draw people in and to create real ambassadors.  Then they can go on to shop, pin, text and post on their own time.

TAG: Battling the Bots



I wrote last week about how many advertisers are exactly sure of the effectiveness of their digital marketing campaigns -- who is viewing them and what they're thinking.

In an article this week, the ANA and White Ops released a study that shows there may be a reason for all the lack of clarity: almost 25% of video ad impressions may actually not be viewed by anyone, and may in fact be be bot fraud.  Same goes for 17 percent of display.

If accurate, both numbers are pretty staggering.  We all know that bots, trolls and fraudsters are problems out there, in the Internet.  But this study points to how much money marketers and advertisers may really be wasting on campaigns if their content is being diverted to these black holes.  Millions upon millions upon millions of dollars.

The article also announces that  advertisers are fighting back.  The ANA, the 4A's, and the IAB have backed the formation of the Trustworthy Accountability Group (TAG), what will be "a cross-industry organization to combat ad fraud, malware and piracy."   I imagine its first piece of business will be figuring out how to really measure it.  Then, how to face down each one.  As the head of the 4A's, Nancy Hill, points out, until now there have been many ad hoc approaches to take down these digital demons on a case-by-case basis -- nothing holistic.

I've been to many ANA annual conferences, as a sponsor, and am always looking forward to the high level industry calls to action -- in past years, leaders have called to arms for better measurement, talent recruitment or creative compensation.  I imagine this year, bots will get top billing.

Marketers Ditch Unsure Agencies and Buy Programmatic Video Ads

According to Strata Marketing, there is a lot of uncertainty when it comes to effectiveness of online video ads.  In its recent forecast survey of traditional ad agencies, about 50 percent of its respondents said they were "unsure" about their confidence in getting good ROI from their online video ad purchases.  The uncertainty lies in the intended audience, with a very small percentage confidence in reaching their targets:



As pointed out in this Marketing Land article, Strata's sample size isn't huge.  But the results are pretty eye-opening.

A separately released (but equally interesting) study published in eMarketer noted, that given current trends and forecasts, digital programmatic ad spending in the U.S. is set to soar to 30 percent of digital ad spending -- right now it's about 22 percent.  As programmatic ad buying cuts out the agency middleman, I think both of these studies should be a call to arms for agencies to get their facts straight.

Why Spend Ad Dollars If You're Not Learning Anything? Here's A Solution.

I caught Jebbit co-founder Jonathan Lacoste on CNBC early yesterday morning at Equinox (I was on the stairmaster and the other channels available were on commercial).  But his interview on Squawk Box was actually really interesting -- maybe because my colleagues and I are deep in the trenches of a Digital Marketing class at Columbia, but I think moreso because Lacoste's company is collecting customers at a steady clip by asking online consumers to willingly hand over valuable preference data to brands.  Jebbit calls this exchange "post-click engagement," and I think it's really smart.


Here's how it works: the company creates an overlay on brand landing pages that asks a potential customer, once s/he clicks on an ad for a product, a set of questions (anything a brand wants to know) and then "rewards" that customer with a coupon or a prize once the mini-survey is complete.  The result?  The brand gets a little insight into what kinds of customer is browsing, and the customer gets a bargain.  Everybody wins!

I think this tactic is particularly interesting because I would actually do it.  I often say I would never click a digital banner, but now well know that I probably do.  But I definitely ignore pre-roll on videos, and click away from disruptive display ad as often as possible.  This, I would do.  Lacoste has said his company's core principal is asking the question, "Why spend ad dollars if people aren't learning what you want them to learn?"  He boasts clients such as Reebok, Zipcar and Microsoft, but I imagine more big brands will be signing on soon.

Serial Podcasting For Brands

Forbes published an article that posed an interesting idea for how companies can shake up their digital marketing: by podcasting.

Although Forbes articles rarely catch my attention (sorry but it's true), the author called out podcasts as "a chance to build a solid virtual relationship with your listeners."  They also rank very well in Google, and have a history of increasing traffic and conversion rates.  The author says to be successful in this space, brands should not build content about its product or services, but about topics customers who use that product or service are interested in.   I have been a huge podcast downloader for years -- it's my favorite way to spend my subway commute.  And given Serial's recent enormous success for NPR (1.26 million downloads per episode), it seems there really is a growing audience for them.  I know that when I've already gone through all my weekly shows by Wednesday, I am looking for more content to pass the time on the 6 train.  Brands have a real opportunity to fill that gap -- they just need to keep it interesting.

Advertising vs. Authenticity: The NFL's "No More" Commercial

Adweek published a clever video featuring young women watching Superbowl ads, then speaking candidly after each one.  The big idea of the video was to demonstrate, through the womens' negative reactions to many of the ads, that the majority of commercials aired during the big game aren't targeted at their gender, despite the fact that more of them are watching now than ever.

One thing that caught my attention, though, was the way one of them called out the No More example (The NFL's own ad about the shame of domestic violence).  The young woman said "Even though this message is super powerful, if they actually wanted to do something, they should fire these men that abuse their wives."  She is no doubt referring to Ray Rice, the Baltimore Raven running back who faced a mere two-game suspension from the NFL after a video of him knocking his wife unconscious in an elevator went viral in the Fall of 2014.

The Adweek video is just one example of the online blacklash the league has received for the ad.  Deadspin called the No More commercial a "Sham."  The New Yorker, in another article on the topic, said the NFL "has a long history of ignoring off-field issues.. and it doesn't appear to be changing its ways just yet."  From a Marketing perspective, I find this so interesting because although the ad had a positive message -- that domestic violence is often hidden, its victims trapped, and that we need to listen to those who may be in trouble  -- audiences didn't buy it, and took to social media to talk about it.

After the Ray Rice debacle, Roger Gooddell said "We will get our house in order," hinting that the NFL will crack down on domestic violence from the inside.  But, because we haven't seen the fruits of that labor, the No More ad was seen as more of a PR stunt than as a public service announcement.  And although the league may be actively working to right its wrongs, maybe it should wait until it can show real results to start preaching about the issue.

30 Days?

According to an Adage article this month, that's the new window the Obama administration is pitching as a national standard for companies to inform their customers of any data breach.  While the thought of my own data being in the hands of some scammer for more than an hour scares me to the core because of the potential lifelong implications, the call for actual nation-wide rules demonstrates that businesses need to build better compliance into their budgets and communications.  Whether or not companies handling consumer data will be thrilled to follow the new guidelines (as now it's a confusing state-by-state issue), I would be happy to see these take effect and hope that 30-day window gets reduced to 30 minutes.