« April 2005 | Main | June 2005 »
May 29, 2005
Pop-ups: More Harm Than Good
A short paper about a few brands that utilize pop-up banner advertising online and why I think it sucks.
Pop-up advertising is annoying. Ask anyone. This was a brief paper I submitted on the subject.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Peter Graber - Week 3
Banners, Pop-ups, Pop-Unders
To begin, I don't necessarily care for pop-ups and pop-unders and rarely click on banner ads. Although I see many of these ads during my online experiences, I seldom do anything to act on their messages. While I enjoy the amount of creativity these employ, I consider putting up with them a necessary evil.
Of these three types of web advertising, I feel the one that is the least obtrusive is the simple banner ad. For this paper, I have attempted to investigate all three types to determine if there were any major differences in how they completed their messaging.
The University of Phoenix
The first website banner that I clicked on was located on CNN Money (cnnfn.com). It was for an extremely popular web advertiser - University of Phoenix (UoP). I’ve seen UoP ads everywhere and they often use pop-unders that I’m constantly deleting. Upon clicking the banner I was immediately taken to the University of Phoenix web site. I landed on a page that was headlined 'The leading University for Working Professionals'. On multiple parts of the page were graphics and banners touting the university's Flexnet, a degree format that combines classroom and online learning. Initially I thought that this landing page was an interior page of the site. There was nothing on the page that gave me any point of reference. I attempted to return to the site's main home page by clicking on the site's logo. It was then that I determined that I was on the home page after all.
Overall, I found the site to be shallow - approximately 5 pages - and one that was designed to get users to 'Request More Information'. Basically a lead generation site. Beyond well-written introductory material, there was little information about the institution. You would expect that such a ‘large institution’ would have a site comparable to what other universities have.
In considering the nature of the banner ad, there was essentially no enticement offered to click-through on the ad, and the landing page as described above, did not offer any special information. From a consumer's perspective this might help the organization's credibility as it fosters the user to take the initiative. But I would think that this would lead to very limited response.
The UoP site was nicely done, but altogether too brief and lacking specifics. I came away feeling that anyone can write pleasing copy and build a small website. It didn’t improve my perception that the organization is a well-organized diploma mill. This may be a touch off base, but the organization should be providing a more robust public-facing presence. With almost all universities now offering electronic distance programs, this is more important than ever.
Verizon DSL
The next advertisement that I clicked on was for Verizon DSL. The ad appeared on another of my most favorite sites - The Drudge Report (drudgereport.com). The headline of the ad exclaimed 'Verizon Online DSL 3.0Mbps'. I clicked and was immediately taken to a Verizon landing page promoting a 'limited time offer'. But to see the latest offers in my area, I was required to enter a phone number. I obliged for the sake of this discussion.
After I entered my Verizon Wireless telephone number, I was greeted with a page that informed me that ' Verizon Online DSL Is Not Available', but that I could enter my first and last name and my email address for more information. The page also communicated that the Verizon network was 'continually being expanded' and that Verizon didn't want me 'to miss the opportunity to get a dedicated high-speed Internet connection...' From that point I was sort of stuck. There seemed no point in going any further. Verizon didn’t offer services in my area. Case closed.
Clicking back to the original landing page, I decided to venture around a bit. What I thought was effective was the information the company provided in comparing DSL to cable access. They presented a link to a JD Power Report on the company, as well as an interactive tool comparing Verizon with a variety of cable access providers. The tool presented a user selection list naming companies like Adelphia, Cox, Earthlink, AOL, Bellsouth and others. When you selected a competitor, their 'ratings' appeared next to Verizon's. As a skeptic of comparisons, the page highlighted that they were based on 'responses from thousands of consumers nationwide. The six categories below (cost, billing, image, performance and reliability, customer service, e-mail) were the factors found to have the greatest impact on customer satisfaction.'
When compared to the competition, Verizon faired extremely favorably. This may or may not be true in real life. Although the 'results' showed them being bested by certain competitors in specific categories, they were always superior in price. Although I was skeptical, I then visited the JD Power and Associates link they provided. The information they provided - namely a quick abstract of their 2004 Internet Service Provider Residential Customer Satisfaction Study - seemed more credible. This worked to buttress Verizon's claims. I thought this was an effective way for them to drive home credibility in their services and their survey results. It appeared to be consistent.
What I thought was most interesting about the banner may have been its biggest weakness. I consider myself a very savvy internet user that's extremely comfortable with technology and as a result of my professional work, probably have a better grasp of technology than most web users. Given this, I felt the ad's headline was confusing. What is DSL 3.0 Mbps? I understand 3.0Mbps, but I'm unsure if the average Internet user would. And besides, for this banner to appear on a site designed for low-bandwidth connectivity, I questioned why anyone would waste his or her time to investigate it. Last, after I clicked-through to the Verizon site, there was no other mention of this feature. This seemed to be a bit confusing. I’m sure the average user would have experienced similar difficulties.
The Online Reward Center - http://onlinerewardcenter.com/
The last ad that I viewed was a pop-under advertisement that appeared on my computer when I followed a news link from the Drudge Report regarding a tourist being shot on Broadway in New York City. The advertisement was designed to simulate an operating system 'System Status' dialog box that proclaimed that my 'urgent attention is required'. This type of ad epitomized the creative, yet sometimes rogue nature of some forms of modern web advertising. I clicked through only for the purposes of this discussion.
From a design perspective, the ad was well done, complete with authentic looking system features. It was only slightly discernable from a normal system. The copy of the ad stated that I had been chosen to 'receive a free* laptop PC' and that the offer was only available online and for a limited time. When I clicked, my browser opened up a new window and I was taken to the Online Rewards Center.
Upon arriving, three types of laptops appeared. These included a Toshiba Satellite, a Compaq Presario, and a Gateway Notebook. There was a form field that required me to enter a Zip Code to determine if the offer was available for my area. Beyond this information, there was clear information that stated that to be eligible for my 'free laptop' my information would need to be validated, I would be required to complete a user survey and I also be required to participate in the several ‘sponsor offers’. Further browsing uncovered customer testimonials, and more specific information regarding what 'sponsors offers' really meant. The information about what this entailed put me a ease somewhat. They stated the following:
" Examples of sponsored offers may include free trial offers, credit cards, free quote requests and other free or low-cost offers. Please note that there are typically a variety of offers presented for your selection - some offers require a small purchase, while others are free trials or free applications which does not require a purchase (and can be cancelled without obligation)."
I felt that this was adequate information and actually intrigued me. Beyond this, they listed other specifics of the program, along with some frequently asked questions. They stated that users could even monitor the status of their progress online. This was another plus.
Taking all of this information into account, I viewed the Online Reward Center in a different light. They seemed very credible. I was almost tempted to try it out, but thought otherwise when considering the time frame (90 days), and the administrative hassles of completing the necessary steps. But even so, this was a plus. I had a different perspective on the nature of the service.
Posted by pgraber at 03:34 PM
May 28, 2005
My Ideas for Southwest Radio & TV
Southwest has always been known for extremely down to earth and creative television spots. 'You're now free to move about the country' made them famous. 'Wanna get Away' was also fantastic. I had to create a couple of concepts for my class at West Virginia University.
Part II - RADIO COMMERCIAL
Southwest Airlines "Rush" : 15 seconds
Produced. Version 1, May 2005
SFX: SOUNDS FROM THE CONCOURSE IN AN AIRPORT.
ANNCR: Attention all air travelers. Attention all air travelers.
ANNCR: Southwest Airlines is now providing daily flights to Philladelphia, Chicago, Orlando and Las Vegas. Far starting as low as $29 one way.
SFX: PEOPLE RUNNING, SCREAMING. COMMOTION. TRAMPLING.
ANNCR: Hey slow down!. You – in the white– no running. People! People!!
SFX: MOB OF PEOPLE SHOUTING FOR RESERVATIONS.
SFX: QUICK CUT TO SILENCE.. (3-5 seconds)
ANNCR: Southwest Airlines. Pittsburgh’s newest deal for low cost air travel. Beat the rush at southwest.com
Part II - Television COMMERCIAL
Southwest Airlines "Welcome" : 30 seconds
Produced. Version 1, May 2005
1)FAST FOOTAGE OF PITTSBURGH SFX: FRIENDLY, UPBEAT
AIRPORT. DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH. MUSIC
DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT
1)CHEERY SOUTHWEST TICKTET AGENT VO: ‘Hello Pittsburgh’
2) FAST SCENES OF HAPPY TICKETING
EXPERIENCES. SMILING CUSTOMERS
3) FRIENDLY BAGGAGE HANDLER VO: ‘Hello Pittburgh’
4)FAST SCENES AT GATE. SOUTWEST
STAFF HELPING ELDERY, LAUGHIING
3)FRIENDLY FLIGHT STEWARD VO ‘ Hello, Pittsburgh!’
1)FOOTAGE OF CONCOURSE,
TERMINALS, PEOPLE WALKING
THROUGH CONCOURSE
2)BUSINESS PEOPLE VO: ‘Right on time – Hello
DE-PLANING OFF SOUTHWEST Pittsburgh’
3)FADE IN OF SOUTWEST LOGO VO: You are now free to
move about Pennsylvania”
Posted by pgraber at 03:03 PM
May 22, 2005
Advertising to Children - Right or Wrong?
I wrote a brief paper about the issue of using animated spokes-characters in advertising. I referenced several discussions on the matter, including Using Animated Spokes-Characters in Advertising to Young Children (Neeley, Schumann)
The abstract of the Neeley/Schumann paper was
"The use of animated spokes-characters in advertising to young children is a strategic communication tactic frequently examined, debated, and criticized by parents, researchers, child advocates, and government officials. Although public opinion suggests that spokes-characters influence young children’s product desires, academic research has generally failed to demonstrate this effect. The present study extends previous studies examining spokes-character influence on children, and specifically examines the effects of character action and voice. Results of two studies support previous
findings that although character action and voice may influence a young child’s attention to an ad, character, and product recognition, and even a positive attitude toward the product, the relation between spokes-characters and a child’s preference, intention, and choice of a product is uncertain."
Here's what I came up with
+ + + + + +
In considering my position with regards to advertising to young children, I read the paper ‘Using Animated Spokes-Characters in Advertising to Young Children’, as well as considered my personal world-view of the subject.
Overall, I do not feel that spokes-character (S-C) advertising is harmful to children or is unethical. Although I believe that S-C advertising is effective in ways that hasn’t been able to be measured – such as lifestyle and parent/child relationships, it is generally conducted in good-taste, and in ways that are consistent with communicating wholesome brand values.
One factor that must be considered is the age of the child. Very young children, referred to as preoperational in the paper, have extremely limited cognitive abilities that are needed to form long-lasting opinions, perceptions and values. These abilities increase with age. Because of these limited cognition skills, I feel that many of the messages they receive via advertising are ignored or not understood. As a result, any negative effects on the child are temporal.
I do believe that young children do remember certain points from advertising that help shape their attitudes and desires. These memories are communicated to their parents, who ultimately make the buying and purchasing decisions. It is these decisions and experiences that form lasting impressions. A good example of this is McDonalds. I suspect that young children only remember the Ronald McDonald character - a character that is happy, full of bright colors – and that when they communicate this to their parents, the parent attempts to complete the picture or fill in the details. The child most likely does not prefer McDonalds to any other food brand, but simply remembers the character only. This factor effects how the parent and/or purchaser reacts. They confuse recognition with desire.
My opinion on this issue presupposes that the information children receive is credible, trustworthy and wholesome. This includes reasonable product performance expectations, and high quality values relative to society and family. Although many of the underlying themes involved in these may not be received by young children, they still need to be followed. If advertisers do this, I do not see many harmful effects on children.
Parental choice is also a factor in my opinion. Advertising and programming serve to educate, inform and shape all of our views and perceptions on society and the world. Parents need to maintain their ability to make decisions independently without intervention. A world without advertising to children would limit a child’s ability to cope with it when they are eventually exposed. Also, limiting advertising to children is both impractical and virtually impossible given the number of opportunities and media forms.
Websites and Children
Websites are increasingly being used in the marketing/communications scheme to help engage children online. The two sites that I reviewed – Froot Loops and Tony The Tiger – were both excellent examples of the types of tactics being used today. Both sites attempted to influence children’s attitudes toward the brand, to engage them through activities.
What I found most interesting, was that both sites were focused on extending each brand’s paradigm or current promotion, and were not just merely forms of entertainment. In the Tony The Tiger example, information about ‘earning your stripes’ was presented via a series of star athletes. Although the information was presented in an animated and fun way, a deeper message about the brand could be inferred. Whether or not children caught this, this type of messaging reflects that websites are not merely forms of entertainment for children. They work as a form of marketing to help build brand awareness and communicate messages. While the Tony The Tiger site presented information on sports, biographical info on the athletes, the Fruit Loops examples continued it’s fantasy paradigm with games, puzzles and fun activities. Both are examples of how the web can be used to reinforce a marketing message or theme. In additional examples, two other websites that I visited, Life Cereal (lifecereal.com) and Wheaties (wheaties.com), followed this by providing additional information that supports each brands mantra.
How effective these tactics are in influencing choice among children is debatable. I found the websites that I visited to be written in a manner that assumed a higher level of reading ability. Although the Fruit Loops site and Tony The Tiger were presented in a more elementary fashion, they still required the user to posses sophisticated hand-eye motor skills to navigate. How much of an issue this can be for a young children is difficult to gauge.
Posted by pgraber at 03:12 PM
May 21, 2005
Southwest Print Ad Concepts
For class I was charged with coming up with a couple of advertisments (fictional, of course) for Southwest's campaign. I was speaking to business travelers and sports enthusiasts.
Here are the two that I came up with. Looking at them today, I don't feel the headline - especially on the first piece - was attention getting enough, and the connection to the airline wasn't as strong as it could have been...
Advert # 1:
Headline: Cheesesteak Never Tasted So Good!
Visual: A big delicious-looking cheesesteak sandwich.
Copy: Beginning this May 4th, Southwest will begin daily service to Philadelphia for fares as low as $29* one-way. With four convenient daily departures, business travelers can enjoy an all-American favorite for a lot less. If you’re the fast-food type, walk-up fares start at only $79* one-way. Philly cheesesteak will never taste the same! Only by Southwest! Reserve online at www.southwest.com
Logo: The Southwest Logo
Mandatories: Available now through May 26, 2005. All fares are subject to a federal segment tax of $3.20 per takeoff and landing. Fares also do not include airport-assessed passenger facility charges (PFC) of up to $9 one-way and a U.S. government-imposed September 11th Security Fee of up to $5 one-way per person. Fares are available for purchase now through the end of published schedule (currently August 3, 2005). On all Southwest Airlines discount fares, seats are limited and will not be available on some flights that operate during very busy travel times and holiday periods. Tickets are nonrefundable but (except for tickets purchased through our Group Tickets program) may be applied toward the purchase of future travel on Southwest Airlines. Fares can be combined with other fares. Fares are valid on Southwest published, scheduled service only. Any change in itinerary could result in an increase in fare.
Placements: To be run in Pittsburgh regional market only.
Advert # 2:
Headline: Revenge Can Be A Good Thing
Visual: A large shot from a Philadelphia Eagles vs Pittsburgh Steelers game. Photo needs to show Steelers in a compromising position.
Copy: Cheering on Philadelphia’s team has never been easier or quicker. In about an hour – with fares as low as $29* each way – Eagles fans can catch the game on August 15th in Pittsburgh. And for business travelers with meetings on Monday, flying on Sunday may not be such a drag after all. Consider it revenge. Consider Southwest. Reserve online at www.southwest.com
Logo: The Southwest Logo
Mandatories: Available now through May 26, 2005. All fares are subject to a federal segment tax of $3.20 per takeoff and landing. Fares also do not include airport-assessed passenger facility charges (PFC) of up to $9 one-way and a U.S. government-imposed September 11th Security Fee of up to $5 one-way per person. Fares are available for purchase now through the end of published schedule (currently August 3, 2005). On all Southwest Airlines discount fares, seats are limited and will not be available on some flights that operate during very busy travel times and holiday periods. Tickets are nonrefundable but (except for tickets purchased through our Group Tickets program) may be applied toward the purchase of future travel on Southwest Airlines. Fares can be combined with other fares. Fares are valid on Southwest published, scheduled service only. Any change in itinerary could result in an increase in fare.
Placements: To be run in Philadelphia regional market only.
Comp: Concept set in 4/C, 8½ x 11.
Posted by pgraber at 02:52 PM