Getty
Marketers are confusing “clicks and listens” to buying. Marketers seek reliable data on how many people have viewed or heard particular advertising messages. The “view/hear mindset” is captivating for marketers. Clicks feed egos.
Every brand wants heavily viewed or frequently heard, multiple-platform shared, award-winning brand communications that people view. But, and here is the problem: just because a commercial garners views does not mean there is brand impact. Brand impact is the messages affect on brand image and brand preference. The ultimate brand award is not the extraordinary number of views or hearings, the multiple-platform sharing, the impressive gold statue or the groovy, global buzz. The ultimate award is the giant impact of greater sales.
For example, The Wall Street Journal reports that Spotify has generated a new tool for its podcast advertisers. This tool lets an advertiser know who is hearing a given ad in a podcast, how many are hearing that ad, how frequently they are hearing, basically everything about the listeners listening behavior. The Wall Street Journal’s Anne Steele describes the tool and its measurement metric as the “… ability to track more precisely the number of impressions and frequency, as well as audience insights including age, gender, listening behavior and the type of device a consumer heard the ad on.” What this tool does not do is correlate hearing with actual improvement in brand preference. This is a marketing sin.
The New York Times Sunday Magazine section printed an article about a new Renault Clio two-minute video on Twitter and YouTube. According to the article, the Renault Clio ad generated something around 10 million views when combining Twitter and YouTube. It is possible to think you are watching a very short auteur’s film. We learn the brand name in the very last seconds. As the journalist points out, “… the connection between the narrative and the product … verges on non-existent.” Further, Renault does not sell cars in the USA where the film garnered millions of views. And, the journalist wonders why viewers would watch this and then feel persuaded to buy a Clio. It is “… a bid for sales that may wind up garnering only clicks.”
To be very clear: Capturing impressions is not the same as creating impact. An impression is just a media unit. It has a cost. It can be viewed or heard. But a viewing is not a substitute or synonym for impact.
Brand value does not come from brand views. Brand value does not come from hearing. Brand value comes from customers’ perceptions about the brand’s total brand experience relative to its total costs.
Kantar, the respected global market research powerhouse released data at the end of 2019 that were benchmarked against their database of 200,000 ads. Only about 25% of this year’s Cannes Lion award-winning ads provided actual brand impact meaning the ads did not effectively generate brand sales. Cannes-winning ads were fabulously creative. But, these ads did not lead to sales. According to Kantar, this is a sign of declining advertising effectiveness. Advertising that does not have impact is impotent. No wonder C-Suite executives raise eyebrows over the seriousness of the CMO role.
For advertising historians, think back to 1989. In 1989, both Lexus and Infiniti launched their vehicles in the USA. Lexus advertising focused on what made Lexus a luxury vehicle in the same league as Mercedes. Infiniti launched with pretty pictures of scenery The car sat in a beautiful wooded area with only the sounds of the forest. Beauty shots of the car, and especially the door handles dominated. Lexus sent a message that this is a luxury ride. Infiniti sent a message about Zen in the woods. Lexus sold cars; Infiniti did not.
Today, Lincoln is sadly following the Infiniti model. Handsome actor, beautiful glacial area, sounds of nature and a wind flag humming in the breeze. Lincoln is the vehicle for you if you do not want to drive but have the time to contemplate nature from the tailgate of your SUV. I am transported by the serenity of the scene. But, I am not transported to the Lincoln dealership.
Cadillac is opting for the same gimmicky approach: its marketers are feeling fabulous because the brand is generating buzz for its #ASMR advertising. Has it come to this: Cadillac cannot find a relevant, differentiated trustworthy brand promise to persuade us to visit a Cadillac dealer and buy a vehicle?
The marketers who are excited about the views/seen/heard metrics are not only harming their brands but also harming their businesses. Loving an ad is not the same as buying a brand. Case in point: after the success of Bud Light’s Dilly Dilly campaign, data showed that sales had not increased. The Dilly Dilly campaign went viral. But, the Dilly Dilly ads said nothing about the beer and did nothing to increase Budweiser purchases. It showed creativity but without brand impact. Without a cohesive, compelling, focused brand message having creative, attention-getting, cool, buzzworthy, award-winning ads will not propel purchases.
Marketers are focusing on the wrong measurements. Metrics are important. Of course we want to know all about our potential customers. We want to know their habits, their opinions, interests, attitudes, their demographics and their perceptions of our brands. But, these types of tools are not enough. What about the tools that point us towards building brands for enduring profitable growth?
