Advertising Post World Wide Web 2.0 :: After the Cold Rush

When Advertising Hit the Web

It smacked up against Google (the premiere search engine) and crushed it: That will be the legacy of “marketing meets Web 2.0 media”.

So what’s next? ==> Advertising Must Change: Advertising 2.0

It’s not necessary for advertising to follow Google. What’s important is that advertising gets the user just as much as the user gets advertising.

The Way it Was

You made a TV-spot. It was the same spot for hundreds of millions (or even billions) of consumers: “Buy this and you will become like a superhero”. That spot went on daytime, prime-time, it was plastered on billboards, it was “in your face” and it was totally OK to spend excessive amounts of money on the production — which might have turned out to be merely pennies per targeted consumer.

When Advertising Met Google

Traditional advertising and Google were a good match, because Google  became the web’s “one-size fits-all” platform. However, there are 2 reasons why this mutually beneficial relationship will not hold:

1. people are naturally skeptical of advertising, and instead want (”demand”) reliable information
2. web sites on the www is no longer “one-size fits-all”: some niches are large, but “one-size fits-all” is simply no longer going to work on the web

John Battelle recently summed up these two ideas during his presentation at the Conversational Media Summit in New York City ( video ):

1. “Search is the interface now to how we find brands online.” (13:50)
2. “It’s not one-size fits all, it’s one-size fits each campaign — and you get to tune it yourself.” (17:15)

So these 2 ideas go together (like peanut butter and chocolate ;) — more targeting, tastes great! Oops, no — let me try that again: targeted advertising, less filling! … No? Um: targeted audience, narrowcasting! WOOHOO! :D

Less Filling, Tastes Great!

So what does narrowcasting mean for you advertisers out there? Simple. That’s it: Just “simple”. Not million dollar ad  campaigns! Simple, quick and dirty (well, not botched up — it’s just that the polish doesn’t have to shine more than the message itself). The point is to get the right message to the right people — and that for each target audience you wish to address. And since many consumers will belong to many target audiences, you will be reminding the consumer time and again that your product / service is the right choice — in many situations (and therefore repeatedly), but also in this particular situation (right here and now).

The important thing to focus on is focus itself. Focus on your communication partner (the “consumer”) . What are they saying? Are they asking you a question? Are you (as John Battelle puts it) “engaged in a conversation”?

How to Measure Engagement

As Mr. Battelle indicates, there have been studies that shed light on the fact that clicks are not the kind of engagement that advertisers are looking for. I have said this for years already, and apparently, Google itself (which attempts to be the “gold standard”) is increasingly moving away from using links as a useful indicator of value (and/or valuable engagement). The funny thing is: advertisers are still paying for links / ppc advertising as if it were worth something (perhaps less, but they are still haven’t reached the point where they recognize thatclicks are of infinitesimally small value — or even just plain worthless).

So what is a better indicator of engagement? First of all: you should not forget that engagement means focusing. We’re not talking “Cluetrain Manifesto” here, in which everyone is connected to everone else — in a one-size fit-all manner. You can simply kiss “one-size fits-all” goodbye, at least in an online setting.

You need to focus, and you need to sign on the dotted line that says: this is what our company is focusing on — this is where we choose to enagage. Some leaders get it: Johnson & Johnson focuses on Baby.COM; NBC focuses on Weather.COM; IAC focuses on Hotels.COM; Microsoft focuses on Live.COM. I’m not saying your focus needs to be limited — but the commitment does need to be declared.

If this is done forthright and in a transparent manner, there should be little difficulty in building lasting relationships with consumers — consumers who are wedded to the ideas of truth and honesty and fairness (rather than sales pitches, spam and link bait). If your company commits the resources and effort to sign on the dotted line and openly to declare “this is what we stand for”, then I feel there is no reason to doubt that the story will have a happy ending.

Like this  :D .

( ps: would love to hear your views! Discuss the article here :)