Loading ...Display Is Dead! There, I Said It.
Originally published at iMedia Connection’s Blog
Forgive me if this post tapers off somewhere in the middle. I will most likely be fielding calls from my friends on the publisher side as well as the ad networks.
Remember when people started saying the :30 spot was dead? That the microsite was dead? That newspapers were dead? Actually, newspapers are dead. I read the Chicago Tribune this morning. Ouch. But the :30 spot is still alive and kicking and microsites are plentiful. So why, do you ask, would I declare the death of digital display ads? Oh, where to begin…
Response rates aren’t going to go back up. Sure, you can work with some of the better BT networks like Yahoo! (through Blue Lithium) and broad reach networks like ValueClick, but how much of a lift will that really give you? One percent? Two percent? Is that enough to make an impact? Storing data allows for better targeting and the POSSIBILITY, based on a better profile of the user, of an action. Nothing more. Maybe you are just looking for eyeballs and argue that this type of buy provides them. Hold that thought.
Search wins. So after reading the above paragraph, many people probably cried BS. That’s “bullshit,” by the way, not to be confused with some fancy abbreviation for behavioral targeting. They probably said that BT works wonders for their clients’ business. That might be true – if the clients’ business is direct response. If it is, then search is certainly a growing part of the business. The biggest differentiator? User initiation. People are actively looking for something, not actively closing a pop-up or homepage takeover and cursing while they do it. If anyone uses the MLB Gamecast on ESPN, you what what I mean.
Old school CMOs. See, the majority of CMOs out there have limited to zero digital experience. So when their VP of Marketing, who probably has some experience, walks in and says “we need to go digital,” the CMO looks for a bridge to walk across rather than a cliff to jump off. How does he do that? He looks for ways to repurpose the stuff he is comfortable with – television spots and integrated partnerships. So he calls his buddy at NBC who says “Hulu” and off we go. It’s an easier sell because a site like Hulu or even Veoh talks the right language. Hell, they could probably sell them TRPs if they had to.
If content is king, original content is Napoleon. If the digital agency is good, they are telling him that pre-rolls are pointless and that viral content is the way to go. You want eyeballs? How many pairs are there on YouTube every day? Not sure? Ask Burger King.
Burger King invested in a known commodity, Seth MacFarlane, to drive awareness rather than in a massive display campaign.
And this, to me, is the final nail in the proverbial coffin. We all know media channels are blurring. There is a point of convergence coming, and coming soon. Until current CMOs are replaced with people who grew up in digital, old school language is what will make them comfortable. Try talking about BT, view-throughs and cookies to someone who still wants to go to the commercial shoot, lunches with their ABC rep and has the checkbook for the marketing budget. So how does this CMO handle convergence? They move offline strategies online, they measure in impressions and they show their kids the “cool stuff” they did at work that is on YouTube. Sad, but realistic.
The web is officially a massive publishing and syndication tool. By the time this digital infusion happens at the CMO level, original content, digital product placement and interactive syndication will have taken over. Display advertising, as we know it, will be a thing of the past like three martini lunches, third-party e-mail and independently run banks in the U.S.
Get ready to attend the funeral.
Blog posts or articles declaring some form of communication is dead make for a great attention grabber. The reality, however, is that CMO’s now have a broad set of tools to achieve the results they are looking for. To say that display is dead or that the 30 second spot is dead misses the point. Blanket statements ignore the nuances necessary to connect with any given audience. For some, a 30 second ad or display ad might make perfect sense as part of the marketing mix for a given product or service. In fact, I think that the introduction of these broad range of tools makes all of the mediums more exciting to work within. As marketers we are now asking, how can this tool best be used in this new media landscape.
Display advertising may be dead in the true direct response sense, but it still plays a valuable role in branding. While it is hard to place a value on the brand element, if you aren’t their your competitors are and they are continuing to spend more and more of their money in the space.
There are a lot of smart things that can be done with serving dynamic display advertising, especially when coupled/combined with search keywords and retargeting. The response rates on combining search and display are obviously a lot higher than just display by itself. It you include site retargeting in the mix as well, the results tend to increase as well.
I think your statement should be ‘Display advertising as a direct response channel is dead, but used in conjunction with search/corporate website retargeting it can be an extremely cost effective channel’. That isn’t taking into account the branding element of display advertising.
Search has won – no doubt about that. In-game advertising may be big, maybe not. All sorts of advertising for video, pre-roll, post-roll, etc. might gain some traction. But can you really see a world where old fashioned display ads are extinct? Certainly the fewer marketers that use display will lead to lower rates, making it at some point worth investing in. Does increasing bandwidth affect your conclusions at all? I’m guessing not.
The “death” or significant decline of display advertising is probable, but the subsequent reality then is that so is the concept of standard metrics. The goal of making the CTR the equivalent of the GRP which ruled for decades isn’t going to happen.
The web is offering avenues, or rather consumers are creating avenues that are rapidly changing where a brand can exist. If syndicating content becomes the new means of branding, then trying to measure all things equally will be virtually impossible. Content doesn’t come in the same package anymore (the 30 second spot or the IAB size banner) it comes in the form of how consumers want it. Does a million views of a YouTube video equal a million impressions? Does a microblog “tweet” to 5000 followers equal 5000 impressions?
These are questions that people will certainly work towards answering, but that doesn’t mean they are 100% accurate. Most people in the advertising industry understand that despite our ability to quantify, this is still an art and not just a science. As mediums blur AND expand brands/agencies/publishers are going to have to get comfortable with being uncomfortable with how they define success.
I’ve never clicked on display ads anyway. Can’t trust them. Especially Flash.