tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/social-advertising-4253/articlesSocial advertising – The Conversation2016-03-21T10:13:16Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/537212016-03-21T10:13:16Z2016-03-21T10:13:16ZIn TV’s shifting landscape, advertisers scramble to adapt<p>A television commercial is a 15- or 30-second interruption of a program – or so most of us born before 2000 assume. </p>
<p>However, a recent <a href="http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/pepsi-empire-fox-tv-advertising-1201644340/">story arc</a> on the popular Fox program “Empire” involved a character making a commercial for Pepsi – <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og54J4LyYaw">a commercial</a> that actually appeared during the episode. Popular Vine users have appeared in videos eating <a href="https://vine.co/tags/dominos">Domino’s pizza</a> and drinking <a href="https://vine.co/MountainDew">Mountain Dew</a>. YouTubers such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan">Michelle Phan</a> are paid by brands to promote makeup products. Meanwhile, AT&T recently sponsored a teen reality show called “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/SummerBreakNetwork">@summerbreak</a>,” in which teens use their phones to take selfies. </p>
<p>As brands work to gain the attention of digitally empowered consumers, the distinctions between commercials and programs are blurring.</p>
<h2>This program is brought to you by…</h2>
<p>In the United States, however, the commercial has been separate from the program only since the 1960s. </p>
<p>From the late 1920s until the late 1950s, most radio and television programs were owned by advertisers and <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/a-word-from-our-sponsor-9780823253715?q=a%20word%20from%20our%20sponsor&lang=en&cc=us">produced by their advertising agencies</a>. Advertisers provided “free” broadcast entertainment, hoping to create positive associations with their brand in the minds of audiences. Worried about alienating audiences with intrusive commercials, many sponsors named the program after the brand (e.g., <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUyy565d0Ds">“Kraft Music Hall”</a>). Sometimes the product was mentioned in the program, as when comedian <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04b8GGq8sLQ">Jack Benny would open</a> his Jell-O-sponsored program with “Jell-O again, it’s Jack Benny!”</p>
<p>The sponsorship system <a href="https://www.academia.edu/924053/The_problems_with_sponsorship_in_us_broadcasting_1930s_1950s_perspectives_from_the_advertising_industry">faded out</a> in the 1960s – a casualty of high production costs, regulatory pressure and shifting advertising strategies. Encouraged by networks to buy airtime in minutes instead of hours, advertisers inserted their commercials into multiple programs, interrupting them with distinct “commercial breaks.” Advertisers were able to reach more audiences while relieving themselves from the burdens and risks of program production. </p>
<p>A new TV commercial aesthetic soon evolved, and many ads became more <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUnEbNgHFco">visually</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmPtGg9W_dY">sonically</a> interesting than the programs they interrupted. Advertisers began to rely on cinematic techniques, such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvzR6dcZYDE">montage and mobile camera work</a>, and they used high concept strategies such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEUHV20kH9g">humor</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQhwNtY3N2k">irony</a>. Audiences – once annoyed by “<a href="https://archive.org/details/dmbb46710">hectoring reasons why to buy</a>” – were instead soothed by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUnEbNgHFco">understated ironic humor</a>, softened by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYEXzx-TINc">emotional appeals</a> and entertained by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpvNgV-sI_Y">pop stars singing</a> about carbonated drinks. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vYEXzx-TINc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A Life cereal commercial from the 1970s.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Entire television genres, such as the sitcom, would go on to structure their narrative beats and arcs around commercial breaks. The separation of ads and programs benefited both <a href="https://www.academia.edu/661145/From_Sponsorship_to_Spots_Advertising_and_the_Development_of_Electronic_Media">the television and advertising industries as they enjoyed higher profits</a> from larger audiences, ever more expensive airtime and ever higher commercial production budgets.</p>
<h2>What’s old is new again</h2>
<p>There was a problem, however: <a href="http://www.auburn.edu/%7Erotfehj/clutter.html">audiences never loved having their programs interrupted</a>.</p>
<p>Today, linear TV (traditional network-scheduled programming) is competing for audience attention with other devices and streaming platforms – such as YouTube, Facebook and Snapchat – that allow viewers to watch whatever and whenever they want. Most advertisers <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/time-running-out-30-second-tv-commercial-alan-wolk">understand</a> that getting audiences to pay attention to interrupting commercials is increasingly difficult. And many brands now wonder if <a href="http://www.carseywolf.ucsb.edu/mip/article/branded-entertainment-reshapes-media-ecosystem">forcibly exposing audiences</a> to commercials just annoys them. </p>
<p>As a result, some of <a href="http://www.carseywolf.ucsb.edu/mip/article/branded-entertainment-reshapes-media-ecosystem">what’s old is new again</a>. </p>
<p>Many brands are returning to sponsorship – now called <a href="http://www.adweek.com/news/television/if-youre-not-least-thinking-about-branded-content-youre-missing-out-164378">“branded entertainment”</a> or “branded content” – because they believe that they can attract their own audiences with their own content. Hoping to avoid accusations of undermining the creative elements, many brands call these deals <a href="https://contently.com/strategist/2014/05/12/should-brands-spend-millions-to-underwrite-other-peoples-content/">“partnerships,”</a> and instead of paying for “product placement,” prefer <a href="http://streamdaily.tv/2014/05/12/producers-talk-brand-integration-at-to-webfest/">“brand integration,”</a> in which the creators control how the brand is used. For example, to prove his independence, Jerry Seinfeld <a href="http://adage.com/article/news/jerry-seinfeld-deliberately-bad-ads-acura/245805/">purposely wrote “bad ads” for Acura</a>, his sponsor for <a href="http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/">Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee</a>.</p>
<p>Although brands have always used celebrities from entertainment and sports to endorse products, today they are also turning to new celebrities who have attracted enthusiastic young fans just through social media. Like the famous 1950s TV pitchman <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAixx8G2wzU">Arthur Godfrey</a>, these <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/technology/stars-of-vine-and-instagram-get-advertising-deals.html?_r=0">“social media influencers”</a> demonstrate products on their <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkOmRDBcI4">YouTube channels</a>, <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BAAQ-5sS5Sj/">Instagram</a> feeds or <a href="https://vine.co/v/e5DZ6aBx1QJ">Vine</a> videos. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MTkOmRDBcI4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Social media star Bethany Mota pitches Fresh Rose Freshface Primer on her YouTube channel.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Brands hope that social media influencers’ strong connection with their audiences will translate into <a href="http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/10-reasons-why-influencer-marketing-is-the-next-big-thing/623407">“word of mouth”</a> marketing. They also hope that this new type of celebrity endorser will seem more authentic and less annoying than the old kind.</p>
<h2>Potential pitfalls</h2>
<p>Although brands may seek to convey authenticity in these new forms of advertising, they also face some potential pitfalls. </p>
<p>Allowing social media stars so much control over branded content is <a href="http://digiday.com/brands/brands-still-need-wary-youtube-prank-content/">risky</a> if it ends up not being “brand friendly” enough. The <a href="http://www.chron.com/entertainment/article/Chris-Brown-loses-endorsement-deal-with-Wrigley-1749896.php">bad behavior</a> of some endorsers could tarnish the brand image. And brands may find it difficult to depend on social media to attract audience attention without the mass distribution power of a TV network. </p>
<p>Consumer advocates also fear that audiences may not be able to distinguish an “ad” from “content.” </p>
<p>When posting on social media about a morning sickness medication, <a href="http://adage.com/article/digital/kim-kardashian-s-instagram-marketer-trouble-fda/299928/">Kim Kardashian got into trouble</a> with the FDA for not following drug advertising regulations. And many social media influencers promote products <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-plugs-for-pizza-a-breach-of-journalistic-ethics-52942">without indicating they’re being paid to do so</a>. <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/press-releases/ftc-staff-revises-online-advertising-disclosure-guidelines/130312dotcomdisclosures.pdf">Regulators are scrambling</a> to redefine the boundaries between “ad” and “content” to prevent potentially misleading social media posts.</p>
<p>So does <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080318/004136567/advertising-is-content-content-is-advertising.shtml">advertising-as-content</a> work? Many would argue that cynical audiences long ago <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/aug/24/tv-advertising">tuned out</a> conventional TV commercials and that [commercials should be more like entertainment](http://adage.com/article/trending-topics/social-tv-commercials-short-shows/236009/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+AdvertisingAge/LatestNews+(Advertising+Age+-+Latest+News).</p>
<p>It’s a question that harks back to the early 20th-century debate among hard sell and soft sell strategists. <a href="https://awordfromoursponsor.wordpress.com/home/hardsell/">Hard sell</a> proponents argued that advertising should be product information and that anything else is merely ineffective entertainment. <a href="https://awordfromoursponsor.wordpress.com/the-soft-sell/">Soft sell</a> proponents, on the other hand, claimed that audiences were annoyed by the blunt delivery of product information and would prefer to see ads with emotional appeals, humor, entertainment and celebrities. </p>
<p>Today, it seems that the soft sell is winning out, and advertisers will continue to chase audiences across platforms and devices, experimenting with boundary-blurring strategies. Brands are eager to be part of the “cultural conversation.” As they begin to question the effectiveness of television commercials that interrupt shows, it’s understandable that they are also courting <a href="http://www.thirteen.org/programs/frontline/tyler-oakley-on-the-business-of-youtube/">social media influencers</a>, producing <a href="http://digiday.com/publishers/funny-or-die-helps-brands-find-their-funny-side/">funny videos</a> and financing edgy, new <a href="http://www.vulture.com/2011/08/can_mountain_dew_save_the_musi.html">music artists</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/53721/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cynthia Meyers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The lines are blurring between programs and commercials.Cynthia Meyers, Associate Professor of Communication, College of Mount Saint VincentLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/456762015-08-07T10:03:34Z2015-08-07T10:03:34ZCalvin Klein’s new sexting ads are not only unethical, they may not even be effective<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90816/original/image-20150804-12028-3gr72l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Calvin Klein is known for its especially sexy ads.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/en321/3936917157/in/photolist-6ZTJj2-61UEpi-8rgjNs-8rdbCX-4zpyzY-2Dm5Dw-9ZtUJr-6oyFd-6ZTM9K-6ZXMVY-6ZTKCX-3XKEHo-5yzgUf-aBkna5-bot8J1-jUPiJT-4HE4ru-Lgi7z-ezHTG-7nAQn3-6525o7-RThVg-5Hni6K-6pvacC-7nxuFy-7ntzpM-RR64h-5HrBc5-7nwV9X-a5pjsB-a5scgf-Ka3ti-T3xD3-dDZoeQ-epidj-5dCqCC-6DQ6ea-7zmrTL-7ntAax-7nwVrB-7nAQem-d9SuKq-7nwVhr-7ntzcX-ezJ4e-d9SuhB-8PaHcA-7ntzPZ-RR5CU-5HnhA6">Susan Sermoneta/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A shirtless man lounges on a large couch while two attractive young women recline next to him. A text message appears: “Hahah a light threesome never hurt anyone.” Where might this scene be from? An adult novel, an X-rated movie?</p>
<p>No, it’s a new Calvin Klein ad. </p>
<p>The brand known for risqué promotion has adapted its advertising for the digital age with a <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/style/calvin-klein-takes-on-sexting-tinder-to-promote-125357644583.html">new jeans campaign</a> that features young people sexting, or sending sexually explicit text messages. </p>
<p>Each ad in the campaign contains a provocative picture, the words of a sexually charged text message and a tempting tagline: “raw texts, real stories.” </p>
<p>There’s little question from the ads that the company endorses more than denim.</p>
<p>In comparing ads from 100, 50 and 25 years ago with ones like the current Calvin Klein ads, it’s easy to see that sexual content has become more explicit. You also may have noticed that the number of such ads has risen. For instance, a <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10641734.2012.675566#abstract">2012 study</a> from the University of Georgia that looked at advertising from 1983 to 2003 showed the share with sexual imagery almost doubled.</p>
<p>Such ads raise two questions: one, are they effective? And two, even if they are, do they cross a moral line that shouldn’t be crossed? </p>
<p>Through a 25-year career that’s spanned industry and higher education, I’ve had many opportunities to consider how marketing and ethics interact. Based on my experience, I’ve come to believe that what’s best for business and what’s moral are not mutually exclusive. </p>
<p>Rather, organizations can excel both economically and ethically. In fact, the two goals are often complementary. For instance, <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ethical-companies-shown-to-be-more-profitable-over-time-56555987.html">Corpedia’s Ethics Index</a>, comprising publicly traded companies rated high for ethical behavior, outperformed the S&P 500 by more than 370% during a recent five-year period.</p>
<h2>Does sex sell?</h2>
<p>First off, does more carnal creativity mean that “sex sells”? Not necessarily. For example, a <a href="http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/abs/10.1027/1016-9040/a000016?journalCode=epp">2010 study</a> from Texas A&M International University did find that people were more likely to remember commercials that contained sexual or violent content. But that doesn’t mean they were more likely to make a purchase. </p>
<p>Memory doesn’t always predict purchase intentions or other positive behavior. While people remember positive experiences, they also remember things they’d rather forget, like car accidents, relationship breakups and kidney stones. Memory only leads to sales if it’s tied to a compelling reason for purchase.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/3151194?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">classic study</a> conducted by Baker and Churchill in 1977 found that advertising models’ physical attractiveness increased viewers’ attention as well as their positive evaluations of the ads. But at the same time, it found that sexual content in ads did not affect respondents’ deeper cognitions, thus rendering physical attraction ineffective in gaining the target market’s acceptance of the advertising message.</p>
<p>Similarly, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.1325/abstract">Parker and Furnham</a> in 2007 realized that sexual ad content had no effect on viewers’ abilities to recall details of television commercials. The study also found that women recalled ads without sexual content better than they did sexualized ads. </p>
<p>A more <a href="http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2015/07/sex-violence.aspx">recent study</a> conducted in July at Ohio State University discovered an even more conflicting effect. Violent and sexual content in ads again succeeded in grabbing attention, but it also overshadowed other important aspects of the marketing effort, including the product being promoted. As a result, the researchers concluded that sex and violence in ads actually impeded product memory and lessened purchase intentions. </p>
<p>But what if sex does “sell” for some companies? Maybe erotic advertising is effective for Calvin Klein and certain others who continue to use it for their target markets. Although companies may find exceptions for what works, there are no exclusions for what’s ethical.</p>
<h2>Why ethical advertising matters</h2>
<p>Unfortunately, some advertisers and other marketers have spurned morality for decades to the detriment of the industry.</p>
<p>For instance, when asked to “rate the honesty and ethical standards” of individuals in various fields, respondents to a <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx">December 2014 Gallup poll</a> placed advertisers near the bottom of the list, only above car salespeople (another group of marketers) and members of Congress. Such disrepute, however, shouldn’t be the case. </p>
<p>Of course, most people don’t want to be thought of as unethical, so such a reputation can discourage morally minded people from entering the discipline. Also, people generally don’t want to do business with individuals they don’t trust.</p>
<p>Although I know <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorieclark/2014/09/24/why-mindfulness-is-the-next-revolution-in-marketing/">many others</a> share this conviction, marketing unfortunately has lacked a common paradigm for identifying and addressing the field’s moral issues. For instance, each year Ethisphere announces its selections for “<a href="http://ethisphere.com/ethisphere-announces-the-2015-worlds-most-ethical-companies/">The World’s Most Ethical Companies</a>,” which many of the winners are eager to promote. The organization’s <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2015/03/19/the-worlds-most-ethical-companies-2015/">140-question application</a>, however, is hardly a tool that marketers can readily use to help make daily ethical decisions.</p>
<p>This absence convinced me last year to develop a straightforward model of marketing ethics called <a href="http://mindfulmarketing.org/">Mindful Marketing</a> to evaluate marketing strategies and tactics, including morally suspect ones like sexualized advertising. </p>
<p>Simply put, to be considered “mindful,” marketing practices must be two things: effective, that is, they accomplish their marketing-related objectives; and ethically sound, that is, they don’t invite any obvious moral compromise.</p>
<p>Together these two goals form the foundation of what I call the “<a href="http://www.mindfulmarketing.org/mindful-meter--matrix.html">mindful matrix</a>,” a visual representation of the concept and its four categories of marketing: mindful, single-minded, simple-minded and mindless.</p>
<h2>Like a bad case of food poisoning</h2>
<p>So where does sex in advertising fall within the mindful matrix? As mentioned above, there may be times when sexualized ads are effective at accomplishing their marketing goals. More often, however, the sensual promotion fizzles, distracting target market members from product benefits and failing to create stakeholder value. </p>
<p>In terms of societal values, the erotic images that such ads often employ undermine decency and respect by objectifying individuals (usually women), fueling unhealthy sexual appetites and reducing human existence to the satisfaction of sensual desires.</p>
<p>Yes, sexually charged advertising grabs attention, and it is often memorable, but so is a bad case of food poisoning. Like other mindless marketing, oversexualized ads leave an ill feeling for many consumers and may sicken an entire society.</p>
<p>Will there come a day when advertising is automatically considered honest and marketing tops the list for trustworthiness? That remains to be seen, but right now <a href="http://www.mindfulmarketing.org/">Mindful Marketing</a> invites marketers and consumers to share in this vision of ethical exchange and to help move forward to such a future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45676/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Hagenbuch is the founder of Mindful Marketing (<a href="http://www.mindfulmarketing.org">www.mindfulmarketing.org</a>) and Professor of Marketing at Messiah College where he teaches marketing and ethics courses, integrating the Mindful Marketing paradigm. He offers consulting services in the areas of marketing and ethics, often to nonprofit organizations in partnership with his students.</span></em></p>Studies show sexualized advertising often isn’t effective, and may even have adverse consequences for the product being promoted.David Hagenbuch, Professor of Marketing, Messiah CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/407962015-05-26T10:06:35Z2015-05-26T10:06:35ZWhy does social media advertising fall flat?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82731/original/image-20150522-32589-1yyi6a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Many Facebook users view ads as a violation of their personal space.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&search_tracking_id=VpBZ0ABpL2V4e33ddWjoKQ&searchterm=facebook%20laptop&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=204633106">'laptop' via www.shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Social media use has exploded over the past five years, with nearly three-quarters of all online adults using <a href="http://wearesocial.net/tag/statistics/">some social media</a> network. Leading social media platform Facebook claims that <a href="http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/facebook-tops-1-billion-mobile-users-157209">more than one billion people</a> use its website. </p>
<p>Based on these numbers, advertisers and marketers have used communication philosopher Marshall McLuhan’s aphorism <a href="http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/mcluhan.html">“The Medium is the Message”</a> when approaching this opportunity. McLuhan was talking about television, but social media sites have well outpaced television’s access to the buying public. </p>
<p>Advertisers and marketers are attracted to social media because they have a huge reach, and it’s relatively cheap to place ads on them.</p>
<p>In addition to these benefits, a <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full">2014 study</a> commissioned by Facebook stated that there is “experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks” – meaning users can pass on positive or negative emotions to others through the network.</p>
<p>The study goes on to point out that not only can these reactions be manipulated, but they can also be transferred to a friend subconsciously. </p>
<p>So it makes sense that advertisers would want to exploit these networks to sell their products. But the best advertisements are compelling and engaging; are those used on sites like Twitter and Facebook connecting with users?</p>
<p>In short: no. In the second of two studies conducted at the University of Florida, we found that most Facebook ads are seen as unappealing and not engaging.</p>
<h2>Diminishing appeal</h2>
<p>Our study measured reactions to the idea of advertising and marketing communications on Facebook, without measuring reaction to specific ads. </p>
<p>Using <a href="http://www.adsam.com">AdSAM®</a> – the Attitude Self-Assessment Manikin – we were able to measure reactions to five key Facebook marketing vehicles: Banner Ads, Suggested Posts (sometimes referred to as “promoted posts”), two types of newsfeed re-posts – referred to as either “I liked” or “my friends liked” – and Business Pages. </p>
<p>Respondents were then asked to evaluate their impressions of these ads, which appear regularly – in the forms outlined above – on their newsfeeds.</p>
<p>In addition to gathering key emotional response indicators (Appeal, Engagement and Empowerment) to the ads, this study also measured Credibility, Personal Relevance and Intrusiveness to determine the drivers of the emotions among the respondents. </p>
<p>Two hundred twenty-eight undergraduate students – a prime target of advertisers – participated in the online survey. </p>
<p>Although there are significant differences in the Appeal, Engagement and Empowerment results, none of the responses was high or promising. Overall, on a nine-point high scale, the average Appeal was 4.5. Engagement was 4.2, while Empowerment was 5.1. Previous AdSAM studies have shown that television advertising frequently has much higher scores on these dimensions of <a href="http://www.adsam.com/files/The%20Power%20of%20Affect.pdf">emotion.</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=307&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=307&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/82714/original/image-20150522-32589-dlmlrx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=307&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The results of the survey (click to zoom).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Facebook users do, however, have significantly more positive emotional responses when exposed to ad and marketing messages re-posted by users (“I Liked,” “My Friends Liked” and the “Business Pages”) than ads originating directly from marketers (“Banner Ads” and “Suggested Posts”).</p>
<p>The more positive reactions to the user re-posts (versus the direct advertiser posts) seem to be related to the third dimension of emotion: empowerment. When users feel like they have control, they respond better to the idea of these ads. In addition, ads placed directly by advertisers are seen as less credible, less personally relevant and more intrusive than those re-posted by Facebook users.</p>
<p>Overall, the emotional response to Facebook ads is below the midpoint on appeal and engagement. The only ad format reported to be slightly more positive is the Business Page. This may be due to the fact that this vehicle is more directly beneficial to users, because it comes to users through re-posts and promotions, and seems like it’s less blatantly trying to “sell” users products.</p>
<p>As previously mentioned, this study is a follow-up to a <a href="http://www.adsam.com/ckfinder/userfiles/files/FindUsOnFacebook_AdSAM-Research.pdf">study conducted in 2011</a>. Unfortunately for advertisers, the appeal, engagement and empowerment of these ads have actually fallen since the first study.</p>
<h2>Why is this the case?</h2>
<p>Social media marketing messages clearly have a different effect on user response than more traditional advertising. In some cases, social media users view sites like Facebook and Twitter as their personal space. Advertising into this space, then, can be perceived as an intrusion. This does not seem to be true for television, newspapers, magazines or radio.</p>
<p>One recommendation from our study is that marketers and advertisers focus more on advertisements that are designed for this medium – ads that actively promote re-posting. Another is to make marketing communications more entertaining and interactive. In other words, advertisers should direct more effort toward the developing engaging content.</p>
<p>Selling products with a content marketing approach is nothing new. Infomercials, native advertising, special advertising sections in news magazines and product-based TV shows have been around since before the middle of last century. John Deere even published an advertising/content-based magazine <a href="http://todaymade.com/blog/history-of-content-marketing">in 1895</a>. Food products have created and distributed cookbooks for their products for years. And, of course, there’s there <a href="http://www.asseenontv.com/ronco-veg-o-matic/detail.php?p=346520">Ronco Vegamatic</a>.</p>
<p>To that end, General Electric <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/business/general-electric-planning-television-series-covering-science-and-tech.html">recently announced</a> that it was hiring film director Ron Howard to develop new content marketing for the National Geographic channel. </p>
<p>And this approach is now making its way into social media. Some companies are <a href="http://www.convinceandconvert.com/content-marketing/9-best-from-buffer/">providing guidance</a> on how to enhance social media ads with engaging content.</p>
<p>However, in the realm of social media, content-based marketing is a risky venture. The audience is more resistant to sponsored content; if the efforts backfire, users could transfer these negative reactions to the products themselves. On the other hand, if advertisers can make the content seem more personally relevant, the feelings for intrusion may subside and the emotional reaction to the brand become more appealing, engaging and empowering.</p>
<p>Companies considering advertising on Facebook and other social media networks will be most effective if they direct their effort to making an emotional connection with their audience. Building brands is more than presenting facts about a product or conducting giveaways. It means making the benefits come alive for the consumer. </p>
<p>Employing creative strategies that are more entertaining or truly informative may be one method for making these ads appear less intrusive. Ron Howard and other well-known directors may be part of the solution, but they should remember that in the world of social media, they don’t have the luxury of a 90-minute presentation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/40796/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jon D Morris consults to/owns shares in AdSAM Marketing LLC. He has received no funding for this study. This study was conducted under the auspices of the University of Florida and is a not-for-profit study. Some of the tools were borrowed with permission form AdSAM. </span></em></p>Facebook earned $3.6 billion in ad revenue last year. According to recent research, for advertisers this might not be money well-spent.Jon D Morris, Professor of Advertising, University of FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/372562015-02-06T18:27:26Z2015-02-06T18:27:26ZHard Evidence: is Facebook a good use of election campaign budgets?<p>News that the Conservative Party has been spending more than £100,000 a month on <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31141547">Facebook advertising</a> has its supporters and rivals all wondering if this is money well spent.</p>
<p>It seems like a lot of money and indeed, it represents a significantly bigger investment than any of the other main political parties, but then again, the potential reach is huge.</p>
<p>Labour spends ten times less per month on the social network at just £10,000. And although UKIP spent up to £3,000 on Facebook messages for specific by-elections, the party generally only spends £100 per month.</p>
<h2>How far does 100k go?</h2>
<p>The Facebook pages for the main political parties in the UK tend to use images with short text descriptions and animations or short videos. The general theme seems to be mocking opponents.</p>
<p>This is part of the American-style campaigning that is engulfing the UK in the run up to the 2015 election. Barack Obama famously led the pack on the use of social media when he maximised Twitter in 2008 to pull in small donations from a vast number of supporters. He is credited with being the <a href="http://mprcenter.org/blog/2013/01/how-obama-won-the-social-media-battle-in-the-2012-presidential-campaign/">first social media president</a> who understood the power of social engagement and content “virality” to maximise reach. </p>
<p>Each of the posts on the Conservative Facebook page at the moment is carefully constructed to maximise its viral life. There is satire aimed at discrediting Labour and more positive messages highlighting achievements.</p>
<p>There is an image poking fun at shadow chancellor Ed Balls, for example, after he <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31126504">forgot the surname</a> of Bill Thomas, his party’s small business task force leader, in a recent interview.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=313&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=313&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=313&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71313/original/image-20150206-28612-1yb56pj.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Balls’ blunder makes Facebook fodder.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facebook</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Another shows Ed Miliband cosying up to Gerry Adams and Alex Salmond at the door of Number 10 after The Sun reported that <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/28/sinn-fein-denies-considering-post-election-deal-labour">Sinn Fein</a> was considering a coalition deal with Labour.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=313&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=313&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=313&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71314/original/image-20150206-28612-128izlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Powerful photoshopping skills on show.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facebook</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Each post on the Conservative page has several thousand likes and hundreds of comments and shares. But notably, whoever is running the page for the party doesn’t seem to be engaging much with the people leaving comments – some of which verge on online bullying. A picture is posted and then left for the crowd, with little conversation from the official page account thereafter.</p>
<p>This gives us a glimpse of where the party’s £100,000 is going. It seems to be being used to amplify the posts to advertise them to a wider audience rather than employing someone to engage with the audience.</p>
<h2>What’s in a like?</h2>
<p>If the Tories measure bang for buck in the number of likes their page attracts, they might think that the money is being well spent. They certainly lead the pack in this respect, with nearly 350,000 likes for the main page. However, the Tories are closely followed by UKIP, even though the newcomers invest a fraction of the Conservative budget in Facebook.</p>
<p>That said, it must be noted that this comparison does not take into account the Facebook advertising for individual party leaders and party representatives, who might also be benefiting from the Facebook advertising budget. We are comparing a party with 303 MPs with a party with 2 MPs.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=371&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=371&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=371&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71295/original/image-20150206-28601-w0tlgn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Main political parties Facebook page likes comparison 5th February 2015.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author Provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Political parties obsess over headline social media figures like these but the main aim of social media is not just to have a lot of fans. Engaging with users is essential too, so tactics like <a href="https://theconversation.com/buying-fake-accounts-wont-get-you-anywhere-on-twitter-36265">buying fake twitter followers won’t get you anywhere</a> unless people are commenting – and that also applies to Facebook.</p>
<p>In this respect, when you compare the Conservatives and UKIP over the past seven days, UKIP leads with 24 posts and an average of 3,000 likes per post. Although the number of comments tends to be higher on individual Conservative posts, as a whole, the number is insignificant, considering the number of posts created by UKIP. </p>
<p>This suggest that UKIP’s Facebook strategy is to focus on the quantity of messages. UKIP tends to use pictures instead of the elaborate animations preferred by the Conservatives. Despite their simplicity in production, the pictures used by UKIP strike a chord with their activists – resulting in the high numbers of likes. </p>
<p>For all this, the most important mark of social success is the number of shares you get. And this is where the Conservatives really fall down. Over the past week, their content has been shared 6620 times whereas as UKIP content has been shared a whopping 12293 times. So, assuming that the party did spend its £100,000 this month, it hasn’t really been cost effective.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=374&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=374&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=374&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=470&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=470&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71297/original/image-20150206-28589-tago3k.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=470&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">One week on Facebook Conservative vs UKIP - Facebook posts likes, comments and shares.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The engagement levels for both UKIP and the Conservatives are much higher when compared to a political Facebook page that has twice as many likes – that of new right-wing party <a href="https://www.facebook.com/britainfirstgb">Britain First</a>. This group has caused alarm by attracting more than 600,000 likes on Facebook but doesn’t seem to be matching those likes with engagement.</p>
<h2>Importing success</h2>
<p>If the 2012 US presidential election is anything to go by, Facebook can be an indicator of political popularity. There was even a tongue-in-cheek website showing how quickly losing the presidential election campaign translated into a <a href="http://usir.salford.ac.uk/28501/1/UKAIS-2013-v3.pdf">loss of Facebook friends for Mitt Romney </a>.</p>
<p>Obama’s campaign made successful use of memes or parodies to spread messages. For example, blunders made by the opposition can quickly be exploited, as was the case with Romney’s unfortunate comment about his <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfXgpem78kQ">binders full of women</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=627&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=627&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71293/original/image-20150206-28598-tgbceg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=627&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">I have binders full of women.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Gaffes like these are quickly picked up and spread across social networks to ridicule the opposition and undermine their credibility. The “binders full of women” US example is comparable to the “Bill Somebody” that emerged in the recent UK campaigns. Although it is early days, the current campaign doesn’t seem as witty or sharp - are the Conservatives being too conservative?</p>
<h2>Is it worth it?</h2>
<p>Parties across the political spectrum need to strike the right balance on social media campaigning. Amplifying a message is a good idea but only when the message is viral in its natural form. Social media objectives must also consider the negative impact that paid advertising can cause. Just as likes are gained, they can be lost as a <a href="http://usir.salford.ac.uk/28501/1/UKAIS-2013-v3.pdf">result of an aggressive and irrelevant content amplification</a>.</p>
<p>Statistics from 2014 show Facebook is still the <a href="http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/research-publications/adults/adults-media-lit-14/">dominant social media network in the UK</a>. But, other networks are on the rise – and this is where the main parties vary in their digital strategies.</p>
<p>YouTube, for example, is integrated to best effect in the digital campaign of the Conservative party. The party has viewer figures in the thousands on what is increasingly credited as the second <a href="http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/research-publications/adults/adults-media-lit-14/">largest search engine in the UK after Google</a>. Despite that, the content is not very “social” since all comments on the videos are blocked.</p>
<p>As the May election nears, British political parties are proving keen to emulate the successful use of social media in the US to win support. And indeed, the American precedent suggests that larger budgets tend to win more votes. But whether running a good political advertising campaign is a good predictor of performance in running a country is not quite as clear.</p>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/hard-evidence">Hard Evidence</a> is a series of articles in which academics use research evidence to tackle the trickiest public policy questions.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/37256/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aleksej works for Salford Business School and in partnership with Fast Web Media. He receives funding from a number of organisations including the European Commission and Technology Strategy Board (now Innovate UK). He is also a head of the advisory board to the Search Engine Marketing Trade Association (SEMTA).</span></em></p>News that the Conservative Party has been spending more than £100,000 a month on Facebook advertising has its supporters and rivals all wondering if this is money well spent. It seems like a lot of money…Aleksej Heinze, Senior Lecturer and Co-Director of the Centre for Digital Business, University of SalfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/328312014-10-14T05:20:05Z2014-10-14T05:20:05ZBranded content: how online advertorials are changing the shape of modern journalism<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/61380/original/q8hd8rhq-1412934956.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Any room for journalism in there?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">David Erickson</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A deal was struck with 20th Century Fox to run a native advertising campaign on MailOnline and Metro.co.uk to promote the release of Ben Affleck’s latest film, “Gone Girl”. The movie was advertised in two features exploring <a href="http://metro.co.uk/2014/10/01/now-that-gone-girl-has-made-us-question-everything-we-thought-we-knew-about-trust-heres-how-to-spot-if-your-partner-is-lying-to-you-4878764/">“trust in your partner”</a> with content written by MailOnline staff.</p>
<p>Quoted in media and marketing magazine, <a href="http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/10/01/mailonline-strikes-native-ad-deal-20th-century-fox-promote-movie-gone-girl">the Drum</a>, 20th Century Fox’s media promotions executive Maria Buttaci said: “MailOnline and Metro.co.uk have given us the perfect opportunity to editorially place the film at the heart of the websites’ content.”</p>
<p>Of course the idea of sponsored content in newspapers is not new. As <a href="https://twitter.com/emilybell">Emily Bell</a>, of Columbia Journalism School has pointed out, the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2014/jan/05/native-advertising-paywall-transparency">origins of “advertorials” stretch back almost a century to 1917</a> when the American Federal Trade Commission settled a case with the Muensen Speciality Co, over an ad for its vacuum cleaner, which it presented as a favourable newspaper review. Bell wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Today you might expect to see something similar, but in the form of a viral link circulated round your social network, entitled “13 vacuum cleaners that suck in the wrong way, and one that doesn’t”.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>MailOnline began investigating the <a href="http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/opinion/1229925/">possibilities </a>of what has become known as “native content” before Christmas 2013 when the “traditional” Marks and Spencer festive commercial appeared on its site. Heralded with the headline: “Watch it here first! M&S unveil magical Christmas ad”, the accompanying <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2487284/Watch-M-S-unveil-magical-Christmas-ad-starring-Rosie-Huntington-Whiteley-David-Gandy-online-TV-broadcast.html">article</a> also featured M&S lingerie and told its readers that as well as “releasing the advert over the internet before it airs on TV, they [M&S] are giving their Facebook fans and Twitter followers the opportunity to vote on a name for Rosie’s dog in the advert”. </p>
<p>Clearly, a huge endorsement for the retailer, the article nevertheless appeared under the byline of one of its established writers.</p>
<p>In August this year though, it was much more explicit about who was paying for content when it ran the article: “Is there a slave living on your street?” As the <a href="http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/mail-online-goes-native-home-office-sponsored-editorial-deal">Press Gazette </a> illustrated, the article was written in the MailOnline style and appeared as indistinguishable from other articles on the site. However, just above the name of the author, Kieran Corcoran, were the words, <a href="http://omnifeed.com/article/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2728962/Beatings-brainwashing-hard-labour-How-thousands-people-modern-Britain-STILL-exploited-slaves-happening-street.html">“sponsored by the Home Office”</a>.</p>
<h2>Mass penetration</h2>
<p>It’s little wonder that governments and corporations want to sell their wares through MailOnline. The latest <a href="http://www.nrs.co.uk/latest-results/nrs-padd-results/newspapers-nrspaddresults/">National Readership Survey</a> figures indicate that, staggeringly, the Mail brand (Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline) is read by almost <a href="http://mailconnected.co.uk/stats/news?item=4968.">half of all British adults.</a> The NRS estimates almost <a href="http://www.mediaweek.co.uk/article/1296077/nrs-padd-daily-mail-titles-command-highest-print-digital-readership-uk">14m people</a> a week read either the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday or MailOnline and as the Mail itself points out, its “newsbrand"’ reaches 48.27% of the population. </p>
<p>When you also factor in that MailOnline had <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/17/mail-online-ad-revenue-daily-mail-mail-on-sunday?CMP=twt_gu">180m</a> global monthly unique users in August 2014, it’s evident that we are dealing with a media operation of huge scope.</p>
<p>The Mail’s <a href="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/pdf/2013/05/whitepaper.pdf">own research</a> has confirmed the attractions of branded content. Consumers are now considered to be extremely guarded against naked marketing techniques, so many companies are resorting to selling brands in the "trusted” form of journalism content which engages with the audience through information and entertainment. </p>
<p>It is felt that, particularly online, disrupting the users’ experience with traditional ads is rarely productive – and in some cases demonstrably damaging to customer relations. The point with branded content is that the consumer can engage with a particular product by deciding to read an article. He or she, in theory anyway, is more likely to be attracted to something if it is not “hard sold”.</p>
<h2>Guardian Labs</h2>
<p>It is not only the Mail that embraced branded content. In February the Guardian launched its “Unilever sustainable living partnership”. Its <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/gnm-press-office/guardian-launches-guardian-labs-with-unilever-partnership">press release </a>stated: “Guardian News and Media (GNM) today officially launches Guardian Labs – its branded content and innovation agency – which offers brands bold and compelling new ways to tell their stories and engage with influential Guardian audiences.”</p>
<p>And the brands are prepared to pay for such content. The Guardian/Unilever deal is said to be worth <a href="http://www.whatsnewinpublishing.co.uk/content/guardian-signs-%C2%A3multi-million-branded-content-deal-unilever">“over seven figures”</a>. Meanwhile MailOnline’s head of US operations, <a href="http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/09/25/mailonline-aiming-charge-65000-native-ad">Jon Steinberg</a>, has stated he is hoping that clients will pay £65,000 per <a href="http://www.iab.net/nativeadvertising">native advertisement</a> thanks to a guarantee of 450,000+ page views.</p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/analysis/supplements/agency-opinions-content-marketing/native-content-growth-means-brands-have-big-opportunities/4005872.article">some experts</a>, native content is set to grow remarkably in the next few years. It’s predicted that as much as US$3bn will be invested in native advertising formats by 2016.</p>
<p>The rise of marketing such as this can be seen as further evidence of the lines between <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/937b06c2-3ebd-11e4-adef-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3FgbwQknp">journalism and PR becoming blurred </a> and in many ways this is old news. In 2008, <a href="http://www.mediawise.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Quality-Independence-of-British-Journalism.pdfv">Cardiff University’s School of Journalism</a> found the content of domestic news stories in our quality media was heavily dependent on “pre-packaged news”. In 2011 a nameless News International employee told the Daily Mail that under the stewardship of Rebekah Brooks, the Sun and The News of the World were in thrall to the PR industry. “Scores, if not hundreds, of front-page stories were written by the PR men,” <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013046/Rebekah-Brooks-Sun-News-World-run-fictional-stories-insider-claims.html">he said</a>.</p>
<p>But as branded content increases what happens to journalists becomes entirely predictable. As <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/937b06c2-3ebd-11e4-adef-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3FgbwQknp">Andrew Edgecliffe Johnson </a> reports, employment in US newsrooms has fallen by a third since 2006, according to the American Society of News Editors; for every working journalist in America there are now 4.6 PR people.</p>
<p>The key point is that building brand content is definitely not journalism. Not if we understand journalism to be about facts and objectivity. Anyone writing copy for branded content is interested in one thing primarily: showing their client in the best possible light.</p>
<p>All this being the case, it would be easy to condemn The Guardian for betraying its values, but this would be to deny the financial realities in a media world of diminishing returns and the huge importance advertising has always had in the success of newspapers. The notion, too, that the media once enjoyed a “golden age” of complete editorial independence and transparency is a foolish one. Alliances such as the one with Unilever represent the best way for the Guardian to actually <em>survive.</em> And, in this media landscape, that remains a news organisation’s overarching ambition.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/32831/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Jewell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A deal was struck with 20th Century Fox to run a native advertising campaign on MailOnline and Metro.co.uk to promote the release of Ben Affleck’s latest film, “Gone Girl”. The movie was advertised in…John Jewell, Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/286202014-06-30T12:24:14Z2014-06-30T12:24:14ZKLM angered millions of Mexicans to make a joke about the World Cup<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52630/original/pb2zc8gz-1404119219.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>No sooner had the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27961190">Netherlands beaten Mexico</a> with an equaliser two minutes before the end of the match and a last minute penalty, than KLM joined those who seek to capitalise on the drama of the World Cup with topical advertising: “Adios Amigos” they said to their Mexican opponents, underneath a sign for airport departures. </p>
<p>This was just the latest in a number of quick-thinking adverts which seek to link to topical events in the World Cup. While some can be highly profitable and add kudos to a company, others – such as the KLM tweet – can be detrimental. It’s a fine line for advertisers to tread, but a look at some of the recent ads inspired by the World Cup shows how they can capitalise on the mood of the moment without upsetting millions of fans.</p>
<p>The recent incident with Luis Suarez of Uruguay spawned a number of quick reactions from advertisers. </p>
<p>Marketers sought to capture the moment, from Snickers:</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52631/original/h8xvj3ph-1404119344.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To Philips:</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/52632/original/hkcf8vdz-1404119385.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What though are the pros and cons of this type of topical marketing and the potential benefits and perils of its viral spread on social media?</p>
<p>Social media has grown as a means of marketing communication for businesses as well as individual users, with its real time, engaging and –- often – user-generated content. Platforms such as Facebook and Twitter now command massive potential audiences. In 2013, Facebook had <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/feb/04/facebook-in-numbers-statistics">1.23 billion active accounts</a>, <a href="https://about.twitter.com/company">Twitter 255m</a> (78% of whom are accessing via mobile devices), with newer platforms such as <a href="https://twitter.com/vineapp/status/369911739782946816">Vine</a> (40m registered users), and <a href="http://blog.instagram.com/post/60694542173/150-million">Instagram</a> (150m registered users).</p>
<p>Fresh and “in the moment” are important features of social media as a channel for advertisers. So, funny comment on incidents during the World Cup fits the bill perfectly for content, which is likely to be spread rapidly between users. </p>
<p>What, though, are the benefits and potential pitfalls of this type of advertising?</p>
<p>One of the obvious benefits is the relative low cost of the internet and social media as a channel to market compared with the cost of advertising on television or even in print. A second is speed or immediacy. When used effectively, it is possible to get these advertising responses out within minutes of a match finishing or an incident occurring. A third is that football and the World Cup is emotionally engaging, and that this type of advert is likely to gain attention and be passed from user to user. </p>
<p>But there are potential pitfalls of this form of topical, social media advertising. First, these adverts often use humour. While the World Cup has a massive potential audience, humour is often culturally specific and – along with topical adverts – is not always a form of advertising which is <a href="http://www.millwardbrown.com/docs/default-source/insight-documents/knowledge-points/MillwardBrown_KnowledgePoint_HumorInAdvertising.pdf">well suited to global audiences</a>. </p>
<p>Put simply, these messages may simply not be misunderstood because of cultural differences. Similarly, topical advertising only works with those who are aware of the event to which it refers. </p>
<p>Second, and more worryingly, both topical and humorous ads run the risk of offending at least part of the potential audience. So an advert which pokes fun at the Suarez incident might entertain some audiences, but might offend Uruguayan fans and customers of those products. </p>
<p>It may also miss the mark. What is funny to one person may not be to the next. The KLM advert met with mixed responses: was this funny, or was it just poor sportsmanship and <a href="http://time.com/2938225/klm-royal-dutch-airlines-gael-garcia-bernal-world-cup/">offensive</a>? Opinion was divided. The ad appears to have been taken down by KLM, but is still circulating, perhaps all the more for this. </p>
<p>So, these approaches are relatively low cost and potentially engage audiences and provoke reactions, whether positive or negative. They may provide a clever means of seizing the moment. But they may provoke negative responses in at least part of the global market, and the speed with which they circulate means that if they don’t go down well, they are very hard to recall and stop from further spread.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28620/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
No sooner had the Netherlands beaten Mexico with an equaliser two minutes before the end of the match and a last minute penalty, than KLM joined those who seek to capitalise on the drama of the World Cup…Sue Bridgewater, Head of Sports Research, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104172012-11-23T00:00:12Z2012-11-23T00:00:12ZDrawing the line on fear: balance in advertising standards<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17601/original/vdkdvwfp-1352859255.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There's a fine balance between the needs of social advertisers to create messages that will grab attention and public standards .</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Martin Kenny</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Advertisers responsible for getting important messages through to a population swamped with advice and warnings suffer from understandable frustration. So, what does it take to make people take notice?</p>
<p>One effective strategy is to appeal to our survival instincts through fear. Fear can be a powerful persuader and is commonly used by advertisers trying to persuade us to change behaviours that can lead to preventable problems. Obesity, cancer screening, road safety, climate change, AIDS prevention, motorcycle helmets, financial security… the list is long. In fact, it’s difficult these days to escape some form of fear-inducing message, be it on television, billboards, magazines, or the internet.</p>
<p>But while fear appeals are a popular communication strategy, not everyone agrees they’re the best approach and more than 50 years of academic research has <a href="http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11907.pdf">delivered mixed evidence</a> of their effectiveness. Some openly question their use, cautioning that using fear to promote a cause may do more harm than good. The Grim Reaper AIDS awareness campaign of the late 1980s, for instance, while extremely successful at getting attention was criticised for scaremongering, exaggerating risk and terrifying children. </p>
<p>So this sort of appeal faces another challenge: how to make people realise a threat or problem is likely to affect them without crossing the line of public acceptability?</p>
<p>Recently, the <a href="http://strokefoundation.com.au/">National Stroke Foundation</a> found itself on the wrong side of this line when the <a href="http://mumbrella.com.au/nightmarish-stroke-serial-killer-ad-banned-123255#more-123255">Advertising Standards Bureau (ASB) ruled</a> its advertisement for stroke prevention contained an unjustifiable level of violence for the amount of health information it contained.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e8ABfMG9XZ0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Complainants described it as “disturbing” “graphic” and “horrendous”, while the organisation argued it had only resorted to this extreme measure after ten years of tireless but relatively unsuccessful campaigning to bring the issue to the attention of the Australian public.</p>
<p>Persuasion using fear involves conveying a threat with a high level of meaning for the individual – the people it’s aimed at need to believe it can happen to them or affect them in some way.</p>
<p>This can be relatively straightforward for personal health issues, more complicated when trying to convince young drivers they are not invincible but for larger, global issues, it can be a great challenge. The problem with an issue such as <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-ropeik/fear-of-climate-change-ma_b_1665019.html">climate change</a>, for example, is that many people don’t really feel a tangible, immediate fear of personal consequence and tend to focus on more immediate concerns about the results of economic measures such as carbon pricing.</p>
<p>But creating a threat of sufficient urgency to generate fear is only one side of the equation. The other element (on which research agrees) is efficacy – the viewers’ belief that they can follow the offered advice and that this will reduce the threat. <a href="http://122.99.94.111/cases/0397-12.pdf">The ruling</a> on the National Stroke Foundation ad noted the violent, menacing nature of the message and the lack of any information about how to “avoid, fight or recognise the symptoms of stroke.”</p>
<p>Generally, fear appeals will work best when they make the audience very afraid and then show them how to reduce the threat by doing what is recommended. ASB rulings have been in line with this thinking. In addition to the ruling on the stroke ad, a Western Australian drinking ad complaint was upheld for similar reasons earlier this year – the violent message was deemed to be unrelated to the message being conveyed.</p>
<p>Regulators have to balance the needs of social advertisers to create messages that will grab attention with public standards of acceptable levels of disturbing images in the media. Research suggests that people tend to tolerate higher levels of disturbing material in social marketing but it has to be worth the effort. And there’s always the risk that too many disturbing images will just <a href="http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/do-shock-safety-ads-work/asc/">turn people off</a> altogether. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10417/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jannet Pendleton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Advertisers responsible for getting important messages through to a population swamped with advice and warnings suffer from understandable frustration. So, what does it take to make people take notice…Jannet Pendleton, Senior Lecturer, Communication Studies Group, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.