Marketers Hone Digital Game
By Emily Steel
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310469330222313.html
Companies including PepsiCo, Anheuser-Busch, CareerBuilder and more have decided to step up their Superbowl advertising effectiveness by using a variety of digital technologies. Anything from placing interactive links in a Superbowl commercial to advertising an ad on the Web are being used to create more interest. PepsiCo even developed a contest offering $1 million to anyone who can create an ad for Doritos that scores #1 in USA Today's Superbowl ad competition. This competition has generated tons of interest in Doritos. Not only are these companies taking advantage of new technology in order to better market their products, these are ways to cut back on spending, as Superbowl ads can cost up to $3 million for a 30 second spot this year. They also allow companies to get the most for their money.
It never ceases to amaze me how much things continue to change. Marketing and advertising tactics are constantly improving and using new technology to promote products. It is obvious that companies must stay on top of the game, being innovative or creative in using ways to utilize the technology and trends available. For example, I have seen one self-made Doritos commercial, and realize that these chips are gaining so much popularity from this competition. Word of mouth is powerful, and if a group of people are pulling for their ad to win, they will talk about it and try to get everyone they know on board. I say kudos to PepsiCo for this idea and even the rest of the advertising innovators mentioned in the article.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Be Social.
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/jan2009/sb20090116_666697_page_2.htm
"Why Social Media Is Worth Small Business Owners' Time"
-by Steve McKee
from The Wall Street Journal
Steve McKee writes this article for small business owners, understanding their position, but attempting to convince them that social media could be very helpful in their businesses. He states that he understands that this type of advertising or business practice is intimidating to many, but recommends that small business owners take the time to get their feet wet in these areas. Due to the increasing popularity of networking tools such as Facebook and LinkedIn, social media is becoming a huge opportunity, and one that is too big to miss. He says that while they can be scary at first, once users get the hang of them, they can be fun and rewarding. While many people were first confused and intimidated by web sites, too, he sees these forms of social media continuing to take off and thrive. McKee encourages small business owners to take on one new networking site a month, and guarantees that it will help business and contacts, stating that by the end of the year, the businesses that utilize this tactic can be ahead of their competition by 90%.
It seems odd to me how quickly things are evolving. I just learned of LinkedIn in the fall, and now I feel as though I hear about it everywhere. I look at those who don't know what it is and think "Where have you BEEN?", yet I learned of it in October. I can also recall when I had no idea what facebook was. When I heard the term the summer before I came to college I thought the concept was absurd. So did everyone else who never had it. My sister told me she remembers "vowing" to never get facebook. That didn't last long once its popularity struck. Now, as it has become a household term and its fame seems limitless, it only seems intelligent to use it as a business, marketing, and networking tool. Why didn't we think of this before? Seeing all the technologies evolve seems, at times, overwhelming, and I can't imagine what it must feel like for businesses.
"Why Social Media Is Worth Small Business Owners' Time"
-by Steve McKee
from The Wall Street Journal
Steve McKee writes this article for small business owners, understanding their position, but attempting to convince them that social media could be very helpful in their businesses. He states that he understands that this type of advertising or business practice is intimidating to many, but recommends that small business owners take the time to get their feet wet in these areas. Due to the increasing popularity of networking tools such as Facebook and LinkedIn, social media is becoming a huge opportunity, and one that is too big to miss. He says that while they can be scary at first, once users get the hang of them, they can be fun and rewarding. While many people were first confused and intimidated by web sites, too, he sees these forms of social media continuing to take off and thrive. McKee encourages small business owners to take on one new networking site a month, and guarantees that it will help business and contacts, stating that by the end of the year, the businesses that utilize this tactic can be ahead of their competition by 90%.
It seems odd to me how quickly things are evolving. I just learned of LinkedIn in the fall, and now I feel as though I hear about it everywhere. I look at those who don't know what it is and think "Where have you BEEN?", yet I learned of it in October. I can also recall when I had no idea what facebook was. When I heard the term the summer before I came to college I thought the concept was absurd. So did everyone else who never had it. My sister told me she remembers "vowing" to never get facebook. That didn't last long once its popularity struck. Now, as it has become a household term and its fame seems limitless, it only seems intelligent to use it as a business, marketing, and networking tool. Why didn't we think of this before? Seeing all the technologies evolve seems, at times, overwhelming, and I can't imagine what it must feel like for businesses.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Paper or Internet?
"Seattle Post-Intelligencer Faces Closure if Buyer Isn't Found Soon"
-Shira Ovide
The Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123153462765669141.html
Hearst Corporation announced that it will be selling the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (P-I) due to large losses, which it blames on the current economic situation. Hearst stated that if the paper isn't sold in 60 days, then the P-I will close or become an online publication only. It seems as though the recession has hit many publications, as Frank Blethen, Times CEO, stated that it is possible that the P-I closing could increase the chances that the Seattle Times can survive the current economic crisis. Although the situation seemed evident, the article states that employees took the news hard, shedding tears over the announcement.
I found this article to be particularly interesting because I'm not sure that the economy is the sole reason for the lack of newspaper sales. While I believe the recession is a partial cause of loss of revenue for the P-I, I think that changes in technology and social practices also contribute. People aren't giving up their knowledge of the news or current events, they are giving up their newspaper subscriptions because they can get this information elsewhere. Online news sites such as MSN, CNN, etc. make it possible for customers to give up their physical paper version of the news.
-Shira Ovide
The Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123153462765669141.html
Hearst Corporation announced that it will be selling the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (P-I) due to large losses, which it blames on the current economic situation. Hearst stated that if the paper isn't sold in 60 days, then the P-I will close or become an online publication only. It seems as though the recession has hit many publications, as Frank Blethen, Times CEO, stated that it is possible that the P-I closing could increase the chances that the Seattle Times can survive the current economic crisis. Although the situation seemed evident, the article states that employees took the news hard, shedding tears over the announcement.
I found this article to be particularly interesting because I'm not sure that the economy is the sole reason for the lack of newspaper sales. While I believe the recession is a partial cause of loss of revenue for the P-I, I think that changes in technology and social practices also contribute. People aren't giving up their knowledge of the news or current events, they are giving up their newspaper subscriptions because they can get this information elsewhere. Online news sites such as MSN, CNN, etc. make it possible for customers to give up their physical paper version of the news.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Less is More
"Ads to Go Leaner, Meaner in '09"
Wall Street Journal Online
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111923883152873.html
With the economy continuing to slip, ad spending is expected to drop by 6.2% this year in the U.S. Thus, companies are being forced to get their points across with less money. This means that ads will now use less glamor, less time, and more simplicity. As mentioned in the article, some businesses, such as Domino's Pizza, will create advertisements that will demonstrate how they are better than the competition. Their messages will be simplistic, shorter, and right to the point. Instead of using A-list celebrities, companies will be using average Joe Schmoes or unknown actors in their commercials. Businesses will also be trying to get as much out of their money as possible, by placing ads in places where more customers will see or pay attention to them, such as cell phones and other hand-held electronic devices. Another tactic is to place advertisements online and let consumers find them on their own, thus watching these ads for pleasure. Some learning institutions will also be endorsing products and industries in need. The article states how advertisers will have to be smarter and more efficient, and use the new possibilities with technological advances.
In my opinion, I feel as though the types of advertisements written about in the article are those that are most effective. Sure, I love watching humorous and entertaining commercials, but do I ever buy the products in these ads? Don't I usually forget what product the commercial is even for? How many times have I heard about a commercial from a friend, only for them to say, "well...I'm not sure what it was for...but it was hilarious!" We love to watch the clever advertisements that are brainstormed by the advertising giants and creative geniuses, but do we love to buy their products? I can say that I do not. I am more logical and I want to know why I should spend my money on a product. If I buy a product because of a commercial, it's because the commercial made a good point. Yes, why would I pay $40 for a sweater when I can get one at Old Navy on sale for $9.99? Or, why do I buy this product when the other is clinically proven to work better? The commercials that make me realize that I have a need for the product in question, define what the product is, or why it is a better deal are the ones I truly take seriously and will actually ACT on. If these are the ads that must be produced when budgets are low, then I'd say that perhaps advertising agencies could learn from economic crises.
Wall Street Journal Online
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111923883152873.html
With the economy continuing to slip, ad spending is expected to drop by 6.2% this year in the U.S. Thus, companies are being forced to get their points across with less money. This means that ads will now use less glamor, less time, and more simplicity. As mentioned in the article, some businesses, such as Domino's Pizza, will create advertisements that will demonstrate how they are better than the competition. Their messages will be simplistic, shorter, and right to the point. Instead of using A-list celebrities, companies will be using average Joe Schmoes or unknown actors in their commercials. Businesses will also be trying to get as much out of their money as possible, by placing ads in places where more customers will see or pay attention to them, such as cell phones and other hand-held electronic devices. Another tactic is to place advertisements online and let consumers find them on their own, thus watching these ads for pleasure. Some learning institutions will also be endorsing products and industries in need. The article states how advertisers will have to be smarter and more efficient, and use the new possibilities with technological advances.
In my opinion, I feel as though the types of advertisements written about in the article are those that are most effective. Sure, I love watching humorous and entertaining commercials, but do I ever buy the products in these ads? Don't I usually forget what product the commercial is even for? How many times have I heard about a commercial from a friend, only for them to say, "well...I'm not sure what it was for...but it was hilarious!" We love to watch the clever advertisements that are brainstormed by the advertising giants and creative geniuses, but do we love to buy their products? I can say that I do not. I am more logical and I want to know why I should spend my money on a product. If I buy a product because of a commercial, it's because the commercial made a good point. Yes, why would I pay $40 for a sweater when I can get one at Old Navy on sale for $9.99? Or, why do I buy this product when the other is clinically proven to work better? The commercials that make me realize that I have a need for the product in question, define what the product is, or why it is a better deal are the ones I truly take seriously and will actually ACT on. If these are the ads that must be produced when budgets are low, then I'd say that perhaps advertising agencies could learn from economic crises.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
