« Are we doomed? | Main | Is television dead? »

January 05, 2007

Comments

misscritical

Classic Christmas present??

Simon

What a cheery start to the year, no more TV and no more job.

Still, TV's still doing alright, on average we still watch 26 hours a week, with some age groups significantly more than that. Even the young, the lightest TV viewers, consider it one of life's staples and watch around 16 hours a week (a lot of their time goes into gaming, and we can still advertise there). It remains the UK's most popular past time and I’ve heard it's growing. Plus TV is getting better technology with HD and PVRs, and those with better technology watch more, and there are more places to watch it, not just on TV, such as online and mobiles. And we don’t just watch it, we get involved, we vote for Big Brother, choose a player Cam and enter competitions. It’s getting better all the time.

So, we'll still be watching TV for a while to come, even if it's not all on the TV itself.

And marketing will continue. Companies will still be desperate to compete, grow share, tell consumers about a new fangled improvement. Clients will continue to create marketing budgets that are roughly 10% of revenue and wonder how to get their unique message across. And they will still come go to agencies to ask for help.

And words, pictures, sounds and in particular moving pictures, our core skills, will still be best for conveying messages and building brand equity.

So it's not all bad.

The problem is we can no longer rely on simply interrupting someone's TV programme as a way of getting attention. People are too good at avoiding ads as it is, plus they're about to get lots more technology to help them, plus they're watching less telly on the telly.

So we have to accept you can't get attention just by interrupting. Viral ads are better because they can't rely on interruption; they have to be engaging enough to be passed on.

This has been known for a while, but still given the choice most TV ads would be avoided as they’re not engaging enough. Driven I think by pre-testing techniques that force people to pay attention when they wouldn't at home. If you've forced someone to pay attention, that hurdle's crossed, and all your effort goes on refining the message. Yet, a perfectly refined message, probably repeated, with lots of detail, will stop people paying attention. We have to increase the importance of getting attention and engagement, and find ways of proving this importance to clients; otherwise they're wasting their money.

Secondly, we need to branch out. There's no point focusing on TV ads if people are increasingly online. We still need to make TV ads, but find other places to put them. Adapt our skills to engage people online rather than automatically leaving it to the digital agencies.

Something else from YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpgI1_Zb_08

It's old, but a good drug education film.

oakley sunglasses

he let someone bit on that.

true religion jeans

we are just confused with the idea.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Most Recent Photos