Internet Advertising Effectiveness

L.
Flores, Worldwide Advertising Conference, Rio de Janeiro, November 2000 Page 1 of 18

Internet Advertising Effectiveness: What did We Learn and Where are
We Going?
By Laurent Flores, Vice-President, Division Director
Ipsos-ASI Interactive
LFlores@ipsos-asi.com
The papers overall objective is to share the authors experience of how
internet advertising works and how it contributes to brand building. By
leveraging over 5 years of research measuring internet advertising effects,
the author reviews the value of different online advertising formats ranging
from banner and sponsorship to rich media. He then investigates the current
challenges and potentials of internet advertising with a specific emphasis on
the promising challenge of mixed media strategies, integrating online
advertising and other traditional types of advertising.
L. Flores, Worldwide Advertising Conference, Rio de Janeiro, November 2000 Page 2 of 18
Introduction
Over the years and since its birth in early 1994, the online advertising industry has grown
and changed and continues to change every day. According to a recent projection from
Jupiter Communications, the global online ad spending is poised to grow from $7 billion
in 2000 to almost $28 billion by 2005. Online ad spending will represent almost 6% of
total advertising expenditures in 2005, up from 1.9% in 2000. However, although the
medium continues to enjoy dramatic growth, advertisers still have some concerns about
the real effectiveness of online advertising. Recent publications (Association of National
Advertisers, Ad Tech Conference May 2000, Bush and Harris, 1998) continue to show
that the number one barrier to online advertising continues to be no proof of ROI or other
measure of effectiveness. Being involved in the online advertising evaluation for over 5
years, we think that it will benefit the industry to think of online advertising as a medium
with real upside potential in terms of branding. As the first research contribution from the
IAB stated in 1997, we strongly believe that there is much more to online advertising
than just click-through.
Along the lines of a recent article from Briggs and Stipp (2000), we will first define
internet advertising and then share learning accumulated on the effectiveness of different
types of ad formats. Indeed, according to the IAB, only 56% of advertising spent online
in 1999 was for banner ads (this was nearly 95% in 1997), 27% for sponsorship
advertising, the rest being split between interstitials, e-mail advertising and other types of
advertising. In 1997, the IAB study brought findings on the branding value of banner
advertising. However, very little is known about the branding effectiveness of these non-
banner types of advertising. Questions that come to mind are: Does e-mail advertising
help to grow a brand? What about sponsorship and branding? Are interstitials working?
What about rich media advertising? Does online advertising deliver a better consumer
experience of the brand than other media?
We will finally conclude the paper by sharing our views on current and future trends of
internet advertising, specifically on the promising challenge of mixed media strategies
integrating online advertising with other traditional types of advertising.
Defining Internet Advertising and Measuring its Branding Effects
As suggested by Briggs and Stipp, we agree that internet advertising is a commercial
communication intended to generate a response over time. This commercial
communication can take different forms that usually are:
- Ads placed within web site content. These can be banners, full page
advertising (interstitial), rich media ads, pop up ads, buttons, animated
cursors etc.
- Sponsored elements within web sites, such as paid product placements or
content designed around a sponsor.
- E-mail advertising, inserted in e-mail newsletters or direct marketing types of
messages.
- Corporate or product specific company websites.
Whatever the form of communication, the nature of the response expected depends on the
nature of the campaign objectives. These objectives should therefore guide the advertiser
in evaluating campaign effectiveness:
- Is the primary objective of the campaign to induce an immediate response such as
purchase? If so, then the level of click and revenue generated could be good
indicators of this effectiveness.
- Is the campaign primary objective to increase awareness and change consumer
perception of the brand over time? Then, the simple level of click may be misleading
and even more so, irrelevant. We then need measures of branding effects such as
recall, communication and persuasion.
Thanks to the IAB study in 1997, we know that exposure to banner advertising does
activate a response before and beyond click. The recent release of the AdKnowledge E-
Analytics Online Advertising Report (2000) provides an even stronger perspective on the
potential impact of the simple ad exposure on conversion events. The report clearly
states:
On average, across multiple advertisers and campaigns tracked by AdKnowledge over
the last 6 months, there are more conversion events from users who only viewed an ad,
but did not click, than from users who clicked. This yields three important conclusions:
1) The potential ROI impact of Internet advertising is much greater than
previously thought, because advertisers only track sales from clicks and tend
to ignore the brand impact on sales.
2) Advertisers who base decisions only on clicks or even post-click conversions
may miss important effects of their campaign, including the impact of an
impression on the propensity to convert.
3) As noted in our Q3 1999 Online Advertising Report, Repeat Conversions are
also a significant source of returns on an advertising investment.
These findings further emphasize the need to measure effects induced by ad exposure
itself and antecedent to any kind of behavior or interaction such as click. This
measurement will likely take place before the last stages of the Expanded ARF Model
proposed by Harvey in 1997, where measures of level of attention (recall), perception
(communication) and persuasion can help predict and better understand the branding
effects of online advertising.
Indeed, since early 1997, when we started measuring internet advertising, we thought
that, like for traditional advertising, the consumer experience of online advertising
depends on his/her ability to be exposed to the stimulus. Once exposed, he/she needs to
notice the stimulus (Recall), he/she needs to get the message (Communication) before
being persuaded (Persuasion). Persuasion can take different formsfrom attitude change
to behavior changedepending on the advertising objective. However, the internet
introduces an additional dimension that we call Alienation (Figure 1). This refers to the
fact that the internet is an active medium. Unlike television, the internet puts the
consumer in control of the experience, moving the role from being a passive receiver to
that of an active receiver. The challenge is then to build advertising pull strategies, rather
then advertising push strategies. The measures of successful internet advertising are not
only relying on Recall, Communication, and Persuasion as in traditional media, but also
on a measure of Alienation. The former measures refer to the ads ability to involve the
consumer rather than to disturb his/her surfing experience. Measures such as Likeability,
Interest, and Suitability of the ad fall into this category of measures.
Review of Key Findings
We will review findings in the light of our Internet Advertising Consumer Model to
understand the value of:
1. Different Advertising Formats (such as banners, banners with daughter window,
shared real estates, and interstitials)
2. Sponsorship
3. Broadband Advertising
This learning comes from different studies that Ipsos-ASI Interactive conducted over the
last three years. They all have in common the objective of understanding the value of the
creative. They were conducted in a pre-test or laboratory type of environment, where we
are able to control the consumer experience, and represent a valid approach to our
objective of understanding the branding effects of online advertising. Although some of
the information might seem intuitive in nature, we now have data to support strategies in
line with where the common sense of marketing has been directing advertisers.
Before we actually enter the data presentation, we can never sufficiently insist on one of
our most important learningsthat no single ad model works like a magic bullet. In
other words, research shows that no single ad type has consistently outperformed the
others. Along the same lines, we also found that the objective of a particular ad should
drive the expectations for its performance. Time has proven that objectives may run
H:\PRESENTATIONS\MARIANNE\1099ARF.PPT, 6
Internet Advertising Consumer Model
(Figure 1)
Minimize
Alienation
Persuasion
Communication
Recall
from basic branding to relationship marketing to sales generation, and that click-through
can no longer be a sufficient and exclusive performance indicator.
1. Reviewing the Value of Different Ad Formats
From Table 1, it becomes clear that not only can larger ad units (such as banners with
daughter windows or interstitials) get substantially more notice and can communicate
more, but they can also double the level of click in comparison to simple banners.
However, as highlighted before, this does not necessarily mean that bigger is always
better. In fact, experience shows that in some cases this could happen to the disadvantage
of the consumer experience. This is where the Alienation factor of our Internet
Advertising Consumer Model comes into play. The ad can be too disruptive for the value
it brings to the consumer; he/she will take away a negative perception of the ad and the
brandand in some cases of the site itself! The following chart (Figure 2) illustrates this
by showing that Recall and Click tend to decline when the file size of the ad is bigger.
Bigger file sizes may bring better effect and animation, but they also bring higher
downloading time resulting in consumers waning captive attention and higher propensity
to leave the page.
ARF - Laurent Flores - Lflores@ipsos-asi.com
Ad Format Effect
(Table 1)
Banners
Shared Real
Estate
Banner with
DW Interstitial
% % % %
Recall 100 175 183 202
Clicked on ad 100 185 215 239
Conveyed primary message 100 194 128 183
It is also interesting to notice that better response is not necessarily linked to bigger file
size. In fact, it has been systematically found that interactive components built into a
simple banner ad, such as drop-down screen or click-and-drag, can double the levels at
which consumers will click. Not surprisingly, the more surfers can do within an adand
thus with the brandwithout leaving the content, the more likely they will interact with
it (Figure 3).
The Impact of File Size
(Figure 2)
40
59
71
60
31
63
59
54
40
29
28
35
32
28
27
19
17
15
1-10 11-15 16-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-75 76+
Recall Click
File Size
Interactive Ads Increase Response
(Figure 3)
12%
29%
27%
34%
33%
32%
Banner Pop-Up Interstitial
Click Through
Click Within
Interaction
The lesson is that we need to always remember that the medium is an active medium. Be
creative, but within the space and limitations that the medium offers!
2. Reviewing the Value of Sponsorships
As quoted in our introduction, sponsoring has grown at an exponential rate since 1994 to
account for a total of 27% of total online advertising expenditure (source IAB 99). It is
therefore important to investigate its effectiveness. Using the methodological design of
our copy-testing methodology, where respondents are exposed to a controlled
environment of 5 pages of content, during the course of 1999 we had the chance to run a
series of tests able to assess the branding effectiveness of sponsoring advertising. We will
share the main highlights of these studies in the following paragraphs.
As in television, we qualify sponsoring advertising as the basic association of a brand
name with a site. Of course, this level of association may vary in its intensity, depending
on the level of brand presence within the site. This may range from a simple banner to
heavy brand presence on all pages and background, to dedicated content brought and
developed by the brand in conjunction with the site. When the research project was run,
we managed to get examples mixing different levels of brand presence:
- One simple banner ad located in the middle of the evaluated site: Banner Only
- Brand Logo on Home Page only (YYYY prefers XXX, on the top/right of the
page): Home Page Only
- The same Brand Logo on 3 pages: 3-page
- Brand logo on each page of the site (5 pages): 5-page
- Partnership statement: YYYY in partnership with XXX on each page: Brand Light
- Brand Logo and Product in Background of every page: Brand Heavy
Figure 4 shows level of brand Recall for each type of sponsorship varying from simple
banner (Banner Only) to heavy presence of the brand within the site (Brand Heavy).
Results are indexed to Banner Only (100).
Recall of Sponsorships for Brand
(Index to Banner Only)
(Figure 4)
Yes
Brand A
Brand B
Brand C
a/b/c/d/e/f = Significant at the 90% confidence level
156 155
130
100
208
242
5-page
A
(154)
3-Page
B
(151)
Hompage Only
C
(152)
Banner Only
D
(152)
Brand Light
E
(153)
Brand Heavy
F
(166)
Not surprisingly, levels of sponsorships are well recalled, with noticeability being
enhanced by the frequency with which the sponsor is shown, as well as the depth of
brand integration with the actual content. In all cases, brand recall within test cells were
significantly higher than in control cells, where respondents were exposed to the same
content but with no sponsors. Sponsorships can positively impact advertising awareness
of a brand. When well executed, this impact can significantly enhance the value of a
simple banner ad.
Coming back to the value and importance of brand integration, Case E provides a
specifically good example. Brand integration with site content was optimal, thus allowing
better spontaneous brand name association with the surfing experience. The same
example also gives insights on the benefit of well-executed sponsorship for the site itself.
When comparing test and control group results (Table 2) for overall rating of the website,
it is interesting to notice that respondents exposed to the sponsored area have a better
perception of the site than respondents just exposed to the site with no sponsoring. We
now have proof that good sponsorship can be beneficial both for the sponsor and the site!
Unlike general findings coming from banner copytesting, when we look at brand image
changes between test and control cells across all examples, no significant differences
were found, not even in Case E where sponsor integration was optimal. In our mind, this
may be due more to the specific methodological design used rather than to any lack of
impact of sponsoring on brand image. The methodology simply provided for immediate
evaluation after exposure, and does not allow for true evaluation of change in brand
image over time. Our first experience of continuous tracking of online sponsoring shows
that when well-executed sponsoring takes place, it can positively impact brand image and
site perception over time.
Sponsorship Effect on Site
Overall Rating of the Website
(Table 2)
Sponsorship Control
Base: Total (153) (150)
% %
a b
Excellent/Very Good 75 74
Excellent 31 b 17
Very good 44 57 a
Good 24 23
Fair 1 3
Poor 1 --
a/b = Significant at the 90% confidence level
3. Reviewing the Value of Broadband Advertising
In our review of different types of internet advertising, we would not be complete if we
did not provide a perspective on the value of broadband advertising. Recent publications
all seem to suggest an upside potential of rich media advertising (Briggs, Stipp) in its
ability to increase brand building. The paradox in the case of broadband advertising is the
relative lower reach of high-speed connections in comparison to narrowband connection.
Although US penetration for 2000 is under 10% (among online households) Jupiter
Communication predicts that nearly a fourth of US households will have high speed
internet access in 2003. We therefore think that knowing up front the value and upside
potential of broadband advertising will help further legitimize the medium as a viable and
powerful brand building vehicle and will further foster its development.
Table 3 shows a comparison between rich media and narrowband advertising. The rich
media data come from original projects we conducted with Excite@Home in 1998 and
1999, the narrowband data come from our copytesting database.
Results clearly suggest the upside potential of broadband advertising in its ability to get
recalled and get clicked. Interestingly, ad likeability is not significantly different between
the two types of advertising. This simply suggests that the value of the creative is the key
to any positive consumer feedback; although broadband offers expanded possibilities,
narrowband advertising can be effective when creativity is properly leveraged.
Furthermore, the same studies also provide insights on the consumer perception of the
broadband ad model in comparison to other mediums such as television and print
Rich Media Advertising Effect
(Table 3)
Rich Media
Narrowband
Banners
(I & II)
% %
Recall 100 78 -22
Click 100 65 -35
Likeability 100 105 +5
*Advantage to Rich Media
advertising, and in comparison to the more traditional internet narrowband ad models
(Table 4).
Data suggest that broadband advertising seems to be a hybrid of television and print
advertising, far more so than narrowband advertising. Although television leads the group
in terms of its ability to engage the audience, broadband follows immediately and
performs better than print and narrowband. The real added value of the model relies on its
above-average ability to involve the consumer. Interaction, interactivity, and the benefits
they bring in terms of enhanced learning about the product seems to answer consumer
needs for a more personalized experience by:
- providing information that they want to know
- delivering information that they can trust
- helping them understand the product
- being relevant to them
Furthermore, in our mind, the overall results also suggest that each medium offers
specific individual benefits able to enhance the consumer experience in a complementary
fashion. While television is able to engage a large audience and get the word out (a
medium of reach), it seems that rich media advertising has the ability to provide a
deeper and more personalized experience.
Television Print Broadband NarrowBand
Base: Total (2602) (2602) (2602) (2602)
% % % %
a b c d
Top Box (Agree a Lot)
Fun 31 bcd 5 24 bd 12 b
Engaging 29 bcd 9 23 bd 13 b
Enjoyable 28 bcd 8 19 abd 9 b
Helps you understand the product 15 19 a 29 abd 19 a
Relevant to you 15 17 ad 22 abd 14
Provides the information that you
want to know 10 17 ad 26 abd 15 a
Delivers information that you can
trust 8 d 12 ad 16 abd 6
Broadband Perception
(Table 4)
Current Trends and the Way Forward
Since our involvement in the internet industry, we always considered that everyday
brings something new and challenging. Although this remains true, more than three years
of experience in measuring advertising and brands online certainly gives you a better read
on current and future trends. The following paragraphs just represent our modest
contribution to the subject.
1. The Importance of Copy in Creating Quality Advertising
Of course, for traditional advertising researchers, this affirmation may sound obvious.
However, it is only recently that sufficient data allowed us to affirm the same for internet
advertising.
For decades now, research in traditional media has shown that good creative/copy can act
as a real media multiplier. We think that the same is true for online advertising. In our
research, we systematically found that copy quality is key to any brand success. Figure 5
illustrates this. In this example, six different banners were developed for the same brand
using same strategy. Results clearly suggest that depending on which creative is used,
ROI may dramatically changed. If Ad 1 or Ad 6 were used in place of Ad 4, the
advertiser may have lost up to four times the ability of consumers to recall the brand.
This is important, of course, but even more so in a media that is becoming more and more
crowded. On one hand, according to AdRelevance, a division of MediaMetrix, the
number of sites looking for advertising constantly increase as well as the number of
advertisers investing online, on the other hand consumers become themselves more and
more demanding. Our research systematically shows that the more experience the
consumer has online, the less accepting he/she is of advertising (Table 5).
Online Experience and Advertising
Perception
(Table 5)
1997 or later Before 1995
% %
Ad Ratings (% Agree Strongly)
Entertaining 19 15
Believable 24 21
See again 28 17
More interested 18 12
Irritating 7 15
Therefore, the challenge for advertisers is to create quality advertising--the kind of
advertising able to invite the consumer to a deeper brand experience, noticeable, non-
disruptive and attractive. Is this a trend that our data confirm? The answer is
unfortunately, No! In fact, we actually noticed a decrease in ad recall between 1998
and 1999, (Figure 6) true for both broadband and narrowband advertising:
Unlike television advertising, as we have shown in France and the US (Flores 1998),
quality of online advertising is not yet sufficient. We will share a comment made by Rich
LeFurgy, Chairman of the IAB, that concurs our finding. Back in 1999 Rich clearly
stated that we have yet to see the day when as much time goes into creating banners as
television ads. We think that this time has not yet come although things are progressing.
In fact, we want to use this information as a wake up call for the whole industry. We
believe that online advertising has a real ability to contribute to brand building but will
only do so if properly leveraged by advertisers and their agencies! Then lets start
thinking Quality rather than Quantity only! Lets make sure that our experience and
recommendation will not only serve the US internet industry but also the global internet
industry. For example, lets work towards keeping the same level of advertising recall in
Brazil in 2000 and the following years (in Brazil the 2000 average recall equals the 1998
US recall average), lets leverage our experience in the US to insure that internet
advertising becomes a real synonym of quality! (Figure 7)
Ad Recall Declines
(Figure 6)
100%
63%
100%
75%
Sept. '98 June '99 May '98 May '99
Broadband
(Excite@Home
studies)
Narrowband (Banner Avg.)
Indexed to earlier read
2. The Importance of Media: Adjusting Media Strategy to Campaign Objective
In traditional advertising, our review of advertising effectiveness will not be complete
without exploring the contribution of media weight to advertising effectiveness. The
same is true for online advertising, where our experience shows that media weight can be
an important component of effectiveness. In fact, our online tracking data regularly
shows that branding effects can not be observed without a minimum of media pressure.
Even if this sounds straightforward, too many times weve seen online ad budgets being
shut down or decreased to the profit of other media. If so, how can we expect significant
and measurable effects of any online marketing program? As Figure 8 shows, we know
that online advertising awareness is reactive to media investment: The more you spend on
quality copy, the better your chance to be noticed and change consumer perception.
Recall Average: Brazil vs US
(Figure 7)
100% 100%
75%
Brazi l 2000 May ' 98 May ' 99
Brazil Average US Average
Indexed to US May 98 Average
Smoothed 8 weeks
M
a
r
c
h
2
8
M
a
r
c
h
7
F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
2
2
F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
8
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
5
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
1
1
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
8
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
1
4
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
3
0
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
1
6
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
O
c
to
b
e
r
1
9
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
40
30
20
10
0
Brand Online Ad Awareness
7 Million Imp. 300,000 Imp.
I mpressions
Recall Does Move with Spend
(Figure 8)
Once media weight has been accepted as being an important component of any campaign
success, the next challenge is to optimize frequency of exposure. Existing research seems
to be contradictory on this topic, but in our mind this is probably because things are
discussed or evaluated in regard to different objectives.
The first data available on the subject go back to early work conducted by DoubleClick in
1996. At that time, DoubleClick looked at banner burnout in terms of level of click.
They concluded after the fourth impression, response rates dropped from 2.7% to under
1%. We call this banner burnout, the point at which a banner stops delivering a good
Return On Investment (ROI). Other more recent research (July 2000) from
DynamicLogic suggests that there is a direct correlation between the branding value of
online advertising and the frequency of exposure; by increasing exposure levels from one
to four or more, advertisers can virtually double the impact the advertising has on Brand
Awareness. As pointed out earlier, these data may be contradictory at first sight but in
fact are not. Each supports different levels of frequency necessary to generate different
types of effect; branding effect for DynamicLogic or click for DoubleClick. If these
findings were misinterpreted, the debate would raise more questions than answers,
whereas discussed earlier in this paper, evaluation should depend on the campaign
objective. If the campaign objective is sales lead, sales, or any other type of direct
marketing objective (usually measured by click), common sense will agree on the fact
that repetition cannot dramatically increase ROI. People are either interested and then
click, or not interested and then dont click. However, in the case of brand building, click
may provide additional benefit but is not the only measure to look atrecall, awareness,
liking, image are key to the evaluation process and are indeed likely to move with
multiple exposures!
Our own experience of online brand building is in line with these first findings and
suggests that optimal levels of frequency depend on the value of the copy and the brand
itself. Better copy means lower necessary frequency. A more reactive brand to online
investment means lower necessary frequency.
3. The Promise of Mixed Media Strategies: Building One to One Relationships in a
Mass Marketing World
The 90s have been the years of marketing and branding where companies started to fully
recognize the value of brand as their most important asset. For a short period of time,
marketers may have taken the time to enjoy their new corporate power, however the
environment brought them two new challenges: globalization and the internet. Challenges
such as: How can I market my brand to a global consumer? How do I need to adapt my
brand to the challenges and opportunities of the internet? Can I just continue to use my
traditional techniques and build my brands on the lessons from the past that have been so
successful so far?
Of course, the answer is no. In the case of the internet, we think that the challenge is
twofold. Marketers need to:
- Be tactical, to understand the specifics of the internet and use it appropriately. For
online advertising, understand what works and what does not work.
- Be strategic, to use the internet in synergy with other media to specifically leverage
the medium as a powerful means to deepen the consumer relationship with the brand.
Once the former has been properly learned, we think that the latter offers the most
promising reward for todays marketers. The one strategy of our modern world is and
should be One to One 360 Branding to make sure that the consumer is surrounded by
the brand anytime, anywhere. In this strategy, the internet offers the invaluable asset of
building individual relationships, whereas other media, such as television, offer brand
building for the mass. When used together, our experience shows that television and the
internet can dramatically benefit the brand and the consumer. The following example
(Table 6), from continuous online advertising and brand tracking, shows early indication
of synergies between television and the internet. When appropriately used together, the
perception of the brand among respondents who recall both television and online
advertising is better than the perception among those who remember either television or
online alone.
This is true for all key image dimensions. It is also interesting to notice that online
advertising awareness alone does make a difference. For these respondents, image
perception is better than those not able to recall any advertising for the brand.
Furthermore, the data also suggest the additive power of online in its ability to offer
deeper information, interaction, and knowledge. The attribute Educates you about the
proper use of medicine is a good example of this. When respondents are aware of both
television and internet advertising, then image endorsement is at its highest. This suggests
that the additional interaction provided by online advertising makes a difference thanks to
its ability to better connect with the consumer, giving him/her the chance to better
experience the brand, its usage, etc.
Advertising Effect on Brand Image
(Table 6)
Brand Advertising Awareness
Online Only TV Only TV and
Online
None
% % % %
Fast acting 17 35 37 24
Long lasting 25 28 37 16
Effective for body aches and pains 33 41 43 25
Effective for headaches 42 45 45 29
Effective for arthritis pain 33 21 37 13
Worth the price you pay 25 32 51 19
Works effectively on migraines 8 18 28 11
Has no side effects 25 37 45 26
Educates you about the proper use of medicine 25 34 45 19
Trusted source for health information and
treatment
17 21 23 13
Is this exception or legion? Our experience confirms that all markets can benefit from this
synergypackaged goods, automotive, services, durables, and even over-the-counter
products, as our previous example show. Furthermore, we strongly think that the internet
can allow marketers to truly re-invent their brands.
The Pampers example below is a good example.
Moving away from the traditional type of television commercial (comparing Pampers to
X and showing Pampers better functionality), a new television advertising campaign was
developed. In this campaign, no products were shown, the Pampers name appeared at the
end, pushing the audience to visit the www.pampers.com site. The whole theme of the ad
was parenting, all along showing animals feeding their newborns, and highlighting the
benefits and importance of parental care. The ad was highly emotional and tender. Not to
mention, we should all know that emotion can be a powerful trigger for relationship
development and enhancement. This is exactly what the strategy was. This time, the
internet was at the marketers disposal to fully leverage this emotional trigger. Visitors to
the site are welcome by the Pampers Parenting Institute (Figure 10). The site clearly
states:
You'll find practical tips and helpful advice on every aspect of parenting,
provided by some of the world's leading experts. You'll also find the latest
Pampers product information. Pampers is proudly committed to supporting
families in every way.
Through use of its site, Pampers wants to move the consumer relationship to another
level by providing value, tips, and information to new parents. With of all that, does
anyone have any doubt that parents experiencing the brand will not consider Pampers
products for their next purchase?
Www. Pampers.com
(Figure 9)
Dont you think this is a good example of re-inventing the brand or re-connecting the
brand with its consumers? The way forward is shown, lets push marketers to think
outside the box and truly leverage the internet!
Conclusion
Throughout the course of this paper we have shown that online advertising can be an
effective branding vehicle. Weve seen that, from simple banner to rich media, online
advertising can provide marketers with powerful communication tools. However, as
highlighted at the end of our development, we strongly think that successful branding in
the 21
st
century will largely depend on advertisers ability to develop either mixed media
strategies working in synergy, or on integrated communication plans. Here lies the
challenge to modern marketers. More research is still needed to better understand how
each media works in conjunction with the others. This is crucial, particularly when online
communication takes new multiple forms such as e-mail advertising, or advertising on
wireless devices. These last two forms of communication are projected to grow
exponentially to surpass online advertising revenue by 2005 (Jupiter Communications).
Not a lot is known yet about the branding effects of these communication forms. We are
working to deepen our understanding in this area and we encourage the whole industry to
do the same. We believe that the future is really linked to our ability not only to
understand how each medium works, but moreover, how they work together.
We have an exciting future in front of us, lets continue our effort to learn everyday, and
bring better knowledge to the industry!
References
http://www.thestandard.com/artcile/display/0,1151,14934,00.html
http://www.ana.net/about/ananews/05_09_00a.htm
http://www.adknowledge.com/update/index.html
Briggs, Stipp (2000), How Internet Advertising Works: New Evidence and Directions for
Future Study, Up Coming.
Bush, Harris (1998), Advertiser Perceptions of the Internet as a Marketing
Communication Tool, Journal of Advertising Research, March-April 17-27.
Flores, Laurent (1998), 20 ans de Communication de Marque : Au travers des priodes
de crise et de croissance, une analyse franco-amricaine de lvolution des critres
defficacit publicitaire, IREP, October, Paris
Harvey B, (1997), The Expanded ARF model : bridge to accountable advertising future,
Journal of Advertising Research, March-April 11-19.
Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) - IAB online advertising effectiveness study - October
1997.
Jupiter Communications - Online Advertising Through 2003, Online Growth a Catalyst
for Changes in Traditional Business.

Internet Advertising Effectiveness

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Internet Advertising Effectiveness

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

L.

Flores, Worldwide Advertising Conference, Rio de Janeiro, November 2000 Page 1 of 18

You might also like