February 26, 2004

blogs as mass-advertising medium?

zzzzsteak22.jpg
TobyZ made the follo­wing thought­ful com­ment on an ear­lier post:

“The pro­blem with blogs for adver­ti­sing — or anything else, for that mat­ter — is that most net users don’t know what they are, can’t find them, and won’t ‘book­mark’ them.
You’ve men­tio­ned Ger­ber, for exam­ple. Goo­gle shows 1.7 MILLION hits for Ger­ber. Does it mat­ter whether your blog is hit #415, #415,000, or #1,415,000? No one is going to find it from a search engine.
“The gate­way to your blog (for me) is a link at the top of the adrants.com site. When that goes away, your blog cea­ses to exist (for all prac­ti­cal pur­po­ses), and you can’t con­trol that.
“Blogs are for small groups of friends who are con­tri­bu­tors. They can’t reach the mass audien­ces that tra­di­tio­nal media pro­vide to adver­ti­sers. Once I post this com­ment and leave, I’m gone fore­ver. I won’t see any follow-up com­ments. I won’t see any ads you might put here tomo­rrow.
“Blogs is not an adver­ti­sing medium.” 

Oh, man, where to begin…
Well, if ABC, CBS and NBC had to follow the same eco­no­mic rules as Toby assu­mes blog­gers do, they wouldn’t be selling much “mass” adver­ti­sing, either. All they’d have to show the public would be a lot of empty offi­ces and ticked-off sha­rehol­ders. But of course, they don’t follow these rules. And there’s a rea­son.
To get millions of peo­ple to sit down in front of a TV chan­nel for any length of time and soak up all those adver­ti­sing mes­sa­ges, broad­cas­ters first have to spend big money. How much does NBC burn through in a sin­gle day? $100 million? Heck, “Friends” alone must be set­ting them back $10 million a week.
And every year those num­bers keep get­ting higher, as peo­ple find more and more things to do with their time, besi­des watching Chand­ler get­ting it on with Monica.
But pro­vi­ding adver­ti­sing on blogs is not free to the blog­ger, either. Besi­des suppl­ying the con­tent neces­sary to attract the adver­ti­ser, the blog­ger has to find ways to drive traf­fic to her site. That means media buys, among other things. And to get serious num­bers isn’t cheap.
But then again, neither are sit­com actors, anchor­men, jour­na­lists, TV pro­du­cers, edi­tors, researchers, Manhat­tan offi­ces, camera ope­ra­tors, art direc­tors, mar­ke­ting mana­gers, cafe­te­ria wor­kers, recep­tio­nists, and all the million and one things a big media com­pany like NBC has to have in its arse­nal before it has something via­ble to sell the adver­ti­ser.
Obviously, I can’t indi­vi­dually get the num­bers “Friends” has. But kno­wing what I know, I can get a cou­ple of million peo­ple to soak up my client’s mes­sage without too much trou­ble. Con­si­de­ring I don’t have Jen­ni­fer Aniston’s wages to pay for, I’m not com­plai­ning.
The issue isn’t whether media is “mass” or “micro”. The issue is always (A) how much trou­ble is it to get x peo­ple to your stuff/brand/media/message etc. and (B) what peo­ple do once they get there.
The line sepe­ra­ting “mass” and “micro” is an inte­llec­tual cons­truct, it has nothing to do with eco­no­mics.
If the blo­gosphere was willing to spend the same collec­ti­vely per day as NBC in order to shift pro­duct on behalf of their clients, we’d see big, big chan­ges in how adver­ti­sing was done. 2 million blogs or so, $50 each on ave­rage? Hmmm…

10 Responses to “blogs as mass-advertising medium?”

  1. henry says:

    There’s no dif­fe­rence bet­ween mass and micro mar­ket on the inter­net. Great point Hugh.
    Reaching the mass mar­ket used to hinge on dis­tri­bu­tion; few orga­ni­za­tions could afford the means and publishers built up local mono­po­lies around their eco­no­mies of scale. Now those eco­no­mies of scale are avai­la­ble to anyone with a lap­top and cable subsc­rip­tion; the indi­vi­dual has the only mono­poly around — on his/her own talent.

  2. Christine says:

    I wouldn’t be sur­pri­sed if there was a cre­di­bi­lity and loyalty effect as well. Rea­ders of blogs will hit those ads out of a sense of loyalty and willing­ness to a help the blog­ger pay the band­width fees. The cre­di­bi­lity comes in because we assume (rightly or wrongly) that the blog­ger would not allow a pro­duct or ser­vice to be adver­ti­sed that cau­ses an ethi­cal dilemma. If we trust the blogger’s opi­nions and adhe­rence to prin­ci­ple, we will most likely trust the adver­ti­sers that offer goods and ser­vi­ces on that blog. If mar­ket researchers loo­ked at the demo­graphics of dif­fe­rent types of blogs (i.e. poli­ti­cal, per­so­nal, tech, etc)they could pro­bably offer the poo­led blogs as a tar­get audience to whiche­ver ad pools it fits with. Of course, they pro­bably already do this and I am just pulling shit out of my ass . Hey, love your dra­wings though! They always make me laugh, some­ti­mes too cyni­cally for my own good but there it is.

  3. Dennis says:

    Blogs can cer­tainly be an adver­ti­sing medium. Whether they can be a *mass* adver­ti­sing medium is another mat­ter.
    Blogs are the next big Inter­net thing. I used to say “Every­body and their dog has a web­site!”. Now, it may be “Every­body and thier dog has a blog!”
    Back in the 1960s, SF wri­ter Nor­man Spin­rad ran­ted that there ought to be enough maga­zi­nes and the like that *ever­yone* could get published. Now, via the won­ders of tech­no­logy and the Inter­net, eve­yone *can* get published. The ques­tion is, who will read it? I can’t agree with Henry’s com­ment for that rea­son. Sure, anyone with a lap­top and an ISP can publish on the Inter­net. Get­ting anyone else to *read* it is quite another mat­ter.
    Yes, you can adver­tise in blogs and draw traf­fic. The trick is the age old one of mar­ke­ting: defi­ning who your cus­to­mer is and figu­ring out how to reach them. Which blogs attract what rea­ders? How do I tar­get X mar­ket? What do I have to offer them?
    I see blog ads as an effec­tive method of tar­ge­ting niche mar­kets with a spe­ci­fic mes­sage, based on the rea­dership of the blog, but fin­ding out who that rea­dership is is a thor­nier pro­po­si­tion. Who reads your blog? What do you know about them? Can you pro­vide demo­graphics? Can you spe­cify age/sex/income dis­tri­bu­tion? Most blogs can’t. Those aren’t ques­tions they ask, nor do the pos­ters gene­rally care to ans­wer if they are asked.
    Is there a cre­di­bi­lity and loyalty effect Chris­tine men­tions above? Perhaps, if the owner of the blog has any say over the ads that get pla­ced. The vast majo­rity of ads seem to be sold by the owner of the sites that host the blogs, and the blog­ger may have nothing to say about pla­ce­ment.
    I don’t see TV, news­pa­pers, radio, bill­boards, and other ad forms going away any time soon. I *do* see a con­ti­nua­tion of the trend that has been going on for some time, as adver­ti­sers search for grea­ter effec­ti­ve­ness, and figure out that there may be bet­ter ways to spend the ad bud­get than 30 second spots on the Super Bowl.
    ______
    Dennis

  4. hugh says:

    I agree with a lot of what you say, Den­nis. Yeah, mea­su­ring one’s effec­ti­ve­ness has always been a pro­blem, as has tar­ge­ting, as has get­ting good demo­graphic feed­back on one’s web­site.
    But there are ways. Depends on how deter­mi­ned you are.
    Can I see an adver­ti­ser who, ins­tead of blo­wing a million dollars on a Super­bowl ad, opts for ten-thousuand dollar buys on 100 dif­fe­rent blog? Or hundred-dollar buys on 10,000 dif­fe­rent blogs? Cer­tainly. The tech­no­logy to set it up isn’t that hard, theo­re­ti­cally.
    The thing is: it’s not about “blogs”. It’s about fin­ding ever more sophis­ti­ca­ted and chea­per ways to adver­tise. That’s what the client is buying, regard­less of media.

  5. samantha says:

    Are you being enti­rely honest, though, about how adver­ti­sing really func­tions?
    Doesn’t it have to tap into fan­ta­sies, desi­res, inse­cu­ri­ties, etc. in a way that is mala­dap­ted to the blog medium?
    I’m sure you’re a great guy and all, but I just don’t want to be you the way that millions of peo­ple would like to be Jen­ni­fer Anis­ton– or, at least, the JA we see after a cadre of peo­ple has prep­ped and scrip­ted her, y’know?
    Doesn’t all that sort of lay the ground­work for an ad’s efficacy?

  6. Danny says:

    Except that a blog envi­ron­ment has a poten­tial to have the effec­ti­ve­ness of Mass Media adver­ti­sing through ads­pace in the blog, and as Direct Mar­ke­ting THROUGH the blog.
    That is where I think the elti­mate evo­lu­tion of this con­cept will take us. Let’s say Ford crea­tes a blog for F-150 enthu­siasts. Ford gets to take advan­tage of a DM setup with the added advan­tage of actually crea­ting rela­tionships with cus­to­mers and poten­tial cus­to­mers – it’s a cheap, effec­tive way of crea­ting buzz among a highly tar­ge­ted audience for your new pro­jects AND a sim­ple way to gather highly tar­ge­ted mar­ket research.
    Plus, auto­mo­tive acces­sory manu­fac­tu­rers, hunting/fishing/outdoors manu­fac­tu­rers and retai­lers, and pro­bably a hun­dred other tpyes of com­pa­nies can place an ad in an envi­ron­ment where easily 80 per­cent of its rea­dership is in their tar­get mar­ket as well. (Isn’t that pretty much what hap­pe­ned with Hugh and AdRants?)
    In this light, cre­di­bi­lity and rea­da­bi­lity are going to be para­mount con­cerns when com­pa­nies set out to create a blog for self-promotion, as oppo­sed to the “I wanna be like Jen­ni­fer Annis­ton” com­ple­xes dri­ving the ad pla­ce­ment for TV.

  7. Hm, hm, but aren’t blogs suc­cess­ful just because they’re NOT adver­ti­sing but pro­du­cing a kind of per­so­nal added value for the visi­tor? See Macromedia’s blog-strategy f.e. having five of its “com­mu­nity mana­gers” create their own weblogs. Pro­vi­ding a forum for the mana­gers to dis­cuss the new pro­ducts, show deve­lo­pers how to use some of the new fea­tu­res and ans­wer ques­tions — all with a typi­cal blogging-style, and no adver­ti­sing approach at all. The dia­lo­gue itself is the adver­ti­sing force behind

  8. hugh macleod says:

    Yeah, I think you’re on to something there, Roland…

  9. charter says:

    hugh, you’re too close to the sub­ject of adver­ti­sing to see the big pic­ture. You can’t see the forest for the trees. Tobyz made a totally valid point.
    “Audience” will never get to see the adver­ti­sing on indi­vi­dual blog sites, exactly for the rea­son that tobyz sta­tes. Lack of expo­sure.
    Who knows you’re here? 20 or 30 peo­ple with an affi­nity to you or your topic and who have mrked the blog as a “Favo­rite”. Maybe 100 or 200 others have found a link and clic­ked. If they don’t book­mark the blog, they’ll never find it again.
    You are but one blog in a sea of blogs. If you have deli­ve­red even one “new” cus­to­mer to an adver­ti­ser, you’ve bea­ten the ave­rage. Don’t let that get you down. Even Bud­wei­ser, spen­ding millions on Super­Bowl ads, knows they get few “new” cus­to­mers. They adver­tise only because they know they can’t let the com­pe­ti­tion get their own ad expo­sure uncon­tes­ted.
    Dis­con­nect ‘adver­ti­sing’ from what tobyz said.
    A typi­cal blog has a hand­ful of loyal fans. Aside from those few from a 9-figure inter­net audience, lite­rally no one (sta­tis­ti­cally spea­king) will ever find a clue that the blog exists.
    Do you know the num­ber of indi­vi­duals who have ever found this blog (“uni­que” hits)? I betcha it will never get to 250. That’s why tobyz’s com­ment is right on.
    So how did I find this site? I relax and waste time by loo­king at pages that a web ran­do­mi­zer pops up for me. There’s no way I’ll ever be able to find it again.

  10. hugh macleod says:

    Char­ter, what are you saying? That one will never be able to buy large audience num­bers via blogs?
    Peo­ple are already doing exatly that, though gran­ted, the sch­tick is still in its infancy.