Andrew Hampp's article in Advertising Age (the online version includes an 8-minute video excerpt from the roundtable) is enlightening and instructive, a valuable read for any radio advertising sales or creative professional.
Toward the end of the video, RAB President Jeff Haley talks about a Houston study by Coleman Research in which researchers observed listener behavior during 92,000 commercial "pods." Haley noted that the "breakaway" (listeners going elsewhere) was just 8%, even in the middle of a lengthy 6-minute break. The majority of listeners stayed with their station.
NOTE: That's not perception; that's measured behavior!
But if you listen carefully to this segment of the video, right after Mr. Haley mentions people listening to 92,000 commercial pods, one of the panelists interjects, "Poor people!"
Why did he say that?
Obviously, because many (if not most) ads on radio are notoriously "bad."
"Radio needs to get better before radio ads can get better," said Crispin's Bill Wright. "When I read a magazine, all the ads don't annoy me. When I watch TV, all the ads don't annoy me. Even when you do a good radio spot, it's still the best-looking house in a bad neighborhood."
There's our problem. And our opportunity. To change, one ad at a time, one client at a time, on stations across America, the quality of the commercials we write and produce.
Radio, as a medium, is powerful, versatile, and personal. It's everything an advertiser could ask for.
But radio advertising needs to improve, to exploit the full potential of our medium, to achieve its highest and best uses in the marketplace.
This is our job, our challenge, and our responsibility as radio advertising professionals. We can't make the industry better apart from making our commercials better. And that, my friend, is an individual operation.
Posts
Rod,
ReplyDeleteWith a tuneout percentage of only eight, it seems to me that radio doesn't have a "bad ad' problem. I think the radio guy on the panel has a problem. But, you know that..radio ads are most often disliked by radio people, not listeners.
If radio's listenership is up and revenues are down, and few listeners are turned off by a long stop-set, seems to me like the problem is with radio people, not the audience or advertising potential of the medium.
But, Rod, we always knew that, didn't we?
Hey, Rick!
ReplyDeleteI hear you loud and clear, just as I often hear the voice of Jim Williams in the recesses of my mind when dealing with a familiar dilemma.
And you make a damn good point in your second paragraph. It's almost mathematical, isn't it?
And yet...
There are plenty of folks in and out of the industry who share our belief in radio as a medium, but also recognize that too often radio ad writers settle for cliché-ridden drivel that under-serves both listener and the advertiser.
The ultimate goal is to help the advertiser sell widgets, not to make art on his nickel. But some approaches are clearly superior to others. Roy Williams likened expiration-dated advertising to cocaine use; it produces an effect that feels good, but with diminishing returns over time.
By the same token, if creating better commercials helps us to bring more people into a client's store, in greater numbers, with greater frequency, and to feel good about doing business with him, that client gets to sell even more widgets, leading him to buy more radio, etc.
To the extent that we can do better, we should do better. Surely you don't disagree with that.
Rod..
ReplyDeleteAn ad is an ad. It should contain product information sufficient enough to cause activation of a pre-existing want or need. A given amount of listeners are in the market for the goods and services offered in all radio ads at any given time. Radio ads activate that desire. The more times the ads run, the greater the activation
Those listeners who are "in the market" for the products in the ads then tell friends about the offer (Word of Mouth). It's a great multiplier, at no additional charge to the advertiser, who is simply buying the existing station audience.
Bill Wright, whom you quote, confuses intrusive and passive advertising when he says that "magazine ads don't annoy me." Magazine ads are passive. They don't force themselves on Bill, he chooses to open the magazine and look at the ones he desires.
Radio ads ARE intrusive. Bill has no control which ones are played in sequence while he listens. Bill is likely not in the market for the products in the ads of which he speaks. If he were, he wouldn't be irritated. He would be interested in what was said.
When Bill says "radio ads need to get better before radio can get better", he's blaming the medium for his misunderstanding of how radio works..and works so well.
Have you thought about how radio's revenues began to plateau in about 2000? That's about the time the internet hit it's mass appeal and satellite radio was the buzz. Radio developed another case of inferiority complex, just as it did when TV exploded in the mid-50's.
Since 2000, radio stations have been trying to figure out a way to join the internet craze, and not very successfully, I might add.
The internet is the internet, satellite radio is clawing it's best to survive, and radio is still radio, hind tit on the media sow.
We need to just do well what we do best..sell radio ads, and lots of them.
Rick,
ReplyDeleteYou make a great case for radio's power to activate a pre-existing want or need...for the customer in the bullseye, the one who's ready to make the purchase today. We've both sold a lot of radio advertising over the years to clients wanting to get as many of those "ready now" buyers as possible into their stores, instead of their competitors' stores).
And it's true that little time or effort is needed to create that type of commercial. It's easy to pick the low-hanging fruit.
But what if, with the investment of additional time and effort, we could create commercials that not only serve the immediate goal of speaking to today's buyers, but also make a favorable impression upon future buyers - including those who may not even be on the target at this point?
That investment may be more than is needed to achieve the narrow immediate goal. But if it causes other listeners/prospects to think better of the advertiser (instead of being irritated by his ads), then maybe it's worth considering.
I'm inclined to give Mr. Wright credit for understanding the differences between passive and intrusive media. In fairness to him, he also mentioned TV, which largely shares radio's intrusiveness. And I suspect he'd admit to being just as irritated with many of the locally produced TV ads that get inserted into cable channels (where "spots" sell for 2-3 bucks in many markets).
Do you know of any radio stations that charge their advertisers for copywriting and production? Know any television stations that don't? Reminds me of a Williams' aphorism: "a thing is worth what you pay for it." (And as the song goes, "nothin' ain't worth nothin', but it's free.")
You're right to say that we need to do well what we do best: sell radio ads, and lots of them.
But to borrow again from Williams: "What's wrong with two good things?"
Rod,
ReplyDeleteIn small markets like the one I operate in, the main competition is weekly shoppers and..indifference. Television doesn't enter into the picture. Radio production and copywriting is gratis to paying customers. That won't be changing anytime soon.
Therefore, I concentrate on seeing accounts regularly with a proposal on all calls.
I've always liked what I call the "Copy/Sell" approach on calls. This involves asking a few questions of the client to produce "keys" that can lead to copy ideas offered impromptu on the same call. Closing rate is high on these calls.
I rather doubt that clients are looking for the "Million-Dollar Slogan" from their radio sales rep. Instead, regular timely ideas, a basic understanding of the client's business, regular calls, correct scripts and invoices go a long way towards keeping clients on the air.
As far as your wondering about copy for future buyers....all advertisers need to regularly plant seeds with basic sore information..hours, parking, credit terms and merchandise offered.
But, aggressive schedules geared to today's buyers can also implant the thought for a future customer's reference.
Geico Insurance has been running a lot of broadcast advertising of late. I'm currently not in the market for what Geico sells, but their prominence makes me think of them if insurance is discussed. That could make me a future customer of Geico.
Few newspaper ads could be called creative or innovative, especially among categories that revel in print..auto dealers, grocery, etc.
But these "mundane" ads seem to work..or at least the merchant has been offered no alternative to the print ads that has caused him to switch, in most cases.
Good copy and production are important in radio sales..always have been.
Of equal or greater importance are ideas, a business-like approach. strong belief in product, and......durability.
Geico is a great example of an advertiser that "gets" radio and uses it well. Their commercials are customer-focused and entertaining enough to hold even a casual listener's attention, without diluting or compromising the company's core message: "Geico. Fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on your car insurance."
ReplyDeleteAre your local insurance agencies also advertising on radio? How are they dealing with the very real competitive challenge presented by Geico?
Roy Williams gives a great example of an effective insurance ad in his "12 Most Common Mistakes in Advertising" DVD. I've watched this 45-minute presentation with clients maybe 25-30 times over the years. Very good stuff.