Google AdWords is an extension of Google’s mission to make information easily searchable and useful. One of the biggest problems with ads on the web is relevance. Google’s perspective of AdWords and AdSense at the time of their inception was that advertisements on the web can be a good thing as long as they’re showing people products they actually want to buy. (Okay, I may be putting words in Google’s mouth here, but everything I have read and seen supports this point of view.) I can personally say that I’ve been alerted to events and products that I was extremely interested in as a result of Google and Facebook contextualized ads. For example, if you know that I like a particular musician and you know what city I live in, then it makes sense to tell me if that artist’s tour is traveling through my hometown in two weeks.
What strikes me is how different the Google approach to advertising is compared to traditional advertising models. One of the key tenets associated with the advent of AdWords was maintaining the sanctity of organic search. Stephen Levy’s In the Plex details Google’s dealings with a number of competing search companies. Some of these companies had functionality that would have greatly bolstered Google’s ad serving capabilities early in the company’s life. However, Google leadership was adamant about not tainting the discernible line between organic and sponsored search, no matter the cost to the bottom line.
This contrasts the approach taken by traditional media as it struggles to cope with the changes in the marketplace stemming from online marketing and commerce. Martin Lindtrom’s Buyology introduces an emerging field known as neuromarketing. This is the practice of using equipment with the ability to monitor brain activity (fMRI and steady-state topography devices) in order to gauge which parts of the brain are activated by a particular brand, image, or other facet of advertising.
The obvious intent here is to determine which ads activate the pleasure or reward centers of the brain, as well as to avoid those that invoke unpleasant sensations (unless you’re developing a political attack ad, perhaps.) However, studies have revealed that when ad content is not tightly integrated with subject matter consumers simply ignore ad content. This has only been exacerbated by the adoption of DVRs and other means of viewing that allow viewers to skip over traditional commercial spots. To combat this, companies have begun sponsoring television shows and tightly integrating the brand into the subject matter. One example given is both subtle and direct uses of Coca-Cola in the show American Idol. Not only do the judges drink Coke on screen, but there is also deliberate use of “Coke red” in elements of the show and other hints of the brand partnership.
Neuromarketing studies of these practices have shown that they are not only effective at stimulating positive feelings towards the brand, these tactics actually make it more difficult for viewers to recall other, non-integrated ad content. So the consumer not only has an increased emotional response to seeing the Coca-Cola logo, but they may experience a diluted sensation of being connected to competitors’ brands and marketing.
Google’s approach is to provide a high quality content experience that features ads of relevance while never crossing the sacred barrier between the two. Traditional marketers have sought not to blur, but to eliminate, the line between content and advertising. Buyology suggests that the future of television and movies will feature more than merely product placement; particular brands and products will overtly influence story arcs.
In college I wrote my honors thesis on online advertising preferences described as a function of user demographics. My idea was that certain classes of users would prefer particular ad formats. I expected that less savvy users would be more likely to click on a banner advertisement, and that the most savvy groups would favor content-integrated ads. Referral links are a part of the rapid evolution of online marketing, with many consumers not even realizing they are viewing an ad. The only difference between a recommendation and an endorsement is whether or not one receives payment. But this line gets fuzzier with the introduction of Facebook ads that say “Brad has liked Threadless.com! Click here to like this too.” Many of us have been unwillingly made into unpaid spokespeople for brands through these mechanisms.
I didn’t get quite the results I expected from my research. I had difficulty developing a diagnostic tool that accurately assessed the level of Internet experience and savvy each participant possessed. If I could repeat the study without any budget constraints, I think it would be very interesting to show consumers different ad formats but to measure their reactions through neuromarketing techniques rather than self reporting. I still maintain the belief that graphical banner ads are merely artifacts of a dated approach to internet marketing where impressions were king and relevancy was irrelevant. If traditional marketers are right, as consumers get increasingly more adept at ignoring advertising the advertisers must become better at hiding the existence of the ad completely. This is good news for referral marketers but may challenge the core principles of Google’s ad model.
