MARKETING MIX: SOAP BOX; Loud and often is no way to attract the 90s customer
What a new year fillip! I risk being proved right about something.
What a new year fillip! I risk being proved right about something.
When, in this very column back in August 1994, I raised the daunting
prospect that TV and radio advertising was beginning to turn consumers
off, I was pilloried by the adland gentry, most notably by Lord Fletcher
of Bozell.
In his uniquely charming way, he chided me disdainfully with the
disarmingly rational argument that it was advertising’s sole purpose in
life to intrude, because without such intrusion nobody would notice
them, and thus not respond.
‘But,’ I retorted meekly, ‘where does intrusion turn into irritation as
raucous ads alienate the very consumers they are trying to influence?’ I
didn’t get a satisfactory answer - from anyone. But now, new research
from Lowe Howard-Spink suggests that the incidence of the ‘ad avoiders’
- across all demographic groups - is rising rapidly.
‘Advertising is producing a diminishing return on investment... the
sophisticated and sceptical 90s consumer needs to be seduced rather than
assaulted,’ pouts Gerry Judge, no slouch for recognising the potential
PR value to LHS for launching his survey to the media (although by
raising doubts about ad effectiveness, one initially questions the
appropriateness of the message). According to the Financial Times
(reporting a full week after Marketing), Judge believes ‘advertisers
rely on outdated tactics - prizing repetition above creativity’.
But, stack me, isn’t that what I’ve been saying - that repetition turns
into intrusion, which turns into irritation, which turns consumers off?
This is especially true, I believe, on radio where advertisers seem to
believe that he who shouts loudest is the one to be heard - but fail to
recognise the vital difference between awareness and the understanding
that leads to brand favourability.
Now Campaign’s Dominic Mills is joining my bandwagon. Writing on the
Rajar debate he says: ‘My personal venom is directed at mobile phone
ads, so whenever I hear one I switch stations.’
I agree, but I’m 14 months ahead of him. In my August 94 article I cited
Advance Telephone Systems as my irritating ad of the year, but no one
came to their defence to tell me how successful they were in sales
terms.
But Judge’s message is laudable: for agencies to produce ‘engaging and
likeable’ advertising (as opposed to the raucous stuff that drives us
potty) like my current favourite for Toblerone, which is subtle and
persuasive; and to improve media targeting.
But even that is a daunting task. WH Smith sponsors the Saturday chart
show on Classic FM but loyal listeners are subjected to the same ads,
even though they’re only once a week.
Advertising will surely have to reinvent itself, otherwise marketers
will find direct marketing and particularly PR - which talks with
consumers rather than shouts at them - will lead even more of the
effective campaigns of 1996.
Quentin Bell is chairman of the Quentin Bell Organisation
