Simple Steps (You Would Think) for Effective Internet Advertising Campaigns...

So many advertisers make the same mistakes over and over again. For the umteenth time, here are some things to avoid when you are planning your online campaigns:

Here are seven mistakes that, research tells us, afflict so many digital ads today.

1. They are too complex.
To digital advertisers: Most people aren't as interested in your products and services as you are; avoid the details. To interest them, attract their eye with uncluttered visual displays and concise, to-the-point headlines and body copy. In short: Keep it simple.

2. They take too long to get to the point.
Yes, the viewer is watching a screen. But they're not at the movies -- they're not waiting for the credits to roll and the good stuff to start. Effective internet advertisers register their brands, post their messages quickly and avoid the long build-up with teaser words and images, which irritate and, worse, alienate the audience.

3. They are ambiguous.
Americans don't go to advertising to raise questions. They want answers. When internet ads generate thoughts that begin, "I wonder what..." or "Why are they..." or "What the hell...," they've missed their opportunity. Some digital advertisers believe that ambiguity arouses curiosity and product interest, but the research indicates that advertising effectiveness and uncertainty are usually mutually exclusive.

4. They are visually bland -- or, worse, ugly.
The research demonstrates that the eye is drawn to sharp, clear, colorful pictures; yet many digital advertisers offer muted, abstract photography or a visual cacophony of verbiage and images. With photographs, present one clear focal-point to entice the eye; employ strong, primary colors; and, if possible, heighten contrast by using black for the background.

5. They use Flash for the sake of Flash -- not for a clear purpose.
Static ads often perform better than flash ads. Why? The online world is divided into two kinds of advertisers: the quick and the dead. Effective static ads don't have the luxury to distract the visitor with Flash; rather, they're forced to rely on simple images to attract the eye and on simply-stated messages for the mind, exactly what most online travelers are looking for.

6. They are often difficult, if not impossible, to read.
Some digital advertisers unwisely borrow from some of the most egregious print ads, which were created by people who are not aware that uniformity of font size and style, not VaRIabIlitY, is the key to legibility. The most effective digital ads use one font style, in one size, well spaced and in lower case. (All-caps copy demands too much effort.)

7. They are bereft of benefit statements.
The vast majority of advertisers in all media are more comfortable listing features not benefits. The importance of this point cannot be overstated: There is one primary question that drives purchase interest in any product in any medium, and it is, "What's in it for me?" Clearly and concisely answer that question, and you'll win their hearts and minds.

One last point: The internet traveler usually has a clear purpose: to read e-mail, to get medical information, to book a flight to Bermuda ... Time moves quickly for people on a mission. Distract them without a quick payoff, and you're likely to irritate them -- rarely a goal of any advertising campaign.

Bands you've never heard of....

A band you've never heard of -- AC/DC cover band AC/db -- made over $32,000 from music sales in November.

How is that possible?

Under the old business model of music sales on physical media, it wouldn't be. For a band to end up with that much money in its pockets after the distributor and record label had taken their cuts, its music would have to have posted gaudy, unmissable sales numbers.

AC/db, on the other hand, just had to do around $45,000 in sales at the iTunes store. After Apple took its 30 cents on the dollar, that left $32,000, of which the band's distributor -- TuneCore -- took nothing at all.

TuneCore is one of a few digital distributors that have turned the music business model on its head, treating distribution as a service. The company charges an up front fee to process recordings and upload them to music stores like iTunes -- which won't deal with individual artists. The band retains all rights to its music and keeps all the revenue past what the stores keep.

This model is obviously appealing to musicians. CEO Jeff Price says TuneCore, a startup with a mere $7 million in venture funding to date, distributes more music for sale than any company in the world -- and by a wide margin. In 2009, TuneCore processed and uploaded more than a song per second; its iTunes sales were good for $32 million after Apple took its cut.

That doesn't seem like a large sum in the context of a $10 billion industry. But as most of TuneCore's customers are unsigned ("whatever that even means anymore," Price says), that is mostly going straight to musicians; in that context, $32 million is serious money.

And it's not just music -- TuneCore put a collection of Halloween-themed sound effects on iTunes, which sold for around $20,000 in November.

The barriers to entry are low -- TuneCore charges around $10 for a single, $40 for an album, pretty much in line with its main competitor, ReverbNation -- so anyone can record just about anything and offer it to the masses on a whim. And if they happen to catch a viral wave, they can end up making a decent living.

Why Brands Should Embrace Technological Change

This is the most well-stated summary of what we preach at eLink Media to our clients:

It took the telephone 45 years to penetrate half the homes in America; radio, less than 20; color TV, 15; computers, 10; cellphones, eight; and the internet, a mere six years. The speed of change is accelerating. Five years ago Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Hulu and the iPhone didn't exist. Today Facebook has 350 million members; Twitter boasts 30 million; and Hulu is the second biggest "channel" in America, having surpassed Time Warner Cable.

Technology now has profound impact on consumer behavior. Take brand loyalty, for example. Smartphones enable consumers to comparison shop on the basis of price at the point of sale. The democratization of information may result in commoditization of brands as consumers make purchase decisions by searching for the lowest-priced product. Technology may also alter the purchase cycle and give rise to powerful third-party influencers, counterbalancing paid media's "management" of the purchase cycle. These are transformational shifts for brands.

Yet while consumers and retailers embrace these innovations, one group seems to be conspicuously lagging behind the rapid technological evolution of the marketplace: marketers. Consider this: Ten years ago, at the beginning of the decade, consumers spent 30 minutes online. Today it's four hours, according to Media Metrix, twice as much time as they watch TV -- and that time spent does not include e-mailing. In this decade broadband expanded from 3% to two-thirds of American homes. Yet marketers barely adjusted their approach. While investment in digital advertising has crept up some, roughly 90% of budgets is still spent on traditional channels like TV.

Change is always difficult, but marketers should be more aware of the new marketplace or run the risk of consumers disengaging, rendering their marketing programs irrelevant. The marketing narrative needs to be rebooted and the architecture of brand building re-engineered.

CMOs must recognize that the speed and scope of change are so overwhelming that they need to dramatically revamp their marketing ecosystem. A good place to start is reviewing the scope of their relationships with their agencies. CMOs must demand that all of their agencies, and not just the digital shop, become technologically savvy. Procurement also needs to evolve its scoring of intellectual-property vendors and consider technical expertise as part of the value proposition. Second, marketers should strive for mutuality and non-partisanship in brand stewardship. Today, it is ensconced with the "traditional" agency, while other disciplines play a supporting role. Of course, if you spend 90% of your budget with traditional agencies, that makes sense, but it also leads to silos and makes integration hard. As the landscape is changing, the digital agency, the PR firm and especially the media agency should play an equal role in brand stewardship. The media agencies in particular can play a unique role in that they are at the intersection of creativity and technology and can best assess how to calibrate them and help marketers through the challenges of a technology-driven marketplace.

CMOs must lead a number of internal changes as well. The first is to recognize that technology is no less a marketing tool than, say, market research, and appoint a "marketing-technology czar" to champion it. That person's responsibility will be to act as a cross-functional facilitator and identify technology that can enhance marketing activity and brand building. Further, as consumers adopt technology at the speed of light, CMOs should act as innovation evangelists, pushing technology into all facets of company operations, to ensure that the company is customer-facing and that brands maintain relevancy. And as all employees and the company culture are significant marketing tools, one of the areas that marketers should have greater involvement in is the human capital of the company, working closely with HR on hiring and firing standards. In the 21st century companies should hire people who are inclined toward technology and accept change as a given. That does not necessarily mean that those people are IT experts, but rather that they are curious, adapt easily and are inclined toward collaboration and social media.

Interestingly, the best technologies reinforce very old-fashioned values of brand building. Zappos, Comcast, JetBlue and Virgin America use Twitter to reinforce their image of delivering exceptional customer service (interestingly, and perhaps, therefore, so effectively, in categories that are not known for it -- retail, cable and airlines). But that is exactly the point of technology and marketing. As new technology replaces the obsolete, a brand can continue and hold its positioning while modifying the technological delivery platform.

The problem CMOs face with mastering technology, and with the internet, is very simple: There is so much going on simultaneously and things change so quickly that no one, absolutely no one, can know everything that's going on. Ten years ago a marketer needed to know maybe 100 things to be effective: some aspects of positioning, some aspects of media, some media research, some pricing, some distribution. Now that number is in the thousands. And whereas technology used to advance incrementally, it now evolves exponentially.

As marketing tasks mushroomed and time became compressed during the recession, CMOs found themselves in a position of having to do more with less. To navigate through the added complexity of the technological eruption, they have to go beyond just tolerating it to become active participants and advocates of the new marketing ecosystem. They ought to embrace the speed of change and view it as brand asset.

Changing Agencies just for the sake of changing them....

Here at eLink Media, we stress to clients (whether brand new, or long existing) to be consistent. Consistent messaging, consistent focus, and staying on point is what make campaigns strong and relationships strong. Changing providers or agencies simply for the sake of changing them never allows for partners to get engaged with the brand, or the focus and instead leaves them feeling scared of the inevitable departure of the client. Case in point?....see below...

Hmm, It's 2010 -- About Time for Chipotle to Switch Up Ad Agencies

For some marketers, a new year means a new agency. If that's your company's annual resolution, you should know that line of thinking will lead to a bad reputation in adland.

Agency new-business executives and industry search consultants report a growing blacklist of sorts, composed of marketers that tend to put ad duties into play every year or two. Thanks to rapid turnover in the chief marketing officer seat (a CMO's tenure averages 28 months, according to the most recent figures from executive search firm Spencer Stuart) and pressure to perform amid the troubled economy, long-lasting agency-marketer relationships are becoming more rare.

"I have a huge disagreement with people changing their agencies like they change their underwear," said Jane Bedford, partner at the Bedford Group, a consultancy based in Atlanta. "Our clients tell us it takes them about three to six months for them to get fully engaged with their agencies. It's very difficult for an agency to get up and running, and totally please the client, within the first year."

And that's coming from an exec who actually benefits when accounts go into review.

Take Chipotle: In January 2004, the burrito chain tapped Mother, New York, to be its first advertising agency. Six years later, that account has cycled through four different shops: After Mother came TDA Advertising & Design, Boulder, Colo.; Devito/Verdi, New York; Butler Shine Stern & Partners, San Francisco; and, its latest, hired this month, Compass Point Media, a division of Campbell Mithun in Minneapolis.

Apparently "The Shack" isn't happy with the nickname either...

Having an innovative marketing plan that includes referring to yourself in slang is one thing...but then blaming that on the wrong agency is another entirely...

Radio Shack has announced a review of its $215 million U.S. media planning and buying account currently handled by Aegis' Carat. According to a release issued by the marketer, the incumbent is expected to take part in the review.

The company said it intends to select an agency by the end of March. The assignment will include media planning and buying across all channels, including digital and new media.

In a statement, Radio Shack said the review is part of its regular procurement process and has hired Select Resources International to manage the review. Radio Shack said its advertising expenses for 2008 totaled $215 million.

"We are constantly adapting our media strategy as the changing landscape -- driven largely by digital media -- continues to create dynamic opportunities for our brand. This review is part of a regular practice intended to ensure that we have the best resources focused on leveraging those opportunities," said Lee Applbaum, chief marketing officer for Radio Shack.

As Much Marketing as you can do, you can't fix stupid....

We advise clients (as do other agencies) that while we constantly improve our service, products, and technologies, they must do the same. When you have a bad product, offer, or service the inevitable will eventually happen....even to Jay Leno.

NBC confirmed Sunday that it will end the run of its much-scrutinized and oft-criticized "The Jay Leno Show" in prime time as of February 12th, just as its broadcast of the Winter Olympics ends. The network also said it will make other moves, reversing its tilt away from the traditions of the broadcast TV business.

NBC

Jay Leno

In a presentation to TV critics, Jeff Gaspin, chairman of NBC Universal Television Entertainment, confirmed the much-anticipated move, saying that the show's low ratings had hurt affiliates' ability to garner ratings -- and thus ad dollars -- for their late local newscasts. He said NBC hoped to put Mr. Leno in place at 11:35 p.m., move Conan O'Brien and his "Tonight Show" to 12:05 a.m. and run Jimmy Fallon's "Late Night" at 1:05 a.m. Those plans could be altered, however, depending on whether or not deals can be struck with the hosts and their management teams.

NBC also suggested it would reverse its reduced investment in prime-time programming, a strategy that left it trailing most of its broadcast rivals in the ratings. NBC said it was preparing a "large slate of dramas" for the 2010-2011 season. In a press release, the network said it had struck deals for pilots from such well-known producers as J.J. Abrams, Jerry Bruckheimer and David E. Kelley. The network also said it would consider a pilot for a remade version of TV-classic "The Rockford Files" from "House" producer David Shore.

Zicam Makes a Move....

While this is a big win for C-K...will digital distribution finally become a focal point for the Pharmaceutical industry?

Drug maker Matrixx Initiatives has named Cramer-Krasselt's Phoenix office the new ad agency of record for its over-the-counter cold remedy, Zicam.

The brand, which spent $30 million on measured media in 2008, moved to Interpublic Group of Cos.' Lowe Worldwide just last May, but it was forced into play after Interpublic merged Lowe with Johnson & Johnson agency Deutsch, creating a new conflict of interest. At the time of the merger, Interpublic indicated it intended to move the Zicam account to another shop within the company, but Matrixx apparently had other ideas, putting the account up for grabs.

"We'd like to be supportive, but we'll ultimately make a decision that's best for our business," VP-Marketing Tim Connors told Ad Age at the time.

At C-K, Zicam will join a growing medicine cabinet of brands that includes the Takeda Pharmaceuticals' sleep aid Rozerem, Boehringer Ingelheim's ulcer drug Zantac, and GlaxoSmithKline's prostate treatment Avodart -- all of which have been won by the agency since 2005.

Few shops manage to balance so many different drug makers on a single roster, but Matrixx didn't hesitate to tap C-K for brand strategy, creative, digital and consumer engagement chores.