Whenever there’s an old standard, there are always new ones that try to take its place. The same can be said about marketing and the old standard of reach. The up-and-coming concept of “engagement” has been gaining speed, but it appears that the number of eyeballs that a campaign will reach still trumps every other draw when it comes to alluring media buyers.
This is according to a survey titled “Wave Eight” conducted by Advertiser Perceptions. Less than half of the 2,047 respondents (which included marketers and their media buyers) listed engagement as one of the top five key factors they consider when purchasing media.
“Ad results,” “Audience,” and “Marketing Services” were the top three criteria in terms of their importance to both agencies and marketers when it comes to deciding where to pump their company’s ad dollars online.
For print, the top three were “Audience,” “Ad results,” and “Ad placement” for agencies, and “Audience,” “Ad results,” and “Content/editorial/programming” for marketers.
For television, the top three criteria were “Audience ratings,” “Audience,” and “Ad placement” for agencies, and “Audience,” “Audience ratings,” and “Ad placement” for marketers.
With regards to advertising budget pies, 76% of respondents indicated that they would increase their online spending, while 55% said they would increase their mobile spending. Newspapers (both national and local) are continuing to lose their luster, with 37% of respondents indicating that they would decrease their spending on both, while 30% said they would spend less on radio.
Part of the reason why engagement has not been gaining even more ground against reach could be in its nebulous definition (or lack thereof). While print ranked the highest for engagement, it ranked lowest for delivering results, while the opposite was true for television.
While online and mobile realms are maintaining their appeal, it is clear that television and magazine advertising is far from languishing, and that traditional newspapers are continuing to see their demise.
Source:
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=123057
Network
