traditional media ads still preferred by consumers…or are they?

image credit: gogogoodiebags.com

survey results released this week by adobe indicate that old media like television, newspapers and magazines are still where most consumers prefer to see advertisements. surveyed consumers and marketing professionals view advertising in online and social media contexts as an ineffective distraction. is the jig up for online and social advertising and marketing? I think not. I believe the analysis is based on a flawed survey and adobe should ask for a refund.

the results appeared on marketingcharts.com. unlike a lot of the sketchy so-called data driving a lot of the pretty infographs nowadays, this study features a robust sample set of 1000 consumers and 250 marketing hacks..er I mean professionals. but then things start to go off the rails.

the report leads with the revelation that 45% of consumers and 42% of marketers chose television and newspapers as their preferred source for promotion, more than ten points ahead of referrals from friends or family for consumers. ouch. the article goes on to dismissively share that less than a third of respondents admitted to liking advertising (I’m actually impressed the number is that high!), but of that group, the largest single preferred source was print magazines. take that, pinterest. the excerpt I chose from the article is typically gloom and doom:

Online Ads “Annoying” And “Distracting”

Although only 3 in 10 consumers (and just 16% of marketers) believe that online advertising is not effective, consumers don’t appear to have warmed to online ads. When asked to select from a list of adjectives to describe them, “annoying” led the list at 68%, followed by distracting (51%), all over the place (46%), invasive (38%) and creepy (16%). Just 14% described them as eye-catching, 10% as clever and 7% as persuasive. 6% feel online ads are evil.

via marketingcharts.com

a glimmer of hope

as I said above, I believe the survey developers went awry in several ways. the first is a problem with what response options were presented for questions. for example, the most preferred media for advertising were television and newspapers. However, tv and newspapers appear to have been the most preferred, single option presented rather than the most preferred combination. There is no response shown with any combination of traditional and new media. in other words, options for integrated campaigns are not offered.

if the goal was to identify the media where people prefer to see advertising, then each option should have had its own line, ideally with a ranking system. if the goal was to encourage more marketers to incorporate online and/or social into their strategies, then the survey could have offered several permutations. I believe this was adobe’s goal based on this video presentation of the survey results (adobe commissioned the survey).

another problem area was question phrasing. many of the slides in adobe’s “state of online advertising study” draw conclusions based on the percentage of respondents who agreed or disagree with statements. several of these statements have a partisan flavor (and that has nothing to do with it being a week before the election!) for example, 54% of respondents agreed with the statement “web banner advertisements do not work.” another statement asked respondents to agree or disagree with the statement “online advertising is creepy and follows you” (46% agreed; apparently remarketing is less of an issue for consumers than banner ads?) leave leading statements to political polls, guys.

or take the question at left. specifying a single action would help gauge the effect of peer endorsement on engagement. allowing multiple selections muddies respondents’ intent. the natural progression for someone seeing a like and wanting to “check out the product” would be to click through to the social media page – why did more people leave to visit the product website? did every person who checked “commented” also mark “like” and “visited product’s social media page?”

what has more effect on campaign roi – where people “prefer to see” advertising or where it converts? what does sentiment toward advertising professionals have to do with channel preference?  it is easy to monday morning quarterback a survey. however, flaws in this survey obscure easy conclusions and open the door to multiple and conflicting interpretations. instead of seeing things more clearly, we are left as blind as before.