+44 207 401 4830

BLOG

Freesheets: the right to be remembered

Despite past concerns, Freesheets today have a lot going for them argues Tim Carr, director and head of international at adconnection. They travel far and wide, attract new - and multiple - readers, and with the right online offering can lead people towards workable 'freemium' content...

There have always been a number of questions raised when considering advertising in freesheets. Brands ask the same questions time after time: are engagement levels as high as with paid-for publications? Do people actually read these magazines and newspapers or just pick them up and throw them away? Do you really know who's reading a freesheet?

While they may not be the right advertising space for all brands, these give-away publications are a vital part of the media mix, and a sector that certainly should be remembered.

You just need to consider the latest National Readership Survey (NRS), detailing April 2012 - March 2013, to see the continuing success of 'fremium' material.

Time Out, having become free in September last year, has seen an enormous rise in readership, up 49 per cent on the same period last year - the highest increase for a weekly title by far, with the next closest Auto Express magazine at just eight per cent [Time Out's circulation was also up a huge 455 per cent in six months, Ed.]

Furthermore, London Evening Standard saw a six per cent rise over this period - the most of any newspaper in England - and in fact a nine per cent increase when analysing the second six months against the same period last year. Again, this is more than any other English paper, the rest of which have seen decreases.

Volume has always been a chief concern in any ad campaign, and readership is a key measurement in campaign planning. Readership doesn't focus on the number of copies, but puts the person at the heart, as every good media campaign should, looking individually at what they read.

If you live in London, just think about your journey to work. How many people do you see picking up an already-read issue of the Metro? Or flicking through a discarded Stylist?

This is one area where NRS positions itself as a leading media metric, estimating the number of times publications are read, and splitting these into different demographic groups - vital when looking at appropriate media channels.

It is this multi-reader aspect of freesheets that is of such value to brands too. A paid-for copy would generally have a readership of one, two or maybe three, depending on the household.

However, when content is free - if distributed through the right channels - this dramatically increases.

The age-old adage is that if you buy a magazine or newspaper you engage with it more and read it for longer due to the commitment of purchasing and spending your hard-earned money on it. However, giving away free issues can attract new readers and foster loyalties that otherwise would not exist.

This loyalty goes beyond print and extends to the publication as a brand, across multiple channels and platforms.

NRS PADD (Print and Digital Data) figures out last week demonstrate that these freesheets foster loyalty that extends to online too. While you may think of the Metro purely as a multi-local free newspaper, it is much more than this; it is a newsbrand with a large readership both online and offline.

In fact, Metro's online readership is 1,868,000 - larger than the Daily Express, Daily Star and the Times Newspapers' titles under a paywall - which adds 11 per cent on to its overall brand reach of almost 12 million people.

The London Evening Standard has an even larger proportion of its readership online, with its website adding 24.8 per cent to overall readership, showing that 'fremium' content in print form complements a multichannel digital presence.

The standard of freesheets, in both magazine and newspaper form, is ever-improving. As more publications take up the 'fremium' model, increased competition means that this content is now more relevant and entertaining than ever.

In London alone Time Out, Sport, Stylist and Shortlist, as well as City AM, London Evening Standard and Metro, are thrust upon you on your commute to or from work.

A good 'premium' paper or magazine needs to be of a certain quality; it must have interesting and original content, trusted opinions, and the ability to engage enough to build its own audience.

They give brands the chance to reach consumers that they may otherwise struggle to engage, becoming synonymous with this dependable source of information and entertainment.

Ultimately, being media neutral is the key to any good advertising campaign. If by putting your consumer at the heart of your plans it means using, or indeed avoiding, freesheets, then so be it. However, media professionals need to realise that 'fremium' is an established model, with a proven track record that must not be forgotten.

I will leave you with a quote from City AM's commercial director, Harry Owen, in a Media Week article last year: "You wouldn't find anyone questioning the value of ITV's audience or content, would you?"

Enough said.

Image credit: The Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/dec/10/pressandpublishing.transportintheuk

Brand sponsorship of the police: Could it work?

According to Martyn Underhill, a former detective chief inspector and Dorset’s current Police Commissioner, “the police are the lowest funded force and have seen the worst cuts”. His solution? Brand sponsorship of the police force.

In a recent blog post, Underhill announced that he had been in talks with a potential sponsor, but also made it clear that he would only opt for appropriate sponsorships with ‘reputable brands’ interested in longer term business support.

Naturally this announcement has raised questions surrounding the ethical soundness of such an arrangement. Is it right or wrong for brands to sponsor the police force?
Shadow policing minister David Hanson warned that although he had sympathy with struggling police force, the scheme could damage faith in the police.

Our opinion:

Given the budget cut backs in this department for the last few years, it’s important to find ways to fund and maintain police presence and community safety. However, the profile of the police and the consumer is mixed; with some good experiences and some very bad, meaning that each brand will need to determine whether this association will be an asset or a drawback to its values. It’s hard to believe that promoting a fast food chain such as Burger King would enhance the police branding, but could have a positive effect on Burger King’s credibility.

At a time where budgets are tight and brands are needed to partner with affiliates, sponsorship of other public services could be a positive move forward. Ultimately, all government funded departments have been hit by the recession, and gaining funds will only improve services to the nation.

If this sponsorship goes ahead, brands are set to have the opportunity to have some credible services associated with their brand, and gaining national awareness through a new medium can only be a good thing.

Image credit: Healthy & Safety Executive - http://www.hse.gov.uk/services/police/

You Can't Live on Big Data Alone

Big Data is fast becoming an invaluable tool that is changing the way we approach marketing. As a way of developing insights into consumers' habits, it is the lifeblood of our trade. But it also has its drawbacks, and no one can or should try to understand their consumers through Big Data alone.

Big Data allows us to pool the plethora of data we get from consumer's complex lives, and draw valuable long and short-term insights into our consumers across multiple media. It enables us to draw together a picture of what consumers are doing, where they are, their likes and habits, and -- many would argue -- what they might do next.

Having this data in real time means we have much more immediate data than ever before, down to a last action, click or purchase. And for media agencies like us, this is vital in terms of interrogating the habits of target consumers.

However, marketers should draw conclusions from Big Data with extreme caution, and avoid falling into the obvious traps. Categorizing consumers according to specific habits, preferences, or demographics makes us run the risk of pigeon holing them, and leaping to the wrong conclusion.

By defining people according to generic types, and making assumptions or predictions, we are forgetting one of the most fundamental facts about human nature: we are unpredictable and not always rational. People don't necessarily behave according to types in real life, or act according to their age, gender or lifestage. So why do we expect our consumers to fall relatively neatly into these categories?

This is where Big Data falls short. None of us likes being put in a box and defined, and our 'consumers' should not be treated any differently. As we discussed in the 'MediaTel Media Playground' AdWeek debate, we need to hone down on individuals rather than groups.

Take a very simplified example from the media industry: you run a banner ad for an online sofa company on The Telegraph home page every Monday for four weeks. The first two weeks you make 40 sales, followed by 20 sales on the second two weeks. If we had predicted the outcome after two weeks, we would of course have come to the wrong conclusion.

While this example is clearly unrealistic, it illustrates the point that you cannot necessarily predict people's behaviour according to how they have behaved in the past, which is what Big Data asks us to do. People are not always measurable. And we must recognise the random quirkiness of our audiences, their creativity and unpredictability of thinking, and then make sense of it all with the data analysis now available to us.

By fusing an understanding and appreciation of human nature with the logic of Big Data, we can gain much more valuable insights upon which to base conclusions.

No one can survive on Big Data alone -- the real value of big data will only ever be unlocked if you have intelligent people to help comprehend it in more real terms.

Image credit: Lenith Scientific Data Management - https://team.inria.fr/zenith/

Why even experienced planners need to challenge their own assumptions

Experience is rightly seen as a key factor in the direct marketing planning process, but used wrongly it can also be the planner's biggest mistake.

Of course, decisions based on past experience are taken often, and can be put down to two things. The first is the area of hunches and assumptions, where statements are made and automatically believed. Our trust in them comes more from familiarity than anything else. If you've ever been in a meeting and heard the phrase, "everybody is on holiday in August", or "we can't do it then because World Cup is on", then you'll know what I am talking about.

Some advertisers will avoid buying space in August because the entire nation is apparently on holiday. Generally, only those who have school-age children part with the premium costs demanded for a holiday in August and do so usually for just a week, leaving the rest of the population (and month) available for targeting.

Last year, we had the additional matter of the Olympics, with "but the Olympics are on" being the reason for as many advertisers to avoid the summer as support it. During the Olympics, we still managed to consume other media and concentrate on other things (just as we do during the World Cup). DTRs and catch-up services mean people don't miss their TV programmes, and we carry web and digital radio capable devices wherever we are. Emails can sit in inboxes, door drops and DM can rest on our doormats until we return.

In August 2012, many advertisers stayed away from much media, and the rest of us enjoyed the deflationary marketplace and bigger share of voice. Marketers should be more scientific and look at audience behaviour around big events rather than make rash assumptions. Buying late into the Olympic period on one charity brand, I was happy to report an average DRTV CPT more than 25% cheaper than normal, while the lack of competitors and heightened national mood helped us to gain response rates that were 32% higher than usual on the copy used. Out of precisely 100 charity brands on TV in 2012, only 23 were active in August - the lowest count of the year, and 33% less than the average month.

The second common mistake is regarding things as fact, and that they will never change. Ever heard that peak-time TV programmes are half as fruitful as daytime ones in terms of lead generation? Or maybe you've learned that outdoor cannot be used perpetually by an advertiser as a source of response. Radio only works for branding. Weekends aren't responsive for DRTV. The list goes on.

Television is full of such examples. Dual-screening, through the prevalence of broadband and web-capable devices in the home, has changed the way we research and respond and direct marketers need to react accordingly. We know that TV advertising creates a halo for other media (anything from 10 to 50% depending on which report you read), especially online, yet when it comes to the implementation of a direct response plan, we too often fall back on rules that go against this. Econometrics would not exist if we didn't see the proof of these facts.

DRTV campaigns that don't set a single foot in peak-time TV or weekends are still common (of those 100 charities in 2012, 48% bought less than 10% peak-time), yet we know how TV feeds online and when online peak times are. Response allocation issues, client restraints and data analysis are to blame in many cases, but whatever the excuses, direct response practitioners should look to the evidence rather than stick with what they think they know.

Several advertisers across many sectors now use radio to generate mass response. SMS response capabilities and long dwell times have seen several previously ignored outdoor options become very fruitful for response; this is probably why charities have spent 75% more year on year in the last six months on that media, and the finance sector is up 40%.

As consumer habits change, we need to keep re-inventing the DM wheel in order to maintain satisfactory return on our investment. Hard facts should be merged with knowledge of our market to make a difference and achieve stand-out. Making assumptions, whether based on years of experience or on our gut instinct, relies on things staying the same, which is something that never happens in media, or anywhere else.

Image credit: Shizuo Kambayashi/AP

Facebook's facelift - what does it mean for advertisers?

Bigger photos, longer text blurbs, and an overall increase in engaging, rich content opportunities. Sounds like an advertisers dream, right? Well yes, but there’s more to the story. Following an in-depth user survey, Facebook has decided to clean up its interface to provide a better experience for users.

Users will now be able to choose between different content-specific feeds on their Facebook page. The ‘Following feed’ will feature all the updates from the Pages they Like and the public figures they’ve subscribed to. There’s also the ‘Friends-only’ feed. Here users will only see updates related to their social networks, and no branded content whatsoever.

The change has promoted mixed feelings amongst advertisers. On the one hand we have the improved creative space, which is a massive plus for content-heavy brands. On the other, the divided news feeds could mean that this space could all go to waste. It will all depend on how popular the Following feed proves to be. The introduction of the Friends-only feed could mean that users will be free to Like Pages to show off their interests or personalize third-party apps, but skip their updates altogether.

Mark Zuckerberg and the other Facebook reps failed to even mention advertising at the big news feed announcement, only bringing it up when prompted during the Q&A. When they did speak up, what they had to say was encouraging however.

“We’re taking all the content you see in the feed and making it more immersive. So that goes across the board for everything, including ads” said Facebook’s head of product design Julie Zhuo.

Whichever way you look at it, one thing is certain. The new dual news feeds put even more power in the hands of the consumer, meaning that brands that choose to embrace the changes will benefit. For example, links shared on the site will have bigger blurbs, which could benefit serious publishers with great prose, but might penalise link-bait headlines that try to mislead people into clicking. Similarly, businesses that buy feed ads that feature a photo will be rewarded with bigger photos and more space for creativity. This could lure more luxury brands who are used to larger homepage takeovers and glossy magazine ads.

Overall, the update should see a richer consumer experience, meaning longer browsing times and an improved overall user experience. Marketers who see the changes as an opportunity rather than a drawback will be rewarded with higher engagement levels and an overall increase in ROI.

Adconnection Unveils First ‘Second Screen’ Integrated Media Campaign for Lovestruck

Adconnection has unveiled a dual screen integrated media campaign for online dating website Lovestruck.com, to promote the service to male and female professionals aged 18-40, living in London.

The campaign, which launched on the 18th February, combines online display banners and ‘roadblocking’ targeted sites and audiences only at times coinciding with Lovestruck’s TV spots.

The technology works by placing online banner ads on websites relating to the content of the TV programme in question, during - and up to thirty minutes after - Lovestruck’s TV spots. For example, fashion sites are targeted during ‘Gok’s Fashion Fix’, and home improvement sites during ‘Location Location Location’.

By harmonising TV and online advertising in a way that has never been seen before in the UK, the campaign has heightened the impact of Lovestruck’s TV advertising campaign, and maximised direct response rates from potential Lovestruck customers. This was made possible by the work of our demand side platform, Adform, who we worked closely with to develop this technology.

Brett Harding, MD & co-founder at Lovestruck.com, said: “This is a key time of year for us, and having a unified, connected approach to advertising will communicate the Lovestruck message effectively. We have been really impressed with adconnection’s strategic approach with this campaign.”

5 essential reasons to consider social gaming advertising

With total global spend on video games expected to expand to $83.0 billion by 2016, in-game advertising is set to become an increasingly important revenue stream for advertisers. An estimated 200 million online gamers play an average of 13 hours a week - making it one of the fastest growing advertising areas yet. Indeed the rise of the smartphone and tablet has seen the conventional gamer broaden from the stereotypical teenage boy to all ages and both sexes.

Could 2013 be the year in which the advertising industry recognises engaged in-game advertising for its true potential? Here are a few reasons why we think it may:

1. Massive reach: 1 billion hours a month are spent playing games on Facebook. Also, contrary to popular belief, the average age of a social gamer is 39 years old, and the audience skews slightly female (55%).

2. Highly engaged users: Across all social gaming formats, CTRs average at a very healthy 6%. However, some formats are achieving CTRs up to a huge 63%. When playing a game, a user has the option to choose several different offers within the interface. If the user decides to take an action with a brand, it proves that there is interest and intent.

3. Rich creative: There are a lot of opportunities to showcase a brand in the gaming space with video, rich media, surveys and even branded content within the game.

4. Robust measurement: Social gaming takes place through social graphs; therefore, everything can be measured, including interactions, view percentage, engagements, sign-ups, CTR, etc. Also, all conversions are click based, so whether it's a video view, registration, offer redeemed, etc., there assured conversion by click.

5. Varied metrics: Offering a variety of metrics from Cost Per Click (CPC), Cost Per Share (CPS) and Cost Per Engagement (CPE), to Cost Per View (CPV), Cost per Action (CPA) and even Cost Per Call (CPCall), social gaming advertising provides a range of options for advertisers to measure success.

Digital add-ons mean a bold future for print

Teach-savvy brands are nurturing customer loyalty by enhancing their print campaigns with digital content.

According to figures from the Audit Bureau of Circulation, digital add-ons are helping defy recent declines in print consumption, showing a 3% year-on-year rise for the 100 most-read customer titles.

Interactive technologies are bolstering readership loyalty to own-brand magazines such as Virgin Media Magazine. Since its release in to January 2012, Virgin has since added an email newsletter, an ezine and developed a strong Twitter presence to complement the magazine.

In addition to this, the title has also incorporated interactive technologies into their marketing efforts, including augmented reality (AR) and mini video games, which aim to encourage more multifaceted brand interaction.

Audiences are particularly responsive to AR functions, which in Virgin’s case enable readers to view trailers of upcoming shows on Virgin Media by hovering enabled devices over ads in the company magazine.

Tesco has also recently incorporated AR into their print marketing. Real Food magazine - Tesco’s own-brand magazine - also includes interactive features such as how-to videos and animations. In addition to this, click-to-buy features enable readers to hover their device over recipes in the magazine and instantly buy ingredients from the Tesco online store.

Image credit: Click Here Online Marketing - www.clickhereonlinemarketing.com

Enduring Brands

The key to a brand's longevity lies in trust, writes AdConnection chief executive officer Catherine Becker.

Everything’s referred to as a brand these days, from brand Beckham to the Royal Family to Strictly Come Dancing and even Suri Cruise; the term arguably reaching its nadir with the arrival of Apprentice candidate Stuart 'the brand' Baggs.

As a society we have only relatively recently become familiar with the expression, and now we can’t get enough of it. Its overuse reflects the fact that we have all cottoned on; brands are powerful, influential and sexy.

Apple, Google, Skype and Amazon are certainly all those things, but what of the future - will they have the staying power of, for instance, Heinz or Coca-Cola? And how have these household names endured, what are the secrets of their success, and what can modern brands learn from them?

The annual Interbrand survey has just revealed that Coca-Cola has retained the number one spot as the top brand, with relative newcomer Apple taking the number two position. The winners and losers from the Interbrand list tell us, in essence, that what the most enduring brands do is keep their customers happy. Easier said than done, of course.

They keep true to their brand values, listen to their customers and innovate only where necessary - they don’t grab at the latest platform or piece of kit to be first for the sake of it - they concentrate on the core idea and use media cleverly and effectively. Most of them have iconic creative at their heart, and some have a large slice of luck.

First sold in 1901, Heinz Beans was already an enduring brand when, in 1941, the Ministry of Food gave the company a boost by classing the product as an ‘essential’ during the rationing years.

Twenty six years later, the now famous Beanz Meanz Heinz slogan was born, with the product appearing on a Who album cover later that year – cementing its iconic status as a must-have staple.

While astute creative, the right celebrity endorsement and a dose of good fortune certainly helped Heinz, it does not entirely explain its enduring appeal.

What Heinz has done particularly well is hold fast to its core values, communicate its proposition with clarity and engage effectively with its customers in all the right channels. In fact, what is has really done is sustain a really productive relationship.

Victoria Beckham, love her or hate her, said early on she wanted to be as famous as Persil. So not as famous as Madonna or Michael Jackson, but a stable household brand.

She saw the parallel between a valuable brand and a valuable celebrity; monetising the trust, consistency and reputation of the core brand but adapting to the audience (so moving from music to fashion when consumers rejected the former).

Successful human relationships puzzle most of us, most of the time. At some point, we have all scratched our heads in wonder about unlikely unions among our peers pondering: how do such opposites make each other laugh, why is she with him, she’s so out of his league, why do they still spend so much time together when they’ve been together so long?

The majority of happy couples I know overwhelmingly cite hard work as the key ingredient to a happy relationship. Not the grinding, sloggy hard work, rather the hard work you love doing because the rewards are going to be so high.

It’s all the old saws that are as true of enduring brands’ relationships with consumers as they are of romantic relationships - common goals, the same moral outlook, a shared sense of humour, spending time together, even having some shared friends and, of course, liking and loving each other. Simply put, the best couples have the same brand values.

If we look at Coca-Cola’s stated company values of Leadership, Passion, Integrity, Accountability, Collaboration, Innovation and Quality - well, to me, that’s as near to the marriage vows as you can get without actually popping on a white dress. Are they overstating their case; after all, aren't Coca-Cola’s brands just fizzy pop?

They’re not though are they? A brand is not a passive entity; to be truly successful it has to engage and have a proper, grown up, ongoing relationship with the people who buy its products. And, of course, all relationships are unique, be it with brands or people.

For instance Coca-Cola, while remaining true to its core values, has long been a creative and innovative brand. It has put sustainability and the community at the heart of its messaging, and is a market leader in stunts and set pieces, including its stunning Beatbox for London 2012. It moves with its customers and consistently reflects their changing lives and concerns.

This type of innovation is right for Coca-Cola, where it wouldn’t be for Heinz - they’re both in different relationships, but are both equally making their partners happy.

Where brands stumble sometimes is with innovation, or technology for its own sake. Keeping up with the Joneses in this way and not being yourself is folly for any relationship - it’s counter-productive, and usually means you’re going to get dumped.

Ultimately, for brands longevity is about celebrating who you are by being true to your core beliefs.

Brands’ relationships are a dialogue, a partnership, a two-way street - they cannot function well in isolation. But the most important thing is trust - customers must believe in you and have confidence that you have their best interests at heart and will always tell them the truth.

Once you have that, it’s a marriage made in heaven.

Image credit: Success Magaine - www.success.com

Free Stuff? Not Enough.

Everyone loves a free sample, particularly in a recession. Sampling works to put brands on the consumer radar, change buying habits, and inspire more creative purchasing choices, and companies are increasingly beginning realise that this is key to continued business growth. Recent findings from a Hotcow shopper survey have revealed that in some cases however, free stuff, is simply not enough.

In most cases, consumers report feeling motivated to buy after sampling a product, however only 5% of these will actually commit to a sale. When it comes to sampling, face-to-face interaction is a crucial moment for brands. Done right, it is a unique opportunity to engage with past, present and potential customers. According to Hotcow’s survey, 76% of consumers will approach a sampling stand if the product is new, while 71% of consumers will try a product if it is visually appealing.

The research also revealed that consumers prefer an upbeat, fuss-free experience when shopping, with 63% of the 1074 surveyed saying that they would be likely to buy a product if the sampling experience was engaging. Despite this however, only 5% of consumers said that they ‘always’ buy after sampling, with a further 59% indicating that they ‘sometimes’ buy.

So what is the key to taking this motivation and seeing it through to a committed sale? Too many brands are unsure when it comes to executing a successful sampling campaign. This can be due to a lack of live consumer behavioural insight, failure to plan, or ineffective monitoring and measurement of ROI. The key to a successful sampling campaign then, comes down to mastering the art of engaging conversation, informed audience targeting, and comprehensive analytics.

Consumers, exhausted by the huge range of products available, are more empowered, price critical, and demanding than ever before. The notion of capricious data - that there is no umbrella approach in a retail environment - is essential to increasing sampling sales. This, combined with the right campaigning approach, will ensure a positive product experience, meaning that consumers are more likely remember a brand when it comes to the all-important moment of purchase.

Image credit: Colors Magaine - www.colorsmagazine.com

The Social Media Storm

Named the largest Atlantic hurricane in distance on record, superstorm Sandy certainly caused its fair share of damage to the East coast of North America this October. After millions were left without power, a social media storm also raged, with platforms reporting record activity over the days surrounding the hurricane. Unlike previous disasters - where mainstream media has always reigned - social media proved the obvious choice for those looking to seek and share information throughout the storm.

When three of New York’s largest news sites, The Huffington Post, Buzzfeed, and Gawker, were taken down during the storm, social media channels seemed to be the only reliable medium for the companies to communicate. In one of the most crucial news moments of 2012, the three news sites turned to social media to keep readers informed.

News giants certainly weren’t the only ones to utilise social media during Sandy however. When millions were left without power while the storm bore down on the East Coast, people from all walks of life took to social media to read and share news, contact loved ones and rally relief efforts.

After posting a single tweet, Mark Horvath - founder of homeless non-profit website InvisiblePeople.tv - sparked a three-day, cross-country operation to get several generators to homeless shelters on the east coast.

Similarly, mayor of Newark and internet personality Cory Booker used the platform to help residents in need throughout the district. As well as tweeting press releases and other updates on infrastructure and rebuilding developments, Booker responded directly to residents’ logistical questions, praising their strength in the face of hardship, organising the personal delivery of supplies, and even managing to keep things light by throwing a bit of humour into the mix.

With everyone from the Huffington Post to the Mayor of Newark harnessing the power of social media during Sandy, it’s not surprising that Twitter usage more than doubled throughout the duration of the storm. In total, over 20 million tweets containing the words “hurricane” and “Sandy” were posted over the days before, during and immediately after the hurricane; while mentions of the word “donate” were at a 180-day peak.

Twitter wasn’t the only platform to report a huge rise in activity surrounding the hurricane however. Instagram reported that its users were posting new photos “at a rate of nearly 10 each second”, while social media management service HootSuite tracked nearly 1.5 million Hurricane Sandy mentions. Facebook also released a list of top 10 shared terms by people on Facebook in the U.S. following the storm. “We are OK”, was the number one status update on the morning of October 30, followed by;
2. “Power” - lost power, have power, no power
3. “Damage”
4. “Hope everyone is OK”
5. “Trees”
6. “Made it”
7. “Safe”
8. “Thankful”
9. “Fine”
10. “Affected”

Another widely used social tool was Google’s interactive ‘Google Crisis Response’ map, which provided current information on Sandy’s path, best evacuation routes, and areas of high wind and flooding. The platform afforded friends and family of those in the crisis zone peace of mind, allowing them to watch the local webcams from Google’s crisis map. Users could also find location-specific information like emergency shelters and traffic information.

Unfortunately, not everyone was using social media to do good during the storm. A hedge fund analyst in New York City - Shashank Tripathi - has publicly apologised after posting fake Hurricane Sandy news updates on Twitter. Tripathi, under the Twitter name @ComfortablySmug, sent out a series of tweets containing false information about the hurricane. One of his tweets, which claimed that the New York Stock Exchange had flooded, was retweeted over 600 times, and was even reported on national news.

Fake pictures with varying degrees of plausibility were also in high circulation across social media platforms. One of the more widely shared included a screen grab of the statue of liberty being pummelled by a gigantic wave, which in reality turned out to be production art from the 2004 disaster film ‘The Day After Tomorrow’.

In times of hardship, the ability for people to stay connected is vital. With its ease of access, wide reach, and peerless ability to spread news fast, social media has certainly proven itself to be an essential and reliable communication channel during a crisis such as hurricane Sandy. Whether used to stay informed, initiate relief efforts, or even spread baseless rumours, each and every post surrounding the hurricane contributed in some way to the global response rallied during the storm. It is times like this that the real power of social media is revealed.

OOH Advertising looks to the future

The world’s oldest advertising medium - out-of-home (OOH) advertising - has seen some recent developments of late. With the rise of digital and mobile technologies, advertisers have begun to incorporate a range of smart and innovative technologies into the medium, including gesture control, smartphone interaction, gender recognition, and touchscreen interface. Such advances are proving highly successful, enabling advertisers a more creative way to reach audiences, and getting consumers more involved in OOH advertising than ever before.

A recent 2-week OOH trial conducted by Clear Channel and Kinetic revealed positive results, hinting at the promising future in store for the medium. Measuring over 2000 interactions, the trial found consumers to demonstrate elevated levels of engagement, longer dwell times, and an appetite for further interaction when exposed to interactive OOH advertising.

Among the results, it was found that:
• 60% of people are willing to interact with an OOH digital screen
• 92% of consumers agreed that interaction made an advert stand out more
• 82% of consumers said interactivity made an ad more engaging
• 80% said they felt that interactive OOH was a good way for brands to talk to consumers
• 90% agreed that interactivity and involvement made an ad better at capturing their attention
• 93% also claimed they would be more likely to notice an interactive advert in the future

Of all the advancements, touch screen was found to be the preferred method of interaction by consumers, with over 60% of people willing to interact with an OOH digital screen. Following this was mobile technology, with more than 50% of participants saying they would be likely to use their smartphone to continue a conversation with brands.

Such findings impart valuable insights into public OOH interactions, allowing brands and agencies to develop and implement more effective, innovative, and profitable OOH campaigns.

Voting for Twitter

With over 100 million people worldwide now on Twitter, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that the tweeters include the Dalai Lama, Rupert Murdoch, Queen Rania of Jordan and Pope Benedict XVI.

David Cameron has joined the social network rather later than most of his contemporaries, but chose the party conference to finally announce his arrival on the social network. Why now, why join at all - is this a necessary move to reach out to, and reassure the electorate?

Thus far, Cameron doesn't seem disposed to engaging with the unconverted - almost everyone he’s following is a Tory MP. He is, of course, being followed by more than 100,000 people, but this lack of engagement suggests he only wants to appeal to the party faithful. Twitter rookie mistake.

Twitter is undeniably a fantastic platform for many brands, be they product, people or political parties, but as ever, the tweeter needs to ask serious questions of their motives and expected outcomes on such a public platform.

It is of course now so mainstream that this week alone, the future King has been reportedly joking with Ashley Cole about having his account removed, and the Daily Mirror now runs a Tweet of the Day snippet. Everyone’s doing it, so why not David Cameron?

The thing is, Twitter isn't for everybody and it isn't for every brand. Brands that do well in social have good reasons for being there - they offer enhanced engagement with consumers, rich content and a direct relationship with their current and potential customers.

Cameron’s advisers haven’t got this right yet. The Prime Minister’s first tweet is testament to that. With a promise "not to tweet too much" it overtly reflects a proposition of under sharing and reduced engagement - the antithesis of the platform.

Inevitably Cameron’s arrival on Twitter has generated a huge amount of media interest, and arguably, that’s all his camp wanted. However, if there is one thing they really should know and act on, it's that hype without content will not sustain you in social media.

It’s early days, but the first tweets are clunky and awkward and the posted pictures are horribly and obviously stage-managed.

By contrast, and as unlikely as it may seem, Boris Johnson, Tony Blair, Sarah Brown and many others are using the platform well. They have been doing it a while longer and have lots of content in the form of information and opinion.

Cameron is in an altogether more exposed position, of course, and has to appear in a safer, more constructed way. This begs the question why bother at all if you are so obviously hamstrung by the party line, and why have your first foray on the network at such a crucial time ?

High profile people in social media, obviously, need to be extra careful - but they are routinely punished for looking fake - authenticity in social really is the price of entry.

Cameron could do worse that look to broadcaster Judy Finnigan who recently explained that her husband Richard Madeley loves Twitter; he is on it often, is opinionated and engaged.

She has no problem at all with this, but will not, under any circumstances, join herself - she is too shy, doesn't understand its appeal, and I suspect, would rather be doing other things in the real world.

Twitter is a massive phenomenon, and to us in media land, a fantastic potential advertising medium for many. However, it isn't the only show in town - there are many other ways of reaching customers.

Deciding on the right channels to amplify your brand is an intricate business, it’s about the overall strategy, the timing, the message and so many other complex considerations, with a backdrop of constant change and challenge.

Throw Twitter into the mix, and getting your message across has never seemed more confusing for most brands, as David Cameron is no doubt finding out. Twitter is certainly not for the faint hearted and never, ever for the half-hearted.

The Second Age of Second Screen

We have written before on the importance of getting social media in place (and done well) when going live with traditional media campaigns.

Social media is now the default way that consumers interact with and talk about brands. 81% of UK consumers now regularly sit in front of the TV with an internet enabled device – be it smartphone, tablet or laptop – by their side. Reaching for a mobile to comment on what you have seen on screen or research or buy a product you have seen advertised is now second nature.

What is driving this second screen revolution? Well, technology has obviously been the main driver. Viewers have always gossiped about TV programs, but in our connected world we no longer have to wait to see our colleagues at work the next day, or friends in the pub on the weekend – we can now instantly give our opinion or act on advertising messages.

At the recent Royal Television Society debates Anthony Rose the CTO of Zeebox, outlined the four key drivers for second-screening as follows;

1. People want to find something to watch.
2. They want to get information about the show they're watching.
3. They want to chat to friends.
4. They may want to buy things that they see on-screen.

Advertisers have been using Facebook pages and twitter handles on advertising for a while now, and while this can help drive connection to consumers it was really the ‘first age’ of second screen.

The second age of second screen is being driven by more innovative use of the technology available. Earlier this summer ITV ran Shazam enabled advertising during Britain’s Got Talent, and BskyB’s acquisition of Zeebox has driven their commercialisation. The next update of the Sky + app (due next week) will have Zeebox integration built in. In the US, Shazam have just rolled out the ability to tag music, actors and products within programs and advertisements.

Advertisers have also taken to linking ATL campaigns with social media communications, finally understanding that consumers don’t make distinctions between different channels but just see messaging as a whole from brands. Linking all brand communication, maintaining a constant tone of voice and style is more important than ever in a world where consumers are quick to comment on inconsistencies.

The Media Olympics

As the closing ceremony of the Olympic Games ended last night, one Twitter joke was doing the rounds stating that ITV could restart their transmitter and resume broadcasting again.

Whilst the situation wasn’t quite that bad for the commercial broadcasters, they must be thanking their lucky stars that the Olympic Games only run for two weeks. Wall to wall coverage of the event by the BBC has made a massive dent in commercial impacts across all other stations, and they will hope that the weather turns wetter over the next two weeks to put some ratings back into August.

The figures have been remarkable and almost unprecedented in a multi-channel age; in total 87% (50.2m) of British people watched at least 15 minutes of the Games. The two most watched events at the Games were the opening (26.9 million) and closing (26.3m) ceremonies.

In addition, London 2012 can claim to be the first truly mobile games – with 9.2m UK mobile browsers to the BBC’s Olympics coverage, making up 34% of all daily browsers to BBC’s Olympic coverage and 12m requests from mobiles for video throughout the Games

From a sporting standpoint Usain Bolt's victory in the 100m final drew 20m viewers while Mo Farah’s 10,000m and Jessica Ennis heptathlon win drew 17.1m and 16.3m viewers respectively on ‘Super Saturday'. Tom Dailey also drew a record audience for BBC3 of 15.9m viewers with his bronze in the diving.

Also remarkable was the use of twitter to comment, analyse and support the athletes. Twitter is claiming 150 million Olympic themed tweets during the Games. The 100m gained 2.4m tweets, including 1.5m directly naming Usain Bolt. He also gained 80,000 tweets per minute for his 200m sprint. Andy Murray brought was the UK’s biggest star in terms of tpm with 57,000tpm during his final with Roger Federer.

Bolt also took the gold for most discussed athlete, followed by American swimming sensation Michael Phelps and British diver Tom Daley.

As we have tweeted recently, newspapers have also enjoyed a strong Olympic Games. The Times, who have produced excellent Olympic coverage have reaped the benefits with a rumoured 180,000 additional sales. Metro, which switched to a 7 day operation across the event, is thought to have benefitted from c£12m of Olympic themed advertising. We will be reporting on newspaper figures in more depth when ABC’s are available in early September.

Channel 4 will be hoping the feel good factor, and significant numbers of viewers, will be carried over when coverage of the Paralympics begins on 29 August.

Ambush Marketing Around the Olympics

The Olympics are in full flow, and with Team GB starting to bring home the medals, it is not only the official sponsors who have been trying to capitalise on the feel good atmosphere; other brands have been using clever ‘ambush marketing’ strategies to showcase their products while remaining within Olympic advertising regulations. Here are three of the best ambushing campaigns of these Olympic Games:

1. Beats Electronics
For those of you who have tuned into the Swimming over the past week, chances are you have seen numerous competitors entering the arena wearing a pair of Beats headphones over their swimming caps. The company, founded by rapper DR Dre, has been giving out free sets of headphones to athletes, including special sets branded with the Union Jack to members of the British Team.

2. Paddy Power
The Irish bookmaker has taken a more audacious advertising approach, showcasing billboards with the words “Official sponsor of the largest athletics event in London this year!” The parenthesis below reveal that the London mentioned actually refers to a small town in France, and the event is an egg and spoon race. As cheeky as this may seem, Paddy Power won a lawsuit against the London Organising Committee of the Games when they ordered the billboards to be taken down, and the campaign continues.

3. Specsavers
Specsavers took advantage of a terrible blunder made at a women’s football match to create a clever ad which builds on their on-going campaign. In the match between North Korea and Columbia, the flag of the Asian team’s less than amicable neighbours South Korea was displayed by mistake next to the names of North Korea’s players on the screen in the stadium. Two days later, Specsavers released an ad showing both Korean flags and underneath wrote its strapline “Should have gone to Specsavers”, partly in Korean.

The innovative strategies employed by these brands show that you don’t need to pay millions in sponsorship fees in order to cash in on an event as big as the Olympics.

Our View on YouView

Last week we tweeted a number of stories regarding the much delayed launch of YouView.

Lord Alan Sugar, the chairman of YouView even predicted that the launch could have as big an impact on UK TV as that of BSkyB in the late 1980s.

To recap, YouView is a TV service that is aiming to be the successor to Freeview. The service is accessed through a set top box which will retail at around £300 at launch. Following this there are no subscription charges. The boxes will start selling later this month, either just in time for or slightly after the Olympics, depending on which source you chose to believe.

The promise is that YouView will bridge the gap between traditional TV and the internet by putting 'catch up' services like the iPlayer and 4OD together with live TV services. Content will be provided by the main broadcast partners (BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5) and deals are being done with other providers such as BSkyB who have promised a new movie, sport and entertainment package called NOW TV. The service will also have a DVR function familiar to those with Virgin or Sky + boxes.

So far so good. But who will buy a YouView box?

Currently DVR boxes are in over 50% of UK homes, and the services that they provide are linked to other high quality content such as Sky Movies and Premier League Football. Is the YouView proposition strong enough to make people part with another £300?

In addition, the ‘iPlayer on your TV’ angle is already being played strongly by Sky (with their Anytime + offering) and Virgin.

So that leaves the ‘Freeview only’ homes. This sector is strongly represented in one main demographic – almost 50% of them are over 55. That in itself is not a barrier to purchasing the box. It’s has easy to understand instructions – simplified to just three steps – and we know that over 55s are technologically literate and heavy online users these days.

However, they are not often at the ‘Innovators’ or ‘Early Adopters’ end of the technology adoption curve.

One additional drawback is that the boxes are not WiFi enabled, meaning that to get the most out of the platform consumers will need to have a wired internet connection into their living rooms – which is not the case in many UK homes.

Our view is that YouView will sell. Heavyweight backing from the big broadcasters, including the BBC, will ensure that.

However we predict a quick price drop closer to the £99 level to ensure broader uptake. In addition the swift launch of a WiFi compatible version will be needed to drive the kind of ambitious targets that Lord Sugar has been talking about this week.

Betting the House on Football

This week’s announcement that BT have won two of the seven broadcast packages to English Premier League football from season 2013/14 throws up a number of interesting questions.

Firstly, a recap on the numbers involved.

BT agreed to £738m to show 38 matches a season for three years from 2013. Sky is paying a total of £2.28bn for the rights to 116 games per season, which works out at a staggering £6.6 million for each match to which it has the rights. Both companies share price dropped on the news.

Together, the each game has cost the broadcasters an average of £6.53m, an increase on the £4.3m that Sky and ESPN pay under the current deal. ESPN did once again bid for broadcasting rights, but lost out in the tendering process.

So, why is Premier League football so expensive? Simply because broadcast platforms are built on the two staples of ‘Footie and Films’. In addition to advertising and sponsorship revenue that football brings in, it is crucial in driving uptake of subscriptions. Sky is currently in 10m homes – and can’t take the risk of cancelled contracts if football rights go elsewhere.

BT’s bid is even more interesting. This is their first foray into football, and many commentators have questioned the bid and their strategy. It has emerged that BT actually bid for all seven packages, at an increase of around 70% up on the current deal. They would only have been allowed a maximum of five packages, but it is clear they were very, very serious about the offer.

In many ways, winning five packages would have made much more business sense for BT. They would have had the lion’s share of the 154 live games per season, driving football mad consumers onto the BT Vision platform.

But 38 games per season? How does the company build a channel, platform, ad sales and all the infrastructure needed to support it on less than one game per week? Admittedly 18 of those games are crucial ‘first picks’, breaking Sky’s monopoly of these top games.

The answer may lie away from the traditional TV advertising model. BT are rumoured to be looking to use football as part of their ‘triple play’ package pushing phone, broadband and TV into homes by offering special ‘bundled’ pricing.

It remains to be seen if BT can build a business around content in the way that BskyB have successfully achieved but others - notably Setanta - have struggled with.

nikita

EU Cookie Law

A new EU online privacy law will come into effect from 26th May 2012. This will directly affect many websites across the UK, as it requires all website owners to make sure that it is clear to users if cookies will be loaded onto their computer.

Cookies may be used for a variety of reasons, from simple tasks such as remembering login details for the website, through to tracking the journey of consumers throughout the site using tools such as Google Analytics. Online advertising is often heavily reliant on cookies, as this may require using a tracking cookie which is used when retargeting or tracking the path to a sale.

The official guidelines state that appropriate action must be taken to inform consumers according to what cookies you have in place. AdConnection would strongly recommend running a ‘cookie audit’ on your website in order to understand these and exactly how these are used. There are many free tools you can use to do this yourself; in most cases there is no need to pay for an external company to take care of this for you.

For more information on the classification of cookies and guidelines on what steps to take towards compliance, AdConnection would recommend reading The International Chamber of Commerce Guide to Cookies.

All of the external networks and websites we use at AdConnection are IAB certified and sign up to the Good Practice Framework, from which consumers are able to opt out of advertising.

In reality, this law is going to be extremely difficult for the EU to police. As long as you are taking positive steps towards informing users about cookies used on your site then it is unlikely any sanctions will come in to force. Adconnection would suggest updating your privacy policy at the very least, but if you are advertising it is important for your website to still be cookie adherent so consumer journeys can still be tracked from advert exposure to conversion.

If you are keen to talk to someone about cookie law and how this may affect your website, particularly from an advertising point of view, then feel free to give us a call on 0207 401 4830.

Facebook Buy Mobile App Glancee

Facebook have been on another spending spree, although this latest move will not raise as many eyebrows as the acquisition of Instagram. The target this time is another mobile app - the location based app Glancee.

Glancee has been described as a ‘Foursquare for people’, working by using your location to inform you when friends or people who share a common interest with you are nearby.

Whilst not being of the same scale as the Instagram purchase, it does further illustrate Facebook’s desire to prosper in the mobile space. It is currently unclear if Facebook have bought the company to make use of the app or the skillset in the team behind the company, as was the case with the company’s purchase of Gowalla.

Glancee has been downloaded around 30,000 times and has around 20,000 users. It created a lot of buzz at SXSW earlier this year, along with its rival Highlight.

There are few details available about the deal other than a short statement on the Glancee website as follows;

“We started Glancee in 2010 with the goal of bringing together the best of your physical and digital worlds. We wanted to make it easy to discover the hidden connections around you, and to meet interesting people. Since then Glancee has connected thousands of people, empowering serendipity and pioneering social discovery. We are therefore very excited to announce that Facebook has acquired Glancee and that we have joined the team in Menlo Park to build great products for over 900 million Facebook users.”

Facebook's Billion Dollar Bet

A lot has been written about the $1bn purchase of Instagram by online giant Facebook. The media and business world was surprised to say the least, for two main reasons.

Firstly the timing. As covered previously in this blog Facebook is in the process of preparing for a huge stock market flotation. Given that, most normal companies would try not to rock the boat too much, or make any investment decisions that could potentially spook new investors. Facebook is far from a normal company however.

Secondly, and perhaps most eye-catching, is the price.

Facebook have agreed to pay $1bn albeit in a combination of cash and shares. Most media analysts have declared their view that this has vastly overestimated Instagram’s value. Commentators have been quick to point out that the company, which has less than 20 employees and no revenue streams, has in effect been valued at more than venerable ‘old’ media institutions such as the New York Times. In addition, it has since emerged that Instagram had only two weeks previously been through a funding round with venture capitalists that valued it at $500m.

So, did Facebook overpay?

As ever, it depends on the reason they bought the company.

The first fact to point out is that the service already boasts 30m registered users and is growing fast. Its Android app for example was downloaded more than a million times in just 24 hours after its launch on April 3rd.

On the simple mathematics of the price one Google executive has noted that Facebook is paying around $28 per user for Instagram, whereas other social apps have been valued at anywhere between $20 and $50 per user. Many of Instagram’s fans are probably Facebook members, but access to even more data about consumers is what is currently motivating Facebook and driving its ability to successfully monetise its own content.

Another key reason for the purchase is the mobile space that Instagram has expertly navigated, and Facebook still struggles in. As we pointed out a few weeks ago in this blog, the mobile internet is the area that Facebook will have to crack. Nearly half of its total monthly users are now accessing the social network through mobile devices. The expertise that resides in Instagram that has produced such slick, user friendly apps in contrast to Facebook’s own is invaluable to the company right now.

Lastly, one other thought behind Facebook snapping up Instagram is simply to remove a potential rival from the marketplace. Instagram’s growth has showed Facebook how a small, nimble start up could potentially take users away from the more established social networks. Its very speed of growth had certainly alerted rivals such as Twitter and Google to the company, and Google in particular were rumoured to be eyeing a bid in order to give some much needed impetus to its Google + platform.

$1bn is certainly a hefty price tag. But time will tell if it was a price worth paying.

The Sun rises on Sunday

From the moment last Friday that Rupert Murdoch stood up at News International’s offices in Wapping and announced a launch of a new Sunday paper ‘very soon’, there has been speculation about what the new product would look like and when it would launch. Here we try to separate the fact from the rumour, and give our view on the biggest new launch in the newspaper market in decades.

On Monday the Sun, in typically bombastic style (and under a banner of ‘another Sun exclusive’ – another blow struck for investigative reporting) declared that ‘very soon’ meant this weekend. In advance of the launch, there are a few facts and a lot of speculation doing the rounds.

The title will simply be called the Sun, with an identical masthead to the daily, rather than being a separate Sunday title. It will not have its own editor, but will share staff with the daily with the with the exception of some ‘Sunday only’ writers. The title is expected to be a more family-oriented product than its predecessor the News of the World, and as with the Saturday edition will not feature topless models on page 3.
The title is expected to focus on some of the other, less controversial elements that contributed to the success of the NotW, namely sport and TV, with more features and a commitment by the editorial team to ‘ continue with investigative reporting’. The paper will contain 28 pages of football news and 16 pages of other sports.

In order to broaden the appeal of the paper to a more female audience The Sun have signed up Sven Goran Eriksson’s former girlfriend and 'Strictly Come Dancing' star Nancy Dell'Olio to write a weekly style column and TV chef James Martin to provide a recipe and cookery section.
The first edition will have a print run of c3m, and according to Rupert Murdoch’s twitter feed has ‘sold out’ of advertising space. Launch price is rumoured to be 50p, which may trigger a price war with other publishers.

Other publishers have already been bullish in response, even before pricing strategies are revealed. Richard Desmond has ramped up marketing spend to support the Sunday Express and Daily Star Sunday, albeit mainly on the (Northern & Shell owned) Channel 5. The Express is advertising that the Sunday Express is giving away a free gardening mat as well as its "action-packed" sports pullout and S magazine.
The Sunday Mirror is also taking to TV, whilst the main paper has carried editorial highlighting that there will be "four great sections in your great Sunday Mirror" which includes the main paper, the Carling Cup special sport pullout, a celebrity magazine and homes and holidays supplement.

The Mail on Sunday, which was the initial winner in the race to pick up the NotW readers has started running a TV campaign and is running ads about Mail on Sunday's "stunning free magazines" (Live, You and bi-annual fashion supplement You Inspire) which it says are "for him …and for her".
It is estimated that rivals could spend as much as £7m defending themselves from the Sun onslaught, which includes TV, radio and outdoor advertising.

We expect the Sun to sell strongly this weekend, and as the News of the World has proved in the past, there is space in the Sunday newspaper market to accommodate it. The NotW always had a surprisingly large element of upmarket adults reading, as it was often taken as a ‘sports supplement’ to broadsheet titles like the Sunday Times.

Whilst there will be an element of the audience that will not buy in protest at News International’s role in the phone hacking scandals, we don’t expect this to affect sales to any great effect. Advertisers are back on board, and we expect the Sun to shine strongly on Sundays.

If you would like to discuss the impact the Sun’s Sunday launch will have on the newspaper market, or access the papers readership for your brands campaigns please get in touch, we’d love to help.

Facebook Goes Mobile

Facebook has been in the news a lot recently. The company announced plans on 1st February for an IPO that values it at between $75 billion and $100 billion. This seems like a crazy price until it is noted that the social network is closing in on one billion users – that’s almost 15% of the entire world’s population.

Last year Facebook generated $3.7 billion in revenue and $1 billion in net profits. This makes the price tag look expensive but not as wildly as at first glance. Other technology companies are also very highly valued - Google’s market capitalisation is $190 billion, Microsoft’s $250 billion and Apple’s $425 billion.

To please investors going forward, the company must solve the mobile conundrum. Mobile is hugely important to the business. According to recent figures just over half of the company’s monthly active users are mobile.

Nearly all of Facebook’s revenue comes from advertising; virtually none of those ads are served to mobile users, either in Facebook apps or on the company’s mobile web site.

In addition the parts of the world where Facebook is still growing in total users (for example high population areas such as Brazil and India) are adopting mobile computers faster than they’ve adopted PCs.

However, the smaller space on a mobile screen and the relationship people have with their Facebook friends has meant that advertising in this space poses problems. How best to provide the undoubted reach that Facebook can offer without intruding on a space that has been ad free? How can marketeers harness the data that Facebook has on its members, without stoking existing fears around online privacy?

To try to answer some of these questions, Facebook has started discussing plans about introducing "featured stories" ads, based on the sponsored story format, into users' timelines on mobile devices from March. Earlier this year Facebook had paved the way for mobile advertising, by rolling out "featured stories" within users' news feeds for the first time.

Featured stories are perfectly tailored for display in mobile apps or browsers; no intrusive pop-ups, no annoying video, — just updates given premium space inside a user’s feed for a price. This is very similar to the Twitter’s advertising model with promoted tweets on its site and in its mobile and desktop apps.

Given the volume of user data Facebook hold, these ads have the potential to be more personalised and better targeted than any other mobile ad platform we’ve seen to date.

LATEST POSTS
  • Freesheets: the right to be remembered
  • Brand sponsorship of the police: Could it work?
  • You Can't Live on Big Data Alone
  • Why even experienced planners need to challenge their own assumptions
  • Facebook's facelift - what does it mean for advertisers?
  • Adconnection Unveils First ‘Second Screen’ Integrated Media Campaign for Lovestruck
  • 5 essential reasons to consider social gaming advertising
  • Digital add-ons mean a bold future for print
  • Enduring Brands
  • Free Stuff? Not Enough.
  • The Social Media Storm
  • OOH Advertising looks to the future
  • Voting for Twitter
  • The Second Age of Second Screen
  • The Media Olympics
  • Ambush Marketing Around the Olympics
  • Our View on YouView
  • Betting the House on Football
  • EU Cookie Law
  • Facebook Buy Mobile App Glancee
  • Facebook's Billion Dollar Bet
  • The Sun rises on Sunday
  • Facebook Goes Mobile