The X Factor: The risky business of ad banners

Second, have your logo on every frame of the banner, or risk the consumers never noticing who you are. Remember, they are not on that page for your ad but for the content, and in their brief glance at the ad space, they better know who you are.

Third, animate your logo. Companies often do it in TV. Stop adhering to logo guidelines set down by the logo cops. Those rules are holdovers from the print production world, but for some reason clients and agencies just keep following them as if they were rules, not guidelines. Don't go wild and wreck the logo's integrity, but keep to its spirit.

And finally, fix your process of producing online banners! Stop wasting money. No single banner is going to fundamentally change the client's business the way a single commercial can gain emotional resonance. The process makes sense for TV due to the high production costs associated with the end product, but for a banner? You're wasting valuable time and resources, repeatedly.

How do you fix it? Well, one way is to have the agency just do weekly concepts. Give them the uber brief of who you are as a brand and the themes they should be concentrating on. And then each week, choose the ones that will go into final production.

Also, cut down your approval process internally. If you have to go up and down three levels at the client side for each banner, you'll never get anything done. Oh yeah, that's what your stuck with now, isn't it? Look, unless you can throw enough stuff up at the wall, you'll never start to find that breakthrough creative. It should be your consumers who determine what resonates. As long as the creative is on message, let them do so.

A few things will happen with that process: You will get much more work out of your agency, in fewer hours and cost, and you will be able to improve your performance.

Why these suggestions? Well, they all point to the fundamental flaw in the format itself. It's not interuptive but peripheral, and it requires different techniques.

You all have to start looking at how the consumer interacts with the pages your advertising is on. Stop assuming you're smarter than your consumer, and for Pete's sake, stop treating this like offline.

None of these suggestions are magic pixie dust, but I think maybe you have all snorted the magic pixie dust of incompetence for too long and I'm sick of it. It's time to start understanding this medium.

<< Previous page

Sean X Cummings is director of marketing for Ask.com.

 

Comments

Adam Kleinberg
Adam Kleinberg May 7, 2008 at 11:41 PM

I get where you're coming from, Sean, but don't agree with you in all cases. Traditionally (remember those 45 minutes when we established tradition?), where "just banners" sat in the marketing funnel was obvious—TV, print and outdoors were used to generate awareness, banners were used for direct response.

But, the world has changed. That funnel doesn't exist anymore. Young people don't watch TV. They don't read magazines. So, banners do have to do more than just pull clicks.

And they work for more than just clicks. I mean, this is totally anecdotal, but I was at a party Saturday night and mentioned we just did a campaign to launch Camelbak's BPA-free water bottles. The guy says to me "the one with the spinning bottles? I loved when the scratched up metal bottle comes in and it says 'aftertaste?'"

Yes, we followed that precise process you mentioned, but we put the ad in very relevant places — and when have you ever heard of someone remembering copy from a banner ad? Plus, the ads are doubling industry norms for CTR.

A typical online media buy is in the six figure range (at least), so potentially doubling your ROI seems to warrant a more rigorous creative process.

That said, the creative process starts with a good brief and a good brief should specify what objectives are. For the most part, you're right, no one really does read banner ads. If you're running a network buy on advertising.com, you may be better of with a giant red flashing button that says "Save $100! One Day Only!" I thought the simple blinking logo execution Ask.com had running was a great banner (enough for me to notice and remember anyhow).

At the same time, I've seen "interactive" banner units (like a simple game-in-a-banner) outperform the rest of a campaign by 7X. Those kinds of ideas, don't come (at least not consistently) without a full creative process.

I agree that there are too many banners out there that try to tell a linear story. That doesn't take demonstrate an understanding of the interactive medium at all.

I also really like (and may adopt) your point about presenting banners in actual environments. And the idea about weekly banner concepts is terrific. Really appreciate the client-side view of a smart solution.

We often present first-round banner concepts in pencil (when that works) to stay efficient. Only works for clients with "vision" but it works to get ideas on the table quickly and cost-effectively.

My two cents, anyway.

Charlie Menduni
Charlie Menduni May 7, 2008 at 7:57 AM

I can hear the mumbling from behind the door of the the "creative department" already. "Just when they tell us we'd have the ability to run video off a banner, they now tell us we only have :03 sec to engage".
What's a conflicted creative director to do?

Charlie Menduni
Charlie Menduni May 7, 2008 at 7:57 AM

I can hear the mumbling from behind the door of the the "creative department" already. "Just when they tell us we'd have the ability to run video off a banner, they now tell us we only have :03 sec to engage".
What's a conflicted creative director to do?

Mark Burgess
Mark Burgess May 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM

Sean, I think you're beating a flacid drum with banners. Human beings struggle with pattern recognition. The more patterns you throw at them the less understanding and related action follows. Banners work like refrigerator magnets, nobody remembers the graphic, but some do notice the note underneath. Web pages are READ, not observed like paintings in an art gallery or family photos. Try this: put different single images on several 8x10 pieces of paper. Then put a single word or letter on some others. Mix them up and give peiople your three seconds on each and have them write down what they remember. Stretch it out, put a simple declarative sentence - subject, verb, object - on a set and compete those with the images. Go even further, make the images with action indication like an arrow or a "no" cross over the image and compete those with the sentences as commands and have your subjects write down what they were supposed to do. People see web sits with banners like a search engine sees a web site made out of Flash...big blanks pushing their sought after content off the page...

Kim Stearns
Kim Stearns May 6, 2008 at 1:22 PM

It seems to me that this form of advertising most closely relates to outdoor campaigns. Get to the point quickly and brand it. Just like people are driving past these signs and paying attention to a million other things, the same goes for users on webpages who are distracted by a bunch of other content.

Christine Bensen
Christine Bensen May 6, 2008 at 1:08 PM

While I am not sure we can get a new banner out every week and maintain the level of quality required by many of our clients' brands, I completely agree with your position that you have about three seconds (if that) to break through and that if you are not announcing who you are immediately, you have likely missed the boat. Not to mention I always like to get a little tough love with my coffee in the morning.

Jeremy Post
Jeremy Post May 6, 2008 at 11:25 AM

Thank you, thank you, thank you. We've been fighting with our internal design team about banners for months. They insist on creating these worthless copy-heavy, multi-frame "commercial-ettes" that don't even show a call to action until 15 seconds in. I've been looking for a succinct way to verbalize what we need instead: "Stop creating stories. No one reads banners. The point and purpose of any banner must be delivered in three seconds at any point in the banner." Perfect.

Otilia Otlacan
Otilia Otlacan May 6, 2008 at 6:19 AM

Sean, thanks so much for this! I feel an urge to forward this article to all agencies and advertisers who 'terrorized' me with appalling banner ads: I'm sure they have quite high productions costs and abysmal impact.

Why clients approve and pay for creatives with fancy visual effects and no impact on the viewer, is beyond my understanding. I wouldn't approve 75% of the ads I am trafficking, mostly because they're build as stories and the brand / product advertised is in most cases only mentioned at the end of the animation. The ads may be executed but the viewer's attention is lost after a few seconds - CTRs and conversions are therefore very, very poor.