Retargeting: Helpful, harmful, or both?

I keep getting car ads. Yes, I know the digital ad budgets in the automotive category have been on an upswing lately, but the car ads I'm getting are in places where I don't normally see car ads. I scratch my head because I know there's some sort of behavioral targeting at work here, and I'm not really sure how I'm being targeted.

My wife's lease on her Volvo is up this summer. I was reminded of that fact when direct mail offers for financing started showing up in my mailbox a couple months ago. And if the direct mailers know about it, odds are the ad networks know about it, too, maybe through a partnership with one of the big three credit bureaus.

Or maybe I'm getting car ads because someone stuck a pixel in those eBay Autos emails I subscribed to. Could be that I visited Dodge's website a couple months ago to configure a Ram 3500. There are probably half a dozen behaviors I can think of that I've been displaying lately in my online surfing behavior that might indicate to a car company that I'm in market.

And I don't much care. It's not a big deal if the ads I see flip from untargeted ads for mobile phones, airline fare sales, or broadband connections to something I'm actually interested in, like cars. It's kind of interesting to think about how car companies are targeting me, but it's not really a big deal.

It might be a big deal if I were single, visited a jewelry ecommerce site to look at engagement rings, and had the surprise spoiled by an influx of targeted ads. Or if I had a specific medical condition and researched it online, only to have condition-specific drug ads show up as I'm checking the sports scores.

It's not just that some consumers think ad targeting is creepy. There are certain situations in which retargeting is inappropriate. An agency media planner who previously worked on an auto account might rotate onto a pharmaceutical account and fail to pick up on that.

Retargeting needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Too often, media recommendations assume that what's OK for one product or category is OK for another. The key consideration is the consumer perception of appropriateness.

This can get schizophrenic. According to a 2008 Truste study, three quarters of web users would rather see more relevant ads, but more than half of them don't want to receive ads that are targeted via web behavior.

Maybe the answer is that certain behaviors ought to be considered private, and others are fair game. Consider that before you apply retargeting tactics to your next media recommendation.

Tom Hespos is the chairman and president of Underscore Marketing and blogs at Hespos.com.

On Twitter? Follow Tom at @THespos1 or @_MarketingLLC. Follow iMedia Connection at @iMediaTweet.

 

Comments

Chris Brinkworth
Chris Brinkworth March 20, 2010 at 5:38 PM

Great points Tom. TagMan have the final solution here for advertisers, bypassing any opt-out challenges. Happy as always to explain more to anyone, but the video on the website helps: www.tagman.com

The example I give is that I am happy to have the "baby toy" adverts appear on my laptop/projector in the board room - but an "adult toy" re-target would stick out more. But - how do the consumers let you know what the limit is? Where is the 'grey area'?


Because TagMan, the Tag Management platform - controls 'all pixels' - it allows advertisers to have a global 'do not serve' on an advertisers T&C's, by simply saying 'do not serve this beacon if a user opts out of re-targeting' ON THIS SESSION ONLY.

The benefits:
1)The user has choice and the advertiser is in control.
2)If the user opts out of TagMan, they are not opting out of BlueKai, InviteMedia, DataXu, Criteo etc everywhere... forever amen; just for that website session.
3)Very easy to manage from T&C's.

http://www.tagman.com

Josh Breinlinger
Josh Breinlinger March 19, 2010 at 12:36 PM

Hey Tom,

Good article and some important things to think about - thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I do believe it's important for advertisers to always keep their potential customers needs in mind as they consider tactics like retargeting. I've heard of some sensitive issues come up when it comes to online dating sites (of various sexual orientations.)

In the majority of cases, I believe advertisers and consumers can mutually benefit from targeting if done properly and the ads are made relevant, non-sensitive, and not overbearing (set a reasonable frequency cap so you don't spam your prospects.)

I'd also note that some ad networks forbid advertisers from indicating that the ad is a "retargeted ad." I wonder how that may change over time. Some advertisers are using landing pages that indicate that the user has been retargeted though with messages like "welcome back".

-Josh
@jbreinlinger
AdRoll

Douglas Cleek
Douglas Cleek March 18, 2010 at 10:30 AM

Tom,

Good read. You basically nailed the benefit of retargeting (when used appropriately) when it involves something you are uniquely interested in.
That's the crossover point where marketing evolves from an intrusive, disruptive process and becomes informative and useful.
At times it is useful to both the marketer and the recipient of the message since it is more relevant, thereby increasing the chances the message will be well received.

I've experienced the exact same thing in the past and there were times when I found it useful.

Doug Cleek
Magnitude 9.6

Douglas Cleek
Douglas Cleek March 18, 2010 at 10:30 AM

Tom,

Good read. You basically nailed the benefit of retargeting (when used appropriately) when it involves something you are uniquely interested in.
That's the crossover point where marketing evolves from an intrusive, disruptive process and becomes informative and useful.
At times it is useful to both the marketer and the recipient of the message since it is more relevant, thereby increasing the chances the message will be well received.

I've experienced the exact same thing in the past and there were times when I found it useful.

Doug Cleek
Magnitude 9.6