Home Data-Driven Thinking What Candy Can Teach Us About Digital Advertising

What Candy Can Teach Us About Digital Advertising

SHARE:

michaellowenstern“Data Driven Thinking” is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.

Today’s column is written by Michael Lowenstern, Managing Director of Digital Advertising for R/GA.

Around last Christmastime, I was listening to one of my favorite podcasts, NPR’s Planet Money. The topic was – and I paraphrase – “Why Economists Hate Christmas.”

The economist being interviewed explained his argument: When buying something for yourself, you know what you want, you go out and find it, and you exchange money for it. The amount you exchange is generally equal to your perceived value of that item; presumably, you wouldn’t have bought it otherwise. But when buying a gift for someone else, you could exchange $50 for something that has no value to the person receiving the gift – like a toaster or a Power Ranger. That inherent value disequilibrium actually has an economic term: deadweight loss.

Like everyone else probably  listening to that podcast, I started thinking about display advertising. It’s a natural leap.

As advertisers, we give people crap they don’t want all the time. We have all of this data to bear: first-party intent data, third-party demographic data, context, location – hundreds upon hundreds of data points. But that data is only used to inform the media components of the ad. Rarely, if ever, is the data used for the creative portion. So, despite our best efforts, we still show people advertising that has no value to them. Why? The ad location may be smart, but the content probably isn’t.

I wanted to prove this at a conference at which I recently spoke. Before the event, I went out with my 13-year-old daughter and bought 10 bags of candy. I asked her to collect a mix of what she thought qualified as “good stuff” and “god-awful stuff.” During the talk, I randomly handed out the candy to 10 participants, and immediately afterwards asked them to rate, on a scale of 1 to 10, how happy they were with what I gave them. Best potential score: 100. Our score: 48.

After rating their happiness, I gave them 60 seconds to trade their candy with each other, and conducted the poll again. The new happiness score: 72. By adding nothing more than choice – i.e. preference data, such as chocolate vs. jelly beans – we improved the perceived value of my targeting (candy lovers).

Simply put, when people are matched with stuff they like, everyone is happier. Can we do this with display advertising? Yes. We. Can. And by doing so, not only do we gain the benefit of happier viewers, but the cost of our media actually goes down too. The question is: How do we achieve this?

An increasing number of publishers and networks are being paid on a performance basis. In other words, they only get paid when a display ad is clicked. The best way to get those clicks is by showing a relevant ad that uses data on our target, but the data that informs the site placement itself only takes us halfway to relevance. The content of the ad should use the same target data for it to be wholly relevant. The content is what makes the ad personal. The content is what makes the ad memorable.

The closer we get to a marriage of media and creative through the partnered use of this rich data, the better our ads get, the happier people are to receive those ads, the more publishers get paid, the more brands succeed.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

The moral of this story: Speak to each user like an individual, one who doesn’t just like candy but who specifically likes gummy bears and doesn’t like circus peanuts.

Follow Michael Lowenstern (@earspasm) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

 

Must Read

Comic: He Sees You When You're Streaming

IP Address Match Rates Are a Joke – And It’s No Laughing Matter

According to a new report, IP-to-email matches are accurate just 16% of the time on average, while IP-to-postal matches are accurate only 13% of the time. (Oof.)

Comic: Gamechanger (Google lost the DOJ's search antitrust case)

The DOJ And Google Sharpen Their Remedy Proposals As The Two Sides Prepare For Closing Arguments

The phrase “caution is key” has become a totem of the new age in US antitrust regulation. It was cited this week by both the DOJ and Google in support of opposing views on a possible divestiture of Google’s sell-side ad exchange.

create a network of points with nodes and connections, plain white background; use variations of green and grey for the dots and the connctions; 85% empty space

Alt Identity Provider ID5 Buys TrueData, Marking Its First-Ever Acquisition

ID5 bought TrueData mainly to tackle what ID5 CEO Mathieu Roche calls the “massive fragmentation” of digital identity, which is a problem on the user side and the provider side.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

CTV Manufacturers Have A New Tool For Catching Spoofed Devices

The IAB Tech Lab’s new device attestation feature for its Open Measurement SDK provides a scaled way for original device manufacturers to confirm that ad impressions are associated with real devices.

Comic: "Deal ID, please."

The Trade Desk And PubMatic Are Done Pretending Deal IDs Work

The Trade Desk and PubMatic announced a new API-based integration for managing deal ID campaigns built atop TTD’s Price Discovery and Provisioning (PDP) API, which was announced earlier this year.

How Agentic Advertising Platform Aimy Uses Comcast’s Universal Ads API

On Monday, Brand Networks announced that Universal Ads would now be buyable through the company’s agentic ad buying platform, Aimy Ads.