Posts tagged advertising

Google Search makes us feel all fuzzy inside

Google’s search team has released these new virals to talk about its latest innovations (like music in search results).

The search engine giant said that the stories were inspired by its users. How cute.

Google said on its blog, “Because while we’re proud of the innovations we’re making in search, we’re proudest of the things people use search to accomplish. In other words, the best search results don’t show up on a webpage — they show up in somebody’s life.”

Again, how cute.

 

 

 

 

 

Quote from Craig Nevill-Manning, engineering director Google New York, “The Google homepage doesn’t belong to us. It belongs to the millions of people who use it.”  

Does digital marketing really make kids turn to booze?

The Portman Group, an industry body that works with drinks producers to raise standards of alcohol marketing, has published a guide that aims to stop alcohol brands targeting underage consumers or encouraging harmful drinking through their digital marketing. This is interesting to me for a number of reasons:

Firstly, please answer this question: Have you ever been encouraged to drink alcohol based on something you saw on the internet?

While there may be some out there that say yes, I suspect the vast majority would say no.

My second point is that when you are a teenager, or indeed ‘under age’, you drink whatever you can get your hands on. Brands that have enough money in the marketing budgets to advertise are often too expensive for teenagers that live of a wage of pocket money from their parents.

But I don’t want to criticize the good deed the Portman Group is doing. It is challenging companies to be socially responsible after all.  

I think however, that it is interesting how the internet has led to further concerns over underage drinking.

Read the rest of this entry »

How CGI technology took the truth and fun out of advertising

citroen “Truth in advertising is becoming a misnomer because of the rise of computer-generated imagery (CGI) in TV commercials” says a new report out today.

This may seem like news from the ‘bleeding obvious’, but it’s actually astonishing to know how often we are fooled by technology. At least 80 to 90% of ads actually contain some CGI, especially car ads (which unfortunately means that Citroen doesn’t actually make a dancing robot car).

Computers have been used for years to create fantasy images and improve landscapes in ads, creating generic cityscapes and inserting well-known landmarks into the background. But the question on the consumer’s lips now is “why use trickery”?

Last April, it was revealed that magazines could be banned from using airbrushed photographs of celebrities that make them look slimmer over fears that they were promoting unrealistic body images.

Editors from glossy publications including Vogue, Hello! and Elle had a meeting, the Periodical Publishers Association (PPA) was there too, but what was the result? Nothing.

Perhaps the real truth hit consumers in the face when Dove revolutionised beauty advertising with its ‘Real Beauty’ campaign, showing consumers what really went on. But consumers can’t tell us now that they are actually shocked by the use of CGI?

The thing is that CGI (and those geeks that sit in dark rooms creating it for hours) has become so life-like that car manufacturers can avoid the cost of building prototypes of new models and shipping them to other countries to be filmed. Instead, entire vehicles are being rendered in 3D to create commercials where nothing is real. Nothing. Is this deceit?

CGI is not always obvious; but that is kind of the point.
Advertisers can obviously achieve more interesting effects in CGI. And let’s face it, ads that ‘wow’ us, are the ones that tend to work.

So how many ads are fully computer-generated? Up to 20% at the most, according to one expert, as CGI can be more “convenient”.

A lot of the time CGI is used to achieve “fantastic”, but more and more it’s becoming simply an easier way of working – sitting in that dark room as opposed to being on location, paying actors, cameramen etc.

And as brands continue to have more of a global reach, CGI is often used to adapt ads from elsewhere. So if you’re taking an ad from another market, you can replace the pack shot in it with the local pack shot using nothing but CGI.

But in the end, CGI won’t replace a good original idea and if you want something to be warm and emotional, CGI probably doesn’t cut it. Consumers want the truth, and it just happens to be the only way to trust.

The next ‘holy grail’ of search advertising?

twitter-logo Micro-blogging site Twitter is in advanced talks with Google and Microsoft about licensing its data feed to the companies’ search engines!

This is very exciting news for all those brands and advertisers that currently use Twitter to release information about upcoming products and company news.

I personally think this is a brilliant idea, and if you’ve ever used Twitter Search you’ll know why – it’s a great way to follow trends, get the news straight from the horse’s mouth and find out what people are saying about you.

The ability to cull through the flood of tweets as they are posted is gaining popularity as an important new way to search the internet for up-to-the-minute information on the latest news events and happenings on.

Twitter’s discussions with Microsoft and Google are being conducted separately and would allow each company to incorporate the 140-character messages, or ‘tweets’, that Twitter is known for into their internet search results.

The AllThingsDigital blog (part of the Wall Street Journal) quoted unidentified sources as saying the companies are discussing several types of deals.

Details could include Twitter receiving a payment of several million dollars and various types of revenue-sharing agreements to allow Twitter to benefit from the ad revenue that Microsoft and Google generate from search results.

Twitter has emerged as one of the fastest-growing internet social media services due to the amount of businesses that use it to promote themselves and stay in touch in ‘real time’, however the company has yet to generate any significant revenue from its free service. Could this be the micro-blogging site’s ‘holy grail’ of revenues?