Its Time For A Re-think – Early Version
Below is a snapshot from the book I am writing which is currently under the working title of ‘The Communication Ideal’:
A typical demo of ‘mobile advertising’ goes as follows:
“jMac – check this out! So, a girl is downloading something and she goes to click on it and that is an opportunity to insert an ad! Then, when they go to enter their details we can insert an ad around the form! But thats not all – no no, the thing that differentiates our service is that the ad is so non-intrusive it doesn’t get in peoples way! Every page they open, a new ad is served – really subtly! They hardly know its there so its easy for them to tolerate! We can serve a gazillion impressions and charge advertisers a whole bunch of cash – all without people even knowing they are being advertised to!”
Well well.
You see the thing is, every other media prior to mobile could work within the standard techniques of advertising. This is because each media was essentially yet another channel for broadcasting messages. Print, radio, recordings, cinema and television are all surfaces upon which to display commercial information. Although we used several of these media as a means of communication, the advertising methodology did not relate to our communicative usage per se.
With the internet, the real chance to use built in interactive mechanisms of user touch and click became apparent. Now, the primary metrics of success in internet advertising is ‘who has clicked on what’ added to how many display images have been served – all of which, hopefully leading to a sale or at worse, increased brand recognition.
Enter a device purely made for communication not broadcast. The mobile phone.
Recently, someone said that the mobile phone was simply another channel to access the internet. Reasoning that, due to this, all we needed to do as an industry was apply the same logic to mobile as we did to the internet.
In many peoples eyes, the challenge is to find ways of inserting adverts into either a) peoples mobile internet or wap experiences or b) peoples non-mobile internet or wap experiences.
For the majority of people I listen to at conferences and workshops around the world – the ‘magic’ is to make clever assumptions from peoples ‘behavior’ and deliver ‘relevant’ advertising that ‘fits’.
I am unsure what interpretation of behavior and relevance is being used in these cases as it seems to vary from ‘expert’ to ‘expert’, whatever an expert is..
It is claimed that if someone clicks to open an automotive page on a mobile page, they are more likely to want to see a car advert.
It is claimed that if someone is waiting for a call to be connected, that is potentially and ideal moment to ‘slip in an ad’.
Is it? Is that what individuals/customers/users want? Or is it that we are looking for any and every inventory opportunity to justify ad spend and build what analysts have predicted to be a multi-billion dollar industry…?
The mobile phone is personal. You are not allowed to intrude into my device.
It is me.
The examples above are arguably like walking into my front room, unannounced, but wearing clothes that blend into my wallpaper so hopefully I don’t notice nor mind you being there.
You are still in my front room and I didn’t invite you in.
Even if I did invite you in, how would you know anything about me apart from where I live? Well – one could argue that due to the cars outside my house you could take a pretty good guess I am ‘into’ cars. Also – you noticed that there were shoes in my porch so now (you assume) you can talk ‘relevantly’ about anything to do with my location, cars and shoes. Bingo! Or maybe not.
What if I use cars and shoes as utility? What if I view them as commodity rather than luxury? Maybe I don’t like buying either but to walk and drive they are a necessary evil? What if I am soon to sell my cars and just travel by bike instead? Would you know that from my cars outside that I want to buy a bike? How could you without asking?
Maybe it is the case that I do not want to have someone walk into my front room talking about local car and shoe retailers.
It is probable in our journey to create more effective communications we should take heed of what Aristotle stated over 2300 years ago, as the 3 principles of persuasion: Ethos, Pathos and Logos.
In communication, the most effective interpersonal and intrapersonal methods are a blend of all three.
Ethos – which is the ethical value of character and reputation, provides what James Borg writes as ‘source credibility’. This is based on trust. Trust is based on a common understanding and agreement – not toleration.
Pathos relates to the emotions felt by the audience. Aristotle wrote: ‘Persuasion may come through the hearers when the speech stirs their emotions’. Empathy is needed – you need to know how they feel.
Logos is the logical element. The actual words chosen, based on tangible truth.
We are in the personal communication space. Mobile devices are our chosen personal communication tools.
The science we need to study now is simply not the same as the last 100 years of advertising. We cannot just simply apply the techniques we have mastered with the 6 prior mass media. The 7th is totally unique – not just as a device but as what it means in peoples lives.
Unexpected, uninvited and unknowing guests will be unwelcome. It’s time for a re-think.
