Extending the Story

This is the next goldrush. Low hanging fruit? Uh huh… Be carefiul, it may be so low you may step on it without knowing.

Well put Gary.

Genius. I think that you are absolutely correct in your way of thinking. TV commercials should be directed towards a social media platform for an opportunity for these companies to know their customers on a personal level. Keep it up Gary!

I work at a business (big food retail) just refuses to use the internet and when they do, they cry. As far as why? Lack of vision, they need an army of Vaynerchuks to lead them in the right direction. I look to see a lot of new businesses over take these lackeys. Good vlog!

Because Dinosaures are running their marketing campaigns. Companies need to WAKE UP! I cringe every time a client says ‘ What will social media do for me? I don’t see how it’s relevant’

Brands simply need to test a call to action and see they can benefit from collecting data as well.

I think the reason big brands are not taking advantage and extending the story is because they hire ad/marketing agencies that either don’t get it OR they know that extending the story requires more work out of them.

I’ve always wondered why more podcasters do not take advantage of the enhanced AAC podcast format, that allows you to place multiple images and links right in your audio podcast. Most major audio players now support this (iPod, Zune). Although non support the URL link yet but hopefully they will.

Gary if these brands and ad agency’s don’t get it then let’s move on without them. See ya!

Completely agree! Saw a TV ad the other day for (dammit can’t remember what, but it was a huge name) and I was stoked they sent people to their facebook page. Noticed this week that Nissan is promoting their new all electric car on FB. I would never go to their website, but I’m in the market for a hybrid and they got me with it! And hey, shorter, cheaper TV advertising if you send people to the web. Yep, I watch TV with both laptop and iphone in hand.

I SO dig your angles, your enthusiasm, and your sincerity! I really believe the lack of movement in this area (and so many others) is a result of thinking the next best thing will last forever. So, everyone heaves truckloads of cash at people and resources to make it happen. And then things change. But the inability/ignorance (lack of vision) to adapt w/the times leaves people hoping change won’t catch on instead of embracing it….and dare I say…monetizing it! And, of course, Crushing It!

Hey Gary,

You are spot on. So many of us sit in front of the TV with our laptops. At the moment the most I see is a message at the end of an advert such as “Search for for more information” (where is the brand name or the marketing campaign slogan. I don’t think that’s enough. It doesn’t do the “call to action” enough. It’s almost as if they’ve thought “oh, we should probably add a Internet address or a search term at the end of the ad because it’s the ‘thing to do’”. Maybe they don’t get it!? They should be shouting at the viewer to tell you why they should bother making that search and going online. They need to get the viewer excited.

Cheers,

Phil

Totally agree that brand extension from a TV commercial to the Web represents a tremendous opportunity for true consumer engagement and ongoing communications – especially if it’s combined with useful content, links and/or offers for the consumer

Hey Gary,

Great video…

I think part of the problem is that the folks making the ad aren’t really on the hook much for the RESULTS the ad generates.

If I worked in an ad agency and the goal was to create an ad that got approved by some committee somewhere, then that’s what I’d do.

But if I was going to be partly accountable for what actually happened AFTER the ad ran, then it would be a different story.

When you ask the person watching the ad to actually DO something you can measure, well that’s risky.

Cause they might NOT do it.

But I bet if that one thing changed, and the RESULTS started to matter, then you’d see a WHOLE lot more hustle when it came to extending the story.

Everyone would be focused on the RESULTS.

Gary, I strongly agree with the importance you place on “extending the story” in TV advertising. Cross-platform ad campaigns are key generators of call-to-action, because they are user engaging. Perhaps, a lot of companies are not submerging into the idea of “extending the story” because they are insecure about the relationship between their targeted audience and their social media/online consumption or engagement? Just a thought.

Why are more brands not using ads as platforms? Because so many ad decisions are still being made in a vacuum. The decision to create television ad buys and then produce the spot is still a two-dimensional decision for so many companies. The idea that the message, the “sell”, could possibly be consumed on multiple platforms still boggles the vast majority of company executives. The idea that their message could be consumed in nearly real-time on multiple platforms is only understood by a handful of companies. Taking the leap to pull messages through from TV to Web will require the same shift in thinking that executives are still going through when it comes to valuing Web publications as much as print publications. It is why companies PR departments are asked again and again for more inches in the NYT, WSJ, etc. rather than asking the smarter question…where do we need to be to have the greatest influence. How we consume media has evolved so much faster than how companies (that can afford national TV placements) are considering how to use that same media.

As a quasi-related aside, it’s the same thinking for why so many hotels still charge for in room wi-fi access. The decision is as short sighted as executives not including calls to actions in their ads. Applying established operating norms the companies are missing out on the subsequent halo affect of ease and convenience guests/customers will feel. Engagement and brand loyalty can be greatly advanced if the customer believes the company is providing them value.

You’ve got a good point. I think, as in any big business, the bureaucratic culture and dogmas creep in and are difficult to dislodge. Big Advertising is no different. To borrow from VC-techspeak, there’s FUD (fear uncertainty doubt) that gets in the way.

You could look at it this may Gary. You’re early. The importance of stories is only now beginning to be really known. And the idea of extending stories is even a bit further up the road.

I think you mentioned something in a previous post about how anyone can know how to play basketball, but that doesn’t make them Jordan. I think it’s the same thing here. Extending the story means someone needs to create a great story that’s worth extending.

So, instead of “got milk?” it will be “got story?”

I completely agree Gary. It’s surprising brands haven’t realized this. Everyone wants to be part of a story and experience.

Part of the problem may be that many brands are stuck in an old mindset and don’t yet have their head around how powerful the internet is. I have come across too many brands that have been collecting data and analytics, but never bother to take a look at it. They are really missing out.

Hi Gary:

Great thought-provoking question. I know that Neilson (http://en-us.nielsen.com/main/product_families) is branching from TV metrics into social a fair bit, but I think the main problem is that the companies that are using TV regularly are there because they’re used to it. It’s what their Madison Avenue ad agencies have them doing–and those agencies have been slow to pick up on the phenomenal impact of social media.

I think companies have been too comfortable shelling out money to agencies and letting them handle things, and the whole social media thing snuck up on them. They just weren’t paying attention, and it happened so quickly!

Some brands get it, like Pepsi–who yanked $20M out of the Superbowl bucket and is moving it to social. But you’re right on the money with the idea that leveraging TV with social is WAY underdone.

Another reason, perhaps, is the flexibility issue. Larger companies with monjo budgets move like tanker ships–not waverunners. It takes a while for their marketing departments to move things through the system.

You’re on a roll, buddy–first mover advantage!!

You’re so right.

The problem is most decision makers are old farts or social web illiterates.

Yeah some PR people are on twitter (im a spammy circle jerk most of the time).

It will be interesting to see which of these ‘old farts’ become superstars by getting this stuff right first…

they don’t know or don’t know how to use it…. they get it more and more so there is hope …

Why aren’t more companies doing it? Because they have the same marketing VP as they did 10 years ago, that doesn’t want to listen to new ideas, because he/she thinks they know everything. Still can’t recognize the importance of social media.
The Department of Defense reversed their position on social networking access for employees…check this out. http://bit.ly/cgvnBb
If the govnt. is now realizing the importance, big business better hop on board. When the govnt beats you to the punch, I’d say you’re lagging behind.

Probably just laziness. I think companies don’t understand yet that the effort to get on the social bandwagon and to extend their message is quite easy.

Plus its not “the norm” yet for these businesses to be on Facebook and Twitter nor to link to such things in other advertisements.

Some get it. Dominos in Australia has a great Twitter presence although the TV ad’s lack the connection. Most people wouldn’t know that they had a Twitter account unless they went searching for it.

The core issue is that there is no direct link that the consumer can “click on” with a TV add to go to the advertisers Twitter page, its all consumer pro-active. I think most of the advertisers don’t think that the consumer will be very pro-active, but in fact we are If the iPad has inline advertisements with clickable regions to save to a bookmark list, game over

I agree there is a great opportunity to “extend the story” using commercials as a platform; however, in many extreme rural areas, e.g., Nebraska, Wyoming, Colorado, etc., consumers do not have overwhelming access to high speed internet. I hear complaints from residents in some of these areas of the frustration of newscasts not being complete and, instead, informing the viewer to “go to www.” for additional information. If the true purpose of the commercial is to inform and sell to the highest population, utilizing commercials solely as a “starting point” may alienate some consumers.

I believe that non-computer based mediums (commercials, billboards, magazines) should not bank on getting internet traffic. Those mediums are not for that, no one remembers a domain (no matter how short it is) enough to rush after watching a TV show and type the URL they saw, especially if everyone ends up doing it. This may change with technology, if you have an iPad during commercials any you type in a URL, thats convenient. The only way businesses and brands will get traffic is if they incentivize, if they say, “you can get a free BLANK if you friend us on facebook”, that would work throughout mediums, and spread like wildfire.

Thanks for starting this discussion, Gary.

In our experience, the lack of call-to-action within traditional media spots is typically due to lack of infrastructure (within the sponsoring company or even within the media buying agency) to support the online conversions. It may seem like a no-brainer – include a “go to http://www.companycampaign.com to submit your comments” within the ad – but more often than not, the landing page/site is not equipped to support the consumer interactions.

While the online resources exist to allow for a quick-turn solution (Disqus, FB Connect, etc.), the large corporations have internal teams with layers of management (and legal departments) to get through before they can execute on any of those solutions. Also, the media buying agencies typically don’t have these resources on staff. This is where I see tremendous potential for the “little guy” – the agile, small businesses who are willing to accept the risk and execute on several of these campaigns.

Problem is, those aren’t the type of companies making buys for Super Bowl ads, or that have deep pockets to afford the web development costs.

Would love to hear (in these comments) if other firms are experiencing these challenges as well.

Thanks,
Rick

P.S. Would love this video blog sparking discussions like this to be a regular thing. Nice work, GV!

Gary. Old habits and old businesses die hard. This stuff isn’t rocket science. It’s not a matter of logic, it’s a matter of habit.

We’re breaking habits gary. One tweet, video, facebook post, email, comment at a time.

I think the answer to why more companies are not doing this is that you are so far ahead of (most) everyone.. FOR REAL! Kudos to the brands that are embracing the internet in their tv ads.. why waste that opportunity?? I have consulted with a few companies that are national brands and it’s like they are afraid to do more than have a web presence. Maybe they are waiting to see where the whole Social Media phenomenon is going, or if it here to stay. I hope they realize soon that it is!

This is a great idea – more people than ever are watching the super bowl – the Olympics – the web and the social media conversation has brought back a huge social component to watching TV. I’d love to see ads on Hulu that pick select tweets using brand hashtags and then encourage the conversation.

Example: Twizzlers does an add where they show people’s real tweets about eating twizzlers – then they say – let us know the next time you’re enjoying a twizzler and you might find yourself in our next ad. Or something catchier.

Great vid as always Gary!

Gary, I agree !00%!! As a portrait photographer (all my life) I feel it’s my God given responsibility to tell everyones story (everyone has a story). Example: when you look at a portrait of your daughter, you want to recall the story of her birth, life, and the love she gives to you and your family. Why can’t national advertisers see the power and value of telling the story then making the customer a part of the family by connecting and building the relationship.

I think this is totally truth, I believe Television Media as always, isn’t putting enough attention of what’s happening in the media world. For example a new technology is emerging JAVA FX which is a platform that will allow developers to create amazing engaging experience for cross platforms mobile devices televisions computers you name it. I will be interesting when companies star doing this. I think a great example can be found at sport events where people will be able of interact with what’s happening in real time

I’ve been wondering something. If internet marketers agree that the money is in your list then why aren’t these companies building a list? Is it arrogance or ignorance? Every message must lead to a point of decision/action, but the fastest growing companies today are ones that are inviting conversation through social media. If the big boys ever figure this out…

You know Gary, this is an often debated topic in the internet ad world. I think there are a couple of angles on this, I don’t think the whole of the people/corporations are totally convinced yet. I know that sounds stupid because the evidence is so incredibly compelling about advertising and the internet. But many corporate cultures are still crazy old school run by old dudes that aren’t good at being humble (willing to change).

Much of the traditional ads are still infotainment and more about branding than call to action, more subliminal. Of course there are a bunch of ads that do post the twitter and facebook logo’s at the end, but that’s merely treated as an afterthought than the primary purpose of the ad.

I agree with you Gary, and eventually, just like the evolution of this online thing, the people will lead the way, they (we) are addicts!

Once they get you online they don’t know how to execute on you and your data/interaction.

You know michael what I think is going to happen is everyone is going to start doing it. I think what companies are waiting for is for a big company to get their feet wet and see what happens if there are successful or if they fail. And we already know what is going to happen.

Totally agree Gary, it’s a gold rush opportunity for any brand to take advantage of. I’m guessing that traditional tv ranks aren’t ready to change? But I’m with you….why not? We are changing package designs to incorporate our social hangouts. It’s not tv, but still builds brand and engages customers.

Gary, I understand what you are saying but did you see in today’s WSJ where a few of the larger players in the magazine industry are going after web advertising and placing their resources back into their magazines. I believe the $ amount was 80 million committed to the campaign. Maybe we moved to far to the web to quickly and this is a little push back??

Banker

I think big players that utilize TV commercials just do not get it. The prevailing feeling is that change will destroy the present “successful” money maker. The problem is traditional ads are hitting less and less people (due to DVR + Tivo fast forwarding). Some of the problem has to also lie in Conventional Wisdom and most likely an aging/old executive structure…bank role.
Great post and right on the pulse.

Because these companies are still consisting of older mindset people where they still think the internet is a waste of time. They now get they need a website but they think social media is just a fad. I have been told by some it is “fluff”. Sometimes it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks.

I think it’s as simple as they’re just NOT thinking about it….And as you pointed out, especially for larger companies who still go through the typical creative ad agencies.

As the great ad man George Lois said (paraphrasing), “most ad agencies are just out to win awards.”

And I don’t think they – most not all – believe “wasting” ad time to direct someone to an internet page is sexy enough….YET.

Seems companies think that putting their facebook url up on the tv ad is enough to get the story going. It’s not… need to draw people in with a story. Traditional co’s are just STARTING to get it and putting the FB urls up there. Good start. now, finish the race…

Old school marketing is still running the show and they are too fearful to give up the control.

Because users hate spam in their inbox.. But love downloadable coupons such as Jack in the Box!!

Gary, I agree current marketing is absolute BULLSHIT. I think most marketing is aggressively creating this buyer phychosis. Gary, you are more intelligent than the average American, and probably less affected by the marketing schemes. Let me me know what you think about this: think it’s because they are afraid of trolls, and the potential for actual discourse. If their products are not GREAT.. then they use slick marketing to sell them. The internet is in the direction of getting informed.. they want their customers stupid. At least that’s most of the major corps.

People aren’t extending the story because engagement is a foreign concept for so many brands, and that’s really what has to change at a more fundamental level.

On my show Doctype (which Gary is on tomorrow, btw) we have in-video sponsorship spots, and we always make sure to feature a URL for viewers to go to. Sending viewers to a URL is a great way to expound upon the details and extend the story.

They’ll figure it out… It’ll just take time!

More commercials should have the call to action however I think some Marketing/PR people either think its a fad or don’t know which social media network to go with (Facebook/MySpace/Twitter).
Many probably think its like the Bluetooth advertising(2005) that was big a few years ago and the mobile barcodes(aka QR codes) billboards/signs(2005) which were used extensively in London.

All brands need a call to action to an online site or social media in all their offline media so they can mine the data. But many don’t know how or why they should do it, it will take a 1-2 years for brands to understand and then it will take 1-2 years for them to implement it and it will be common place in pr/marketing and then the next big thing will come along which will be???? 5 year cycles of technology for marketing is my observation.

follow me on twitter @landscapearch

Gary, you always cut to the heart of the matter. The reason they fail to seize these opportunities is because they are still thinking in old terms. These ad agencies made their money doing the same thing year in and year out. It’s as if they think social media is a fad or something. And, just like the dinosaurs, and maybe pretty soon the nightly news broadcasts, they too will perish! If they can’t understand your simple message that it’s VERY cheap to build a brand online now, then there is no helping them!

Gary,

The answer to your question is simple: They’ve yet to truly grasp the power of connectivity that the internet offers. These are brands that have been successful – some for 100+ years – doing it the old way. They think that generating brand awareness is still the best way to leverage the massive amount of eyeballs that they’re paying to get in front of. They fail to recognize that the landscape for advertising is forever changed because of antiquated ways of thinking.

Besides, you and I both know that this whole internet thing is a passing fad anyway!

Cheers!

Mike

Why are people not leveraging the power of the internet by sending their commercial viewers to their websites??? Good question.

In the smaller, local commercial, markets I think that a lot of it has to do with business owners and small production facilities being behind with the times. They have failed to realize the potential of the internet as the information leveraging, community building, prospect converting powerhouse that it is. They are stuck in the old paradigm, where you show a lame commercial that simply lists off information about the business, and, if you’re lucky, contains a catchy jingle. If they do put their URL on the screen, it is at the bottom in fine print, and there is no real call to action.

Their commercials lack a hook, and they believe that “I built it, so they should come”. That’s a terrible way to approach commercial making and marketing all together!!! Oh yeah, and I failed to mention, if they do have a website, most of these smaller business simply have a page that lists boring information about their business and what they do, using words like “Professional”, “Best Prices”, “Industry Leaders” etc… There are no blogs or social media links. If there are, most of them are unused, with one post at the most. They need you, or someone like you to come into their lives and give them a good wake-up slap in the face

As for the big guys, most of them have a pretty good understanding of marketing principles, and the good ones know how to send their customers to their website. I’m not sure about the ones that don’t do it, but maybe it’s just a bigger version of the little guy’s lack of understanding. They just do not see the potential of the internet as a social, relationship building platform, that can connect them to their customers like never before. Without realizing this and knowing how to go about it, there is no incentive for them to create a hook that will lead their prospects to their website, for they have no story worth telling once you click on their URL. It’s just over the top yelling in your face to Buy, Buy, Buy.

People want a relationship, they want to trust you, they want to be a raving fan, these companies just need to see that and make the shift. Then they will have a solid reason to direct the viewers of their ads to their website with a passionate call to action.

I dunno, what do you think? How do you get through to these businesses that are stuck in their ways?

Hey Gary
To answer your question about Why companies are not utilizing their web commercials to incorporate their online efforts: That is something smaller, entrepreneurial companies do. And since they are more inclined not to have the budget to run ads on TV, it will take some time and some interesting events. So, I think it’s coming, it’s just going to take one brand to do it and become successful before it floods the airwaves. Great vid. Keep doing a great job and we wish you the best!
Joe

Companies are scared of the internet, one reason is that do not understand it, the other reason is they are threatened by it. They need to embrace the abyss and realize that anything is possible online.

its a no brainer gary…. those who have the dominant control over their corporate messages with advertising have all got to be at least 40 years old, and they just resist the natural flow of cultural change.

and yes andrew they feel threatened by it because there comes counter information with all information on the internet and they can just avoid that when they send their message through a one way stream of information that is a commercial on television.

they feel threatened by the fact that people can debate their products or services.

Big wheels move slowly and these massive companies will eventually get it and follow entrepreneurs and smaller, nimbler counterparts. This will be the year of conversion and extension online for most.

I couldn’t agree with you more!
I have been advocating this same action for the better part of a year now. Traditional analytics only go so far as there are limits to what can be distilled from a static site. On the flip side, leveraging the depth of information available to those who integrate various social media platforms has yet to be widely adopted.
The rapid introduction of even more mediums (I.E. tablets, mobile, etc.) with which to advertise on only strengthens the need for community teasers driving traffic to what I call a “social hub” where in depth intelligence can be obtained, studied and acted upon. Adapt or die has become my new battle cry……

you are 100% correct and i couldnt agree with this post more but you’re forgetting some major aspects of the current ad biz..

a.) the people/clients that “approve” commercials aren’t forward thinking on average. they primarily care about reach and cost only. hit the biggest reach @ the cheapest cost. ergo most arent going to pay for a story extensions via the internet.

b.)most broadcast creatives care about one thing and are driven by one thing only – EGO ( ie winning a cannes lion or some type of accolade for their ARTISTIC CREATIVE) screw metrics; screw sales; screw anything that wreaks of biz. it’s about winning awards that creatives feel bring in biz. And sadly to an extent (at least in the past and even today to a degree) that was/is the case.

c.) Ad silos – big agencies are made up of fiefdoms and every dept fights for their lives. And the one that brings in the most dough wins. when you line item the prod costs and media commissions of tv vs digital work – agencies will always go with the guys who are bringing in the most dollars ala TV.

Now we can debate these issues til the cows come home and trust me i’m in your camp but these are the facts. And until the old guard dies or gives up the throne we’re all screwed.

I do think a key though is continued to fight the good fight and showing/telling clients/creatives the value of what you are talking about. Educating creatives/clients IMO is the only true way to get this to sink in. It takes a while for anyone to truly see the light.

I know this is not one of your traits but patience is a virtue…

Well said. EXTEND THE STORY! Love that. While the home TV experience is still there, and growing really. I mean look at people’s home sets and “media rooms.” But–but–people on the move more and more. I get MOST of my news and infotainment from my laptop and iphone–and that’s not slowing down either. So the the idea is more niche fragmentation right? Extending the story may not just be spreading a wider net–but digging in deeper to your niche market. Good stuff dude.

Megalis

Great idea Gary! You have to consider, though, that not all of the world is ready to move forward quite as fast as we internet entrepreneurs would like to. Television has proven itself as THE reliable source of information for 80 years now, it’s not about to fade away that fast, and there are a lot of people that just don’t want that change yet. It will come, though, with the new generations and their reliance on new technology. We are in the prime movement right now with the internet, like you said “it hasn’t even had sex yet…” but it’s coming fast and things are changing fast. As soon as the previous generations that relied on radio and TV are no longer an influence, I’m sure we will see the dramatic changeover to internet-based media. More so, I think that TV companies are going to go with the flow and move into the internet market. Peace out Gary!

I agree. But it seems some companies aren’t putting the up support (mostly technical) that is required to make this work. Look at the the Dockers commercial from this past Superbowl: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1BI8Xu3N1w
So many people hit the site after the commercial aired that the site went down.

Granted, it’s just a technical hurdle and it shouldnt keep companies from pushing forward. But we do need execs to think their strategies through.

Another good video Gary. I think long established companies find it difficult to think out of the box and miss out on some great opportunities. They’re inwards looking and before they know it, the competition is way ahead of them.

I get what you are saying Gary and I don’t disagree. The reason a lot of companies are not driving more consumers to their sites is content. The corporate sites and even their facebook sites are so tied down with legal, and people that do not understand social media that they have nothing to offer once you get to the site.

There is another part of this discussion that must be said.

I love extending the story, but only when there’s a story. There are far too many companies that have not extended the story, but rather just extend their commercial online.

I’m sure you’ve seen it too, all those bottle caps that give u a coupon code J8FH3XY and then tell you that to participate, you have to go online, where they continue to shove their logo in your face. IMO, this is completely the wrong way to go about it. This is simply more work for the consumer, and not user friendly at all.

Marketers need to realize that being forward thinking isn’t just simply using the internet, or facebook, or twitter. At the end of the day, its all about the story being told.

So while I completely agree with the message of extending your story (btw, this works great for movies, and the movie industry has been doing things like this for a while), we should make sure that companies aren’t jumping ahead of themselves and just simply creating a fan page with no content and no story on it.

I’m going to play “slight” Devil’s Advocate – even though it’s more of a Gary comment/question: how many Press Releases have you seen in recent years where a company thinks the addition of a new room in their store or some boring tidbit of product information is newsworthy? Often, right?

Relevance – if you’re going to involve the consumer in your brand/story, then don’t make it an obvious product pitch, give some juice to the event, get interaction and feedback, or solve a problem..as Gary likes to say – get involved and care!

So true Gary. I did see one commercial that kinda put me on a spin, coz’ I watching my show, and then the cast was in this commercial, it was great. It made me engaged, but I can’t remember if it had a “call out” for me to be further engaged.

It would be great if they did take this further, engage the shows with call to actions that encourages brand and tv show interaction.

I love the show “Lie To Me”, it would be great to see if a product was promoted in a commercial, and the actors engaged with it somehow, and let the viewers interact, by proposing a challenge, quiz, etc, you name it.

Push it Gary. Much love.

Cesar

[...] Gary Vaynerchuk says in the video, it’s all about extending the story. The Internet is not an end in itself. For every television advertisement, for every radio [...]

I agree I see what is happening on the internet daily. Vloggers AKA Video Bloggers are finding creative ways to communicate their story online through YouTube and Viddler and Ustream so people can see what these speakers and advertising people are about. Funny thing too is the reason I think the big companies are not using video is because they are stuck in their old fashion ways of marketing and spending money on traditional advertising. I rather turn on my laptop or my Google Phone and watch the darn news there because it’s easy to do and did not cost much. These dino’s are still in the ice age and I am doing my thing with my business on my show to broadcast who I am a funny and witty entrepreneur who is real and unscripted. We can tell these advertisers that we the general internet public want to see your vision Gary but you and I know they don’t get it like you and the rest of us in the http://WWW.com does.

This is Anastacia AKA Ahauldri and I thank you for letting me comment on this debate.

I was thinking about this in relation to retail stores continuing their interaction with customers that walk in. Getting them involved in email lists or other campaigns to let them know about discounts and the like.

I even see many food retailers having a free food day, with a rush of people entering the stores, but there is no effort to keep up with those customers to see how they feel; they just hope they’ll enjoy it and come back. Some of this kind of thinking would be helpful in these situations.

I agree with you Gary. Have you ever heard of these guys: http://www.backchannelmedia.com/advertisers/advertisers1.html

As a consulting company we run up against this all the time. The bev alc industry is way behind the CPG industry, which is also way behind tech in integrating online.

Think of it this way: there are two kinds of people in the world…those who get it, and those who are gonna get it. The latter fall into two subcategories…they’re gonna get it where the sun don’t shine, or they’re going to embrace it.

We like to work with the latter.

For me a huge part of extending the story is having a good story. It’s not easy to come up with an story that actually engages and isn’t just a lame sales pitch that people can see right off the bat.

I’m not saying it hasn’t been done or can’t be done, etc. What I’m saying is that marketing is still marketing and if every company knew how to tell their story well, come up with a great call to action, then produce some great visuals to communicate that message no one would have marketing problems.

I think in the end this question has more to do with being able to execute in a value driven way then people wanting to make it happen.

Hey Gary. Great piece. My first thought is that a number of companies, particularly the larger ones, just don’t think beyond “the sale.” One-hit advertising has been the life blood of big brands. The best that could have been hoped for was buzz around an advertising campaign. I, honestly, think a lot of these big brands don’t, or wouldn’t, know what to say to people beyond the add. It’s pretty clear that most companies (particularly the big ones) are thinking about the extension of traditional advertising. I can’t blame this all on the companies, though. The PR and advertising firms are just as much to blame if they are not pitching it. We all know you deliver what the client wants, but that’s really just the start. That’s the basement floor. To really get to the top of the game, you have to be innovative and convince the client/brand that there’s a benefit in extending and building the story online and in social media. Just as Microsoft underestimated, or just didn’t get, the sweeping change in mobile phone technology–essentially leaving them eating dust; I’m convinced that a lot of big brands still look at social media as folly.

The biggest problem with big brands is control. The don’t have any control over twitter or facebook or myspace. These platforms could be bought and shut down tomorrow. Also, they do not want to have to share brand equity with a platform. If GM is on facebook then, they are endorcing facebook to some extent.

Also, how a large brand makes money is different than a smaller company. They are trying to make a nickel on a bunch of transactions.

Just curious what you feel you are accomplishing with your fan pages?

We come up against this problem more and more and it stems from the old guard but also from the ad agencies that just don’t get digital.

It has been mentioned somewhere above but the Ad guys only care about how good they look. They constantly push back that they is no room for a web address on ‘their’ 30 secs ad. Surely the ad is a ‘consumer’ ad and that is who we are talking to.

Why make it difficult for consumers? Give them a call to action (with a reason). Don’t make them work to find you.

And also there are plenty of reasons that people will sit up and take notice of a call to action even if it is down in the tube station – where you cannot get web!

Amazing! I actually look for ads that have some interesting story to follow, newspaper and mags too. Nobody! btw, who is stevie thompson from texas?

I completely agree on the need to fundamentally change the true purpose of advertising, which needs to be ENGAGEMENT.

The only thing I don’t see happening is the Ipad becoming something important (and I’m a mac guy), it’s just a small mac air or a big iphone. Neither are interesting to me. But that’s my only small disagreement.

Eric

So true, I used to tell all my clients the same thing and I was reprimanded for pushing online too much, needless to say the company went out of business and it was because people fear changes and some people refuse to accept technology and the way that consumers are reacting and responding to the ads. Lot’s of missed opportunities are slipping right out of their hands. Interaction is key, consumers want to get to know the people behind the product, and they want to be part of the brand.

As I watch TV with my laptop, I think you are right. However, If I have another news caster tell me to check us out on the web, I’m going to puke. Gary, THEY are doing this ad nausem already. Just the out of touch ones aren’t.

peace out,

donovan
spiritnewsdaily

Gary.. love it, love it, LOVE IT !

Great single issue blog on a core concept that MUST be embraced, but how do we get people to change their thinking ?

Sending this right away to the marketing organisation with the 8 figure marketing budget that I referenced in this blog last week : http://mccallumsolutions.com/redefine-success/

They (and several other clients and other organisations I work with) are trying to “get it”, but their execution is limited by legacy thinking and structural inabilities to change their resources… often frustrating the key decision makers at those companies as much as it frustrates me.

Not enough people “get it” at all… my last blog was all about shaking up their thinking…. keep shaking, brother !

As much as everyone hates and criticizes GoDaddy, they do a great job getting your attention and then having a call to action to the site.

Granted, they are 100% a web-based business so it is really their only option. Either way, it is a good example of using a call to action from television to online.

As television and cable companies continue to play in the digital/social space we should begin to see the lines of traditional media and digital media blur. For instance, a call to action that says something like “Hit the Enter button on your remote to get our fall catalog sent to your email”

It is an exciting time to be in the advertising world . . .

“Why aren’t more companies doing this?”
.
.
.
Egos!…in positions that make decisions.

Totally agree – I’m sure there are a host of reasons for this: people resistant to change and focused on traditions, not recognizing the online value, not observing the trends, no idea about social media, not engaged with their customers, don’t really care about getting to know their customers, etc. The good news is that this represents an opportunity for those businesses that really care.

One thing is sure, the old commercial television business modal is evolving rapidly and there is no going back.

Inherently, movies and television are passive entertainment experiences and the current broadcast business modal wants audiences to stay focused and tuned in. As I see it, you are suggesting that advertisers take television viewers from passive entertainment mode into active consumer mode, which jeopardizes the network program – especially if it’s carried, live.

If your challenge that “every commercial in America should contain some type of call to action” becomes the norm, then the best commercial avail for an advertiser could actually become the first spot, right after the opening tease or first commercial break. In response the networks may design a tiered rate card within programs or sell programs to individual advertisers complete with product placement throughout plus a “call to action” message at the tail end of the program. Consumers would benefit from less commercial breaks. However, could networks produce meaningful content with fewer advertisers? Only major advertisers would have the resources to fully sponsor and produce programs. Certainly they would influence the creative side and the programming options could change dramatically to meet their business agendas.

Do I think that is where broadcast television is heading? Yes, probably in some form. Internet – We are already there with network on-demand!

Thanks for facilitating such a thought provoking debate.

Have you heard of alternative social ad campaigns such as ARGs? Here’s one from that past that was pretty famous: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_Bees

Great video Gary. I would also suggest that companies are missing the boat with their offline and radio ads as well. Radio has the same limitations as TV in selling products, but you could gauge the reach on top of the metrics the stations offer by offering a specific Facebook page with a survey that asks where they heard the commercial along with some interesting content. You could also add the URL to magazine and other print ads because it puts something tangible and actionable on an ad that won’t immediately garner a sale on the john. By adding a link you could also get someone heading to the site if they happen to have a BlackBerry or iPhone handy in their *ahem* office. What could it hurt? A tiny URL or Facebook call out in the corner of the ad won’t hurt anyone, but will add some more bang to your buck and some additional metrics to track.

You are right on the money as usual and I died laughing at the little wink at the end – too funny.

i don't know why companies choose to not take more advantage of the time they pay a lot of money for on tv. i am a multiple unit quiznos franchisee and it drives me F***ing crazy how much the company is missing it. we are the perfect example of a company that is not crushing it.

I like the earlier comment about the fact that they have dinosaurs running their marketing campaigns. It's so true.

Seriously, I have a sister that is a senior at (a very reputable university that I also attended) where she is a business marketing major. I asked her how much they deal with internet marketing in her classes and she replied HARDLY AT ALL. Freakin unbelievable!

Maybe it has to do with the fact that very few college professors are on the cutting edge so we're spitting out talented youngsters who are already behind the times. Unless someone opens their eyes to the possibilities… like Gary here… or they have the drive to be on the cutting edge within them they probably won't GET IT for awhile… if ever. Great point in your video Gary!

Call to action and direct response are what's missing in most the ads that run on TV and print. Radio uses call to action a little bit more but it is missing. The internet is harnessing this power and leveraging it collect data and lists for future marketing. Gary, as usual, you and I are right on brother!

Just like you are doing with this call to action to leave you our thoughts and comments. Nice work! (Wink,wink!)

Really? You hit the big time AT the big time and I so admire you for that. Your success is due to the intuitiveness of the marketplace and I congratulate you for it. You are amazing. I respect and admire you. You will go down in history. However, now you need to gather those around you to make it happen even further. I wish you, and your family, all the best the marketplace has to offer.

Oh really? I have to post again? I am amazed by your expertise and chutzpah. Continue on, Gary.

First off I must say I hate pre-roll on anything under 5min long. It is a pet peeve of mine. But your general point is absolutely right on. We are in a transformative period in how people digest their media and get their information. companies need to respond appropriately to that.

Here are some of the road blocks I have run into as a creative working at a mid size digital/online agency.

- Large agencies tend to control the brand and don't always play nice with us small digital agencies.
- Large agencies seem less interested in pushing online solutions and tend to be rooted in traditional more expensive solutions (my guess is due to overhead)
- Strategy online tends to be more complicated with more moving parts, and thus is harder to sell and monazite and sell to clients.
- Most companies are afraid of being transparent. They are afraid of bad press, thus they are VERY resistant to fully utilizing social media (which I believe is, after reading your book, the best way to success online).

These are my thoughts based on my experience. I think the space is changing and it is changing fast. The companies that really thrive will be the ones that embrace the change and ride the wave now.

Love it. Every billboard, ad & sign too. Engage with all media: mobile, email & sites.
Capture cell phone #'s with email addresses by offering value. Ex. Txt “brand” followed by “email address” to get free “stuff” & exclusive offers.

If it were up to the “creative people” in the world who get it, we wouldn't be having this conversation. As it happens, the bottom line go/no go decision lies with the “dinosaurs” HunterHart talks about.

It's not wrong for people to be skeptical of new technology. For your suggestion to work, there need to be case studies and white papers that can back the theory up. The old fogies don't want to waste millions of dollars on a “good idea” or a “potential goldrush.” At the end of the day the need numbers to show their (equally fogie) stockholders that they are innovating for good, solid, quantifiable reasons. And a million Facebook fans does not a million dollars make… necessarily.

I think advertisers are afraid of the new technology that it will put them out a job and actually have to work for a living.

I believe it is because we are in the middle of a paradigm shift, where old marketing and TV guru's have not quite got the idea of the connectivity, interaction, and power the web has to offer with its users. There is a huge opportunity like you say with respect to collecting data and leveraging it, and now is definitely the time to take advantage of this opportunity. I am currently educating myself in video marketing to help further help businesses online, but that is just on the web. The media giants need to embrace this change soon… Thanks for your incite Gary!

[...] Topics: Business Originally posted at http://vaynermedia.com/2010/03/extending-the-story/ [...]

Well said Gary! Why shout from the soapbox (paying sick money to boot) and not getting anything other than “hopeful brand recognition”. Put out a commercial that says anyone who tweets the word “StarbucksRules” gets a DM with a coupon code for a free latte.

Seriously that way you know who they are, send them the DM have them fill out the little Name, Email, Age Range, Male/Female, How often do you Starbuck? AND VOILA golden ticket. Find your passionate tribalfolk, and reward them, they will tweet to end for you. (And Facebook your good name!)

LOVE IT!

Well Gary, you are indeed a visionary. I think your idea about people taking ads or personal appearances to the web is happening, slow but it is there. See Mobile advertising. I think it is slow because of technical issues which eventually be solved.
The advertisers do distinguish the difference in quality and presentations from TV and the Web. And I guess it is not quite there yet… but it is coming real soon.
Technology is great and my TV is becoming obsolete too. I love to talk with you more about this.

Gary you are indeed a visionary. I think soon they will. But technology issues are a hinderance at this time or there maybe a seperate gap of TV and the web in terms of self made movies and professional quality movies. Check out the mobile advertisement… people are beginning to advertise and emerge on mobile…by EyeBlaster.com
Hey I also want to jump on the band wagon! : )

Fear, lack of understanding and “silos” within organizations prevent them from doing this type of call to action in their TV and mainstream advertising campaigns. Some are intimidated by the social media space and are waiting to enter when they have more data, more ROI and more buy-in from the higher ups. Some don't understand (or choose to ignore it) until someone above them in the company orders them to do so, and sadly, the “silos” that hold companies back are a result of departmental infighting. The marketing/advertising department that creates the ads doesn't want to plug the social media department's work. In these companies, the social media department might stand alone as an “experimental” or “grassroots” channel of the communications department, and other departments don't want to let them steal the thunder. All these reasons pretty much boil down to “They just don't get it.”

It's all a matter of making social media MATTER within an organization, top-down and bottom-up. If CEOs and founders truly adopt social media, that's when it works the best. That allows for the nimble, crowdsourcing, responsive social media implementations that really change things.

I agree with you completely Gary. Just one question, I will admit that I watch TV with a laptop and the iphone, but I do not see myself adding an ipad into that mix. My laptop does everything the ipad can do.