Noah Brier has a thought-provoking article on Advertising Age eloquently titled How to Make Display Ads Suck Less.
His main tenet is that most “creative” of display advertising has been unnecessarily handicapped because it is almost always developed in a vacuum, absent of consideration of the specific sites and pages where those ads will be placed. As a result, these generic, write-once-run-everywhere ads usually end up looking out of place in their commoditized slots — and certainly don’t build synergy with their context.
Without thinking about where the display is sitting, the creative is left focusing on a totally-out-of-context consumer. The big problem I have with this is it pretty much gives up the biggest advantage the web has over other media: the ability to target smaller groups affordably with discrete messages. As soon as we go with a single message across all these sites we’re left with a glorified television ad.
Noah’s recommendations to create display ads that break free of these limitations include:
First off, we’re going to need to start doing more versions of display ads and at least doing custom ones for the larger sites. If you know you’re designing something for ESPN.com, for instance, you would create a very different thing than if it were for Newsweek.
Second, by knowing what site it’s running on, I believe we can start to design things that look like they belong a little more. Banner blindness is a well-documented phenomenon, but little has been written about why people ignore the ads. My suspicion is that it’s in large part due to the fact that they look like they don’t belong on the page.
I think Noah is right on the money here, with his most poignant point being: why should we give up the very advantage of Long Tail scaling that the Web uniquely provides us?
Of course, having ads really bond cohesively and build synergy with the context in which they appear is only the first step — call it ad placement synergy. That can win you more clicks, but you then need to follow through by providing those respondents with matching landing pages — call it ad flow synergy.
If someone notices a new ad, styled via Noah’s recommendations to be particularly relevant to its context, and clicks on it — which they wouldn’t have done before — that’s wonderful. But if the landing page fails to carry forward with that context, and instead disappoints the respondent with a disconnected experience, it was all for not.
You need context for the click… but you also need context for the conversion.
However, this is exactly the dialogue that agencies need to be having. Doing a lot more targeted ads and targeted landing pages is more work. But 50% more work for 200% more return is a great deal. And — a little self-promotional hint — there’s some nifty software out there that can help you achieve this mission very efficiently.