There are quite a few headlines in the trade press today about the effectiveness of purposeful ads
However, the actual data tells a very different story...
A thread
However, the actual data tells a very different story...
A thread
The research is based on analysis of the IPA effectiveness Databank and it compares ads with a purpose with those without one
The headlines refer to a comparison of a subset of purpose ads - the well executed ones- with all non-purposeful ads
Unsurprisingly they perform better
The headlines refer to a comparison of a subset of purpose ads - the well executed ones- with all non-purposeful ads
Unsurprisingly they perform better
However, if you look at the remaining purposeful ads - the poorly executed ones - they perform worse than general ads
The findings are a statement of circular logic
If you create a subset of any ads (eg well executed ads that use the colour orange) they will perform better than average ads
The thing that drives that overperformance is the fact you are only looking at well executed ads
If you create a subset of any ads (eg well executed ads that use the colour orange) they will perform better than average ads
The thing that drives that overperformance is the fact you are only looking at well executed ads
The approach needed is to compare all purpose ads with all non-purpose ads
Interestingly the study does that and finds purposeful ads are less effective
Interestingly the study does that and finds purposeful ads are less effective
So on one hand we have a finding that purposeful ads are less effective but a headline that leads to the opposite conclusion
It would be like an article about the Titanic's maiden journey focussing on the great buffet selection but relegating the iceberg to passing mention
It would be like an article about the Titanic's maiden journey focussing on the great buffet selection but relegating the iceberg to passing mention
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
