Banners are an Elevator Pitch

Advertisers who overload their online real estate limit the branding value of their ads. To quote the Church Lady, clutter is "bad, bad, very bad." While I would not go so far as to say cluttered banners are the work of (could it be?) Satan, I would recommend that online advertisers keep in mind they have a very limited time to get a message and brand in front of someone.

We talk about the number of creative units in each banner. To estimate this we consider each word in a banner a unit and each graphic a unit. Adding the two gives us the number of total elements in a banner. Statistically, we see that banners with less than 16 elements impact brand awareness much more positively than banners with more elements. Practically, however, I recommend that when evaluating your own creative for branding potential you consider the following:

• Make sure your brand or logo is clearly visible in the banner. For a person to make an association between neutral objects (a brand and a message or object), they need to see these elements clearly and in close proximity and timing.
• Branded elements should appear right away, as goal directed consumers surfing the Web do not wait for animations to load.
• Ask yourself, "Will a consumer clearly understand what I am trying to communicate?" If you want to build awareness of your product or service, do not burden them with strong calls to action, as this will add clutter to a banner.

For four years, Mike has been conducting marketing research for advertisers including, Citibank, Delta Airlines and Unilever. You can write to Mike at mike@dynamiclogic.com

What Role Does the Medium play in Branding?

E-mail marketing has been touted as valuable, mostly due to its targeting potential. While I agree that email enables marketers to reach the right people, the role of context in successful advertising is often overlooked.

If a banner campaign is running on a variety of sites AND in several html newsletters, is there a difference in the branding potential of identical creative served in different places?

One clear benefit of an ad in an html newsletter vs. on a site is the physical placement of the creative. On most web sites, the creative is placed on the periphery - and can easily be tuned out by the visitor. In a newsletter, sections of content are broken up by the creative. Therefore, a reader has to pass by the ad to get to the next section: they are more likely to notice the creative because it is not in a static position (i.e. the ads move as the user scrolls) and at some point appears in the center of the email window. Many sites have modified layouts to move creative towards the eyeball, so my point is not that advertising on sites has less value, rather that advertisers have a unique opportunity when advertising in html newsletters. Not only is there targeting potential as well as receptiveness due to the opt in nature of most newsletters, but there is the likelihood that the user will stare directly at the creative while reading the content. The success of the medium may not be reflected in click through rates because the users are very task-oriented - they do not want to leave the newsletter to visit a web site at that point in time. The value will likely need to be measured through post-exposure behavior analyses (are people visiting the advertisers' sites even though they did not click?) or attitudinal research to assess the branding value.

Molly Hislop has conducted online and traditional data analysis for such clients as AT&T and American Express. You can write to Molly at molly@dynamiclogic.com