[Posted by Peter Kim]
Now that 24 hours have passed since the Pats’ super bust, it’s actually a perfect time for this post.
Think back about the game. Do you remember any of the ads – without any aided recall? Did any of them really "engage" you?
For $3 million, I was curious about how engaging the ads would be.
Thinking about engagement, Forrester’s definition states "Engagement is the level of involvement, interaction, intimacy, and influence an individual has with a brand over time."
OK so were any of these ads really "engaging"? A Super Bowl spot could be a perfect first step – and the second would lead online to a deeper, richer pull experience. So restated: did anyone take advantage of the opportunity to start a conversation with consumers and integrate online?
As expected, the only one that did with any effectiveness was
GoDaddy. The trick wasn’t the suggestive humor – it was their URL
displayed on screen for the entire spot. (I spoke with their PR
director last month in Vegas who said this is a recognized
value-creating tactic.) Whether you agree with their creative ideas or not, they’ve done something for three years that helps drive web traffic – and business.
I can vaguely remember some vanity URLs:
- A talking stain during a job interview.
- Sunsilk – something with music, nothing to do with shampoo.
- Doritos using snackstrongproductions.com again.
- Sobe had one, but I just remember Thriller.
I also remember some of the other advertisers – Bridgestone, Audi,
Coca-Cola, Victoria’s Secret, FedEx, Gatorade, and salesgenie.com
(their URL was ../tv I think). But if they had vanity URLs, I can’t
remember them. (were there any others?)
Keep in mind that I’m biased, in the industry, and trying to keep the addresses in mind. Blame the memory, I suppose.
Forrester’s data shows over 72% of adults have internet access. Of course we could go to myspace and look at all the ads. But
isn’t the point of engagement to say something that a viewer will
remember – and then do something about?