This article from venturebeat.com says that advertisements for mobile apps should tell consumers what the apps do. Seriously?! Gilad de Vries wrote a whole article telling people that their adverts should actually say what the purpose of the product is so that consumers can decide whether to download the app or not. Initially I was dumbfounded, but then I thought about all the stupid adverts I’ve seen where I haven’t even known WTF the product was that was being advertised.
According to Hugh Mackay, author of Media Mania and the founder of the Mackay Report, the impact of advertising is overrated. Mackay cites the Meadowlea ‘You oughta be congratulated’ advertising campaign as one of the most successful because it reinforced existing behaviour of loyal consumers and occasional consumers; many occasional consumers became loyal. Apparently adverts intended to change people’s behaviour are unlikely to succeed, whereas adverts that reinforce existing behaviour are more likely to succeed.
Advertising that doesn’t tell you what the product is or what the product does is highly unlikely to succeed.
Media Mania cost me maybe $20 or $30 when it was still fairly new, excellent value for a slim non-fiction book that was aimed at the layperson while being very informative.
I wonder how much de Vries was paid to write an article stating the bleeding obvious?
