Why Does The ARF Still Need To Prove The Sky Is Blue?
I was only able to briefly attend the recent ARF Re!Think 2016 Conference, and I feel at once like I missed a lot, yet missed nothing.
I am always inspired by listening to brilliant thinkers like Dave Poltrack and Leslie Wood, colleagues whom I’ve known for many years. They, and several others at ARF conferences, are often on the cutting edge of new and innovative research.
Nevertheless, too many studies just seem to be repackaging what we’ve seen over and over again throughout the years. People need to understand that there is a difference between “groundbreaking” and “self-evident.”
In 2016, is a study that concludes advertising works really groundbreaking?
- Spending across multiple platforms delivers greater ROI than investing in single platforms. Don’t we hear this every time a new major advertising medium emerges? It is, of course, true, but hardly a new idea and hardly groundbreaking.
- If you spend less on TV advertising your sales will go down. It scares me that so many actually think this is groundbreaking research.
- “Silo investing” too heavily in some digital formats can have diminishing returns. Really? Did anyone not already know this?
- Customize your creative to the uniqueness of each platform. Again, anyone who took an advertising course in school should know this.
Those of us who have been in the industry long enough remember ARF presentations saying virtually the same things about cable they are saying about digital today.
Do we really still need to spend so much time and money to arrive at these rather banal conclusions? All the above points should be part of an ARF credo that holds these truths to be self-evident. …
… read on at mediapost.com
Originally posted by by Steve Sternberg at Media Post
7th April 2016