Is our audience paying attention? Advertising avoidance across the media spectrum.

Transcription

1 Is our audience paying attention? Advertising avoidance across the media spectrum. 1.0 Introduction The media environment Effective advertising requires an understanding of the target audience and their relationship with the brand, normally by creative and media teams who depict the brand message via the development of advertising ideas portrayed in various media. However, advertisements are of limited value to advertisers unless attention is paid to them by relevant individuals. The continuing fragmentation and development of the media landscape has an effect on all parties involved, namely; advertising, creative and media planners in agencies creating and planning advertising; media brand owners selling space or airtime and consumers of media, making choices about what to watch, listen to and read. In this environment, multi-media campaigns proliferate, reflecting a response to the fragmentation of media and audiences and the recognition that combinations of media can deliver effective synergies (White, 2005). Abratt and Cowan (1999) suggest that the main objective of the media planning process is to ensure that the selection and use of media allows the marketer to optimally communicate the advertising message to as many of the target market as possible, at the minimum cost. The issue of clutter is uppermost in the minds of media planners, some estimates have suggested that individuals are exposed to around 3500 marketing messages in a day (Guardian 19/11/2005 p3). Much of the time, due to the abundance of advertising messages available to them, consumers use perceptual selection to screen information and either actively ignore messages or find their attention distracted away from them. In the advertising industry, concerns about advertising avoidance have been increasing, as media proliferate and the competition for share of eyeball becomes more intense (Ingram, 2006 p.30). Issues surrounding the level of attention to and avoidance of advertising messages have received consideration amongst academics albeit with a focus on the television medium. This study explores advertising avoidance behaviour across a range of media, comparing television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines and the internet. 1.0 Literature review Advertising avoidance is defined as all actions by media users that differentially reduce their exposure to ad content (Speck and Elliot, 1997 p61). Avoidance may be physical (e.g. leaving the room), mechanical (e.g. switching channels) and cognitive (e.g. ignoring the ad). A number of studies have explored the ways in which consumers watch television. One of the earliest studies in this area was conducted by Allen (1965) who used a dynascope to photograph the viewing audience. Collett (1986) used a camera and VCR to record consumers watching television and from this data Svennevig and Wynberg (1986) concluded that pure viewing is extremely rare, and that most viewing occurs in a chaotic melee of other activities conversation, playing with children, and only partviewing of programmes and ads. Channel changes, leaving the room, and beginning or ending other activities occur at any time. Clancey (1994) confirmed that only 31% of viewing could be described as pure viewing. More recent ethnographic studies contribute to the understanding of which elements affect viewing attention. Byfield (2000) used a virtual ethnographic study of seventeen families over a two month period which revealed four elements influencing attention levels; 1

2 programme involvement, programme length, time of day and solus viewing. A similar study by Ritson et al. (2003) filmed eight households over a two week period, analysing viewing behaviour in the second week only. Six types of commercial break behaviour were identified; social interaction, tasking, reading, flicking, ad watching and advertising interaction. These findings suggest a range of attention to commercial television breaks, from complete avoidance to full attention. Ritson et al draw similar conclusions to Byfield (2000), identifying the friends effect as an important factor influencing commercial break behaviour; the more people there are in the room during a commercial break, the less chance there is that they will pay attention to the ads. More recently, Pilotta and Shultz (2005) have highlighted the issue of simultaneous media consumption e.g. flicking through a newspaper whilst watching the television, which may have implications for attention to advertising. The majority of empirical work on advertising avoidance has focussed on the television medium. An area of interest explored in several studies is the level of advertising avoidance by viewers. Abernethy (1991) concluded that around a third of television breaks are avoided by viewers, either physically by leaving the room (22%), or by changing channels (10%). Similar figures were reported by Robinson and Ayling (2004), with viewers spending an average 20% of television commercial breaks out of the room and zapping 12% of breaks. Heeter and Greenberg (1985) examined the profile of people who zap commercials, describing them as more creatures of chance than of habit. Danaher (1995) analysed people meter data on a second by second basis, finding lower levels of avoidance (5%) but little systematic reason why viewers were avoiding breaks. Van Meurs (1998) analysis of people meter data found much higher levels of avoidance (29%) and discovered that strong programming was associated with reduced zapping. Many empirical studies in the area of advertising avoidance have concentrated on the predictors of advertising avoidance behaviour, focussing primarily on the television medium. An exception is research by Speck and Elliot (1997) which, in addition to television, extends the scope of understanding of avoidance behaviour to include radio, newspapers and magazines. Their work established predictors of advertising avoidance and compared avoidance behaviour across these four media. More recently, studies by Cho and Cheon (2004) and Kelly et al. (2010) have examined internet advertising avoidance behaviour. Academic work, including work by Ritson et al (2003) has identified a range of behaviour during commercial television breaks from full attention to complete avoidance of advertising. The study by Speck and Elliot (1997) also suggested that varying levels of avoidance were evident. Research thus far indicates a need to identify, further understand and compare behaviour towards advertising across the media spectrum. 3.0 Aim of the study and research design Our study updates and extends the scope of previous work on the investigation of advertising avoidance behaviour into a full range of media including television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines and the internet. The aim of this UK study is to further understand advertising avoidance behaviour across the media spectrum and to reveal the reasons for such behaviour. The research objectives are:- - To deepen our understanding of advertising avoidance behaviour in television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines and online media. - To investigate the motives for avoidance behaviour across the range of media. - To compare advertising avoidance behaviour across broadcast, print and online media. 2

3 Much empirical research in the study of advertising avoidance to date has been quantitative in nature. Qualitative research was deemed more appropriate for this study as it was intended to deepen our understanding of avoidance behaviour and its motives across the media spectrum. Individual interviews were used as they allow respondents to express ideas, attitudes, motives and behaviours without being intimidated or influenced by others (Malhotra, 2006). Semi-structured interviews were considered most suitable as they facilitate comparison whilst allowing interesting points to be developed (Gordon and Langmaid, 1988). Fifteen semi-structured, face to face, in-depth interviews were conducted with eight male and seven female respondents aged between 20-35, living in large metropolitan areas in the north and south of the UK. Interviews were audio tape recorded and transcribed. Data analysis of the transcriptions followed a manual paper coding procedure and a thematic approach. 4.0 Findings Previous empirical work coincides with our findings that avoidance behaviour broadly falls into three groups; cognitive, physical and mechanical (Speck and Elliot, 1997). Advertising avoidance was evident in all media examined in our study, although the ways in which advertising avoidance was achieved, and the extent to which advertising was avoided varied across media, along with motives for avoidance....in cinema I can t avoid it. It is not up to me. I will avoid the rest of the media because I can......in magazines there are so many adverts that you can t pay attention to them all, but in newspapers there is more content Broadcast, print and online media are discussed below: 4.1 Television During television ads, respondents might zap, ignore the ads, shift their attention (e.g. talk to others in the room), leave the room, check their mobile phone and text or phone someone, read a book or magazine, mute the sound or indeed watch the ads or play ad games. The main drivers of avoidance of television ads were; the lack of relevance of products advertised, perceived ad clutter, a decline in likable ads, the wear out phenomenon, attitude towards advertising, type of programme and duration and frequency of breaks. Leave the room, zap or if I had to text somebody I would do it during the ads. The repetition is one reason it is always the same adverts all the time 4.2 Radio Radio advertising avoidance depends on the reason for radio listening. If radio is used as a background activity, listeners tended to avoid ads by ignoring them, playing a CD instead or listening to ads without paying much attention. In situations where radio is used as the main activity (for example, listening to a specific programme), ad avoidance occurred by 3

4 zapping, switching off, lowering the volume or engaging in an alternative activity e.g. sending a text or calling someone on a mobile phone. Motives for avoiding radio advertising were similar to TV; lack of relevance, a negative attitude towards radio advertising and a decline in likeable ads. In situations where the listener s goal is to follow a specific programme, the radio ads were considered more annoying. I put the radio on to listen to music not adverts. if I am using it as a background then I will carry on and I won t pay attention to it. If I am using it as a first activity then I may make a phone call or text someone 4.3 Cinema Cinema was the medium which respondents claimed to avoid the least. Avoidance measures for cinema advertising included; purposely not arriving on time, leaving the viewing area (for example, to buy food or drink), or talking to the person next to them. The general feeling amongst respondents was that cinema advertising was more interesting, better in terms of quality and that the products were more relevant to them. However, ads were still seen as a goal impediment as they had paid to watch a film. The ads at the beginning were considered by some as a safety net in case they were late. I would always aim to go on time. But not for the adverts, to get a good seat. I like to see the trailers...i want to watch only the film without interruptions. I feel I paid for a film without interruptions and I want to watch only that Newspapers and magazines On sight of ads in newspapers, respondents reported that they ignored them, turned the page, stopped reading the newspaper or paid attention to the ads. Although avoidance techniques for newspapers are limited, people did not feel forced to see ads. In fact, they felt they could pay as much attention as they liked, save the information or even compare information with other ads. Avoidance methods for magazines were similar to those for newspapers, but for different reasons. Our findings revealed that newspaper avoidance is often attributed to the lack of relevance and likeability of ads whereas for magazines, perceived advertising clutter is cited as the main reason for avoidance of ads. I probably just blank them (newspapers) or flip the page. I avoid them because they are irrelevant and so many. Half of the magazine is full of ads. 4.5 Online Findings for online media indicated that respondents claimed to avoid advertising on the internet to a greater extent than the other media covered in this study. Online ads were avoided by; ignoring them, exiting the window, deleting advertising s or blocking them using software and keeping the pop up blocker activated. Reasons given for avoiding online ads centred on perceptions that they are; harmful, untrustworthy, dishonest, 4

5 annoying and dangerous in terms of virus threats. Furthermore, people avoid them because they are considered to be intrusive, distracting and can impair goals. Ads are less likely to be avoided if the internet is being used for entertainment. I avoid the ads by having a pop up blocker. Or I see something flashing, I know instantly what it is and I just ignore it. 5.0 Discussion In comparing the range of media in this study, it is evident that the different nature of each medium attracts different senses and a variety of responses towards ads. The self selective opportunity to avoid ads is also a consideration. Accordingly, with newspapers and magazines, the reader is in control and ads can be immediately avoided, whereas in broadcast and online media, goal impediment (e.g. watching the programme) is more likely to be an issue. Broadcast media suffer from advertising avoidance to differing degrees, via an array of avoidance techniques, with cinema being the least avoided and television the most avoided broadcast medium by our respondents, which concurs with previous findings (Ingram, 2005; Speck and Elliot, 1998). Drivers of avoidance were similar (but with varying importance) across broadcast media with lack of relevance, ad clutter, likeability of ads, wear out and attitude to advertising contributing. Cinema ads were considered more likeable, better targeted and well presented due to the special conditions of the cinema theatre. Radio, by its nature, requiring lower involvement, was felt to be less intrusive than television, with fewer and shorter ad breaks, and is less avoided in accordance with previous work (Speck and Elliot, 1997; Shavitt et al., 2004). Methods used to avoid print ads were broadly similar, but for different reasons, the intention of a newspaper reader is more likely to become informed, whereas a magazine reader usually seeks to relax or pass the time, thus avoidance behaviour varies. Newspaper ad avoidance was attributed to lack of relevance and likeability of ads, while for magazines, avoidance was due to clutter. Online was the most avoided medium by our respondents, who considered online ads; harmful, intrusive, distracting and untrustworthy. Our research has important implications for advertising practitioners, responsible for deploying advertisers budgets. Our findings concur with the literature (Cho and Cheon, 2004; Speck and Elliot, 1998) suggesting that the media planning process must ensure that ads are effectively targeted as the lack of relevance was a key driver of avoidance across the media spectrum. A decline in likeable ads was also mentioned by our respondents as a reason to avoid advertising, although, for example, cinema was felt to have more interesting and creative ads, providing a challenge for account planning and creative teams across the range of media. Issues of repetition and wear out provide clear implications for media scheduling within advertising campaigns in the battle against avoidance. The limitations of this study are those associated with qualitative research methods. The research involved a non-probability sample of only 15 respondents who may not be representative of advertising avoiders in general. Our study was limited to year olds, future research should initially include supplementary qualitative research to investigate other groups and additional media, for example, mobiles and tablet computers. 5

6 6.0 References Abernethy, A.M. (1991) Television Exposure: Programmes vs Advertising. Current Issues & Research in Advertising. (13) 1-2. Abratt, R. and Cowan, D. (1999) Client-Agency perspectives of information needs for media planning. Journal of Advertising Research. Nov/Dec (39) 6. Allen, C.L. (1965) Photographing the TV Audience. Journal of Advertising Research. 5 (1) 2-8. Byfield, S. (2000) Watching People Watching TV. European Society for Opinion and Market Research. May. Byfield, S. (2002) Media Creativity: three dimensions for better communications planning. Admap May 428. Cho, C. and Cheon, H, J. (2004) Why do people avoid advertising on the internet? Journal of Advertising, 33, Clancey, M. (1994) The Television Audience Examined. Journal of Advertising Research. 34 (4) July/August. Danaher, P. (1995) What happens to television ratings during commercial breaks? Journal of Advertising Research. January/February. Gordon, W. and Langmaid, R. (1988) Qualitative Market Research: A practitioner s and buyer s guide. Gower, Aldershot. Heeter, C. and Greenberg, B.S. (1985) Profiling the Zappers. Journal of Advertising Research. 25, 2. Ingram, A. (2006) The challenge of ad avoidance. Admap. May, Kelly,L., Kerr, G. and Drennan, J. (2010) Avoidance of Advertising in Social Networking Sites. The teenage perspective. Journal of Interactive Advertising. 10 (2) Malhotra, N.K., and Birks, D.F. (2006) Marketing Research: An Applied Approach. 2 nd European Edition, Prentice Hall Financial Times. Pilotta, J. J. and Shultz, D. (2005) Simultaneous Media Experience and Synesthesia. Journal of Advertising Research. March, Ritson, M., Brodin, K. and Barwise, P. (2003) An Ethnographic Study of the TV Advertising Audience. EMAC Conference Proceedings, Glasgow. Robinson, H. and Ayling, J. (2004) The effect of television programme enjoyment and viewing duration on the attention levels of the viewer during the commercial break. EMAC Conference proceedings, Murcia. 6

7 Shavitt, S., Vargas, P., Lowrey, P. (2004) Exploring the role of memory for self selected ad experiences: are some advertising media better liked than others? Psychology and Marketing. 21, 12. Speck, P.S. and Elliot, M.T. (1997) Predictors of Advertising Avoidance in Print and Broadcast Media. Journal of Advertising. 26, 3, Speck, P.S., and Elliot, M.T. (1998) Consumer perceptions of advertising clutter and its impact across various media. Journal of Advertising Research. 38, 1. Svennevig, M. and Wynberg, R. (1986) Viewing is viewing is viewing or is it? A broader approach to television research. Admap. May Van Meurs, L. (1998) Zapp! A Study of Switching Behaviour During Commercial Breaks. Journal of Advertising Research. January/Febraury. Varkatas, D. and Ambler, T. (1999) How advertising works: What do we really know? Journal of Marketing 63, 26. White, R. (2005) Multi-media campaigns. Admap 462, June. 7