OOH and mobile: where will the permission line be drawn?

When people talk about ‘interruptive advertising’, out-of-home and mobile is the most interruptive of them all, says The Media Native. It disrupts our flow when we’re on a journey and could easily become the equivalent of bad online display; constantly bombarding us with pop-ups and click-throughs. A marriage made in heaven? Perhaps…but it could also lead to a cycle of disillusion if brands fail to make it work for consumers.

I have been itching to comment about the potential marriage of the decade, following MediaTel’s recent focus on the union between out-of-home and mobile. This could indeed be a marriage made in heaven but, like many such fairytale romances, it could also lead to a cycle of disillusion, bitterness and divorce if brands don’t use it wisely.

‘The year of the mobile’ has been looming over us for at least a decade now, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest it may finally be upon us. Smartphone penetration is growing rapidly, connectivity is improving and usage levels are encouragingly high; for social media at least.

Surely, if ever mobile was going to cement its place as an efficient and effective marketing channel, now should be the time.

After all, we cherish our mobile devices like children. (Although I was dumbfounded by the assertion that smartphones constitute “4% of our natural selves”! Can we please get over these ridiculous pseudo-scientific claims? If we’re not careful, somebody will be saying that if Facebook was a country, it would be bigger than India…).

We naturally engage with pretty much anything mobile decides to show us and I think apps have been a great enabler in shaping a more user-centric environment. And, of course, they know where we are; even when we don’t!

Used in the right way, mobile devices could become a fantastic gateway into consumers’ lives, providing value in the forms of entertainment, communication, information and – most mouth-wateringly of all – pathways to purchase. If brands use this exciting new platform sensitively and creatively, the returns could be phenomenal.

Not only that, but outdoor is changing too, especially through digital outdoor and connectivity. It increasingly offers the prospect of enabling content to ‘jump’ from poster sites to mobile devices, which can literally influence the pathways to purchase (offering location-specific and context-sensitive promotional offers) as well as offering other creative media opportunities; real-world gamification and social media spring to mind.

So, I fully agree with Starcom MediaVest Group’s Steve Smith when he says that more brands need to accommodate mobile into their marketing strategy. The impending union between mobile and outdoor should make that even more of a priority.

In principle, the power to connect to consumers as they go about their daily lives outside the home could be outdoor’s equivalent of multi-screening. However, despite reading the conference reports in full, I’m still struggling to come to terms with what it will eventually produce.

Yes, I can see a real opportunity for retailers – as well as the brands they stock, as part of an extended point-of-sale promotion. I can see some context and location-sensitive marketing transferring quite well from a poster to a mobile. I know several games manufacturers are exploring the possibilities of migrating off the screen and into peoples’ real lives – and brands can play a huge part in this ‘gamification’ of the world around us.

Price promotions, competitions, loyalty schemes and brand experiences could all become more intuitive and therefore effective. But therein lies the real challenge for the outdoor industry and the mobile platform.

During the MediaTel conference debate, Ray Snoddy asked about data privacy concerns but was waved away with barely an acknowledgement that this could represent a huge challenge. The implication appears to be that consumers will have the right to opt out, but few will take it as the benefits will be so great.

However, such concerns are most definitely shared by regulators in Europe and America, and I would argue that insensitive or overwhelming ‘push’ marketing from outdoor to mobile could escalate such concerns dramatically.

In particular, the emotional bond we have with our mobile devices, coupled with the potential ubiquity of marketing communications arriving unannounced or unbidden onto our mobile devices could make current concerns look positively anaemic by comparison.

And yet, to make the marriage of outdoor and mobile work as well as its proponents suggest it can requires a massive amount of data. Indeed, data was possibly the biggest source of excitement for the panellists at the MediaTel session.

Stewart Easterbrook of Starcom MediaVest Group stated: “This is all about data. There’s enough data to change things. We live in a world where we should always know,” while Shaun Gregory, global ad director at Telefónica, said: “Data now allows you to deliver the right message at the right time. It makes for an exciting future.”

So, data is key to making this marriage work but there needs to be lots of it, and cleverly managed. Notwithstanding the relative failure of big data so far to transform into smart data, could this be a step too far?

Will a surfeit of messages, offers and promotions actually turn consumers off? And will a channel that requires massive amounts of data be stymied by the requirement to make it opt-in by cautious and sceptical regulators? Because this might be the point at which the permission line is both drawn (by regulators) and then withdrawn (by consumers).

I really hope that this particular marriage does survive the early challenges that any union must face and can find a way to provide real added value for consumers. But I also fear it could easily become the outdoor/mobile version of online display, constantly bombarding us with pop-ups and click-throughs that end up making the ‘ping’ of the inbox into a source of irritation.

To me, when people talk about ‘interruptive advertising’, this is the most interruptive of them all – grabbing our attention and disrupting our flow when we are on a journey.

With online display, that journey was simply via the screen. In a real-life journey, interrupted on a device we see as a part of ourselves (even if it is only 4%), then the line in the sand may well have been crossed and permission may well be withdrawn.