Spooning with Google…and what Binet & Field’s new study says about TV
After a series of well-documented disagreements, Thinkbox and Google have finally got together to assess the effectiveness of TV and online video – and how they can both support each other
A couple of weeks ago, Thinkbox was caught spooning with Google. Yes, after a year when we didn’t always see eye to eye, we found ourselves nuzzling the nape of the global tech behemoth’s downy neck as we whispered sweet somethings to each other. We complimented Google on the size of its algorithm; they flattered us with praise about TV’s reach and emotional engagement.
OK, it didn’t go that far, but we did join forces for the greater good to co-sponsor the latest piece of effectiveness work by Les Binet and Peter Field for the IPA – an analysis of the IPA’s incredible Databank of effectiveness case studies.
We launched the research to kick off the IPA’s inaugural Eff Week. It was a symbolic moment. One of our well-documented issues with Google – and others – has been the use of black box, self-produced research. But the IPA’s research is impartial and rigorously independent. It is a gloriously glass box and we both had to accept what Binet and Field discovered from their latest analysis – music to our ears or not. We both simply enabled them to do it.
So what did the Godfathers of Marketing Effectiveness™ find? Thankfully there was music for all ears to enjoy – as well as a couple of bum notes for the industry as a whole to resolve. Here’s a round-up of the key points:
Mass media are crucial
Binet and Field found that penetration – i.e. going after new customers – is three times more likely to be the main driver of growth and profit compared with customer loyalty and that the scale of the medium is the primary driver of effectiveness.
Video drives effectiveness
Emotional advertising, which Binet and Field have found to be the most effective approach, is uniquely suited to video (N.B. don’t forget that the majority of video is TV: 76% of video content viewed and 94% of video advertising viewed)
TV is the most effective advertising
In particular, the findings reveal the impact of TV. Investing in TV advertising increases a campaign’s effectiveness by 40%, making TV the most effective medium, according to Binet and Field.
TV is also the best for generating top-line growth that drives profit, with a 2.6% average market share point gained per year when using television advertising (marketing campaigns without TV achieve an average of 1.1%, so TV more than doubles market share growth).
TV is getting more effective
Between the years 1980-1996, adding TV to a campaign led to an average 12% increase in business effects. This increased to 40% during 2008-2016.
TV and online video are the dream team
Binet and Field said ‘work in synergy’ but it means the same thing. This is a key finding. One of the reasons why TV advertising has got more effective is due to video on demand and online video – like YouTube – working in synergy with live television. Binet and Field found a 54% increase in the average number of very large business effects from investing in television and online video together.
The danger of short-termism
A more worrying finding is that, although TV effectiveness is increasing, overall advertising effectiveness is declining. Binet and Field identified a number of reasons for this, central to which were an over-emphasis on chasing short term results and activation as opposed to long-term brand building activity. An urgent re-balancing is required.
These are the main findings from the first part of Binet and Field’s study (you can watch the launch event here). With three more instalments set for next year, there’s plenty more Google-spooning to come.
Lindsey Clay is the CEO of Thinkbox, the marketing body for commercial television in the UK