Is TV Advertising Less Effective Than Radio? The RAB Says Yes
February 21, 2013 at 4:01 AM (PT)
THE RADIO ADVERTISING BUREAU (RAB) has taken aim at TV in a study showing a lack of effectiveness for spots that ran during the recent SUPER BOWL. Wrote the RAB, "Despite unprecedented hype around television ads that ran during this year's Big Game, many viewers said they didn't watch them -- and even when they did, consumer recall of brands advertising during the game was uniformly low."
The study was conducted by NIELSEN ENTERTAINMENT for the RAB.
Although the game brings out the advertising industry's best commercials, the results of the study show the limitations of television ads in selling products and highlight the fact that sight, sound and motion can distract from advertisers’ basic messages -- in contrast to radio, where the audio message is more direct and personal and is not obscured by video or picture.
THE RAB noted, "For example, of half the ads tested, recall of the types of products being advertised was below 10% among viewers of the game. More importantly, when asked to name the brand of the product being advertised on an unaided basis, most viewers could not link the brand to the ad, even for the ads that had higher recall themselves. As with recall of the product category, for most ads, brand recall was in the single digits. The ads not only generated low brand recall, but also had little impact on viewers’ perceptions of the brands."
The study also found that only 15% of game viewers said they later looked for the ads or related content online; only 9% posted, tweeted, or shared links about the ads; and as few as 7% claimed that they actually looked for more information online about the advertised products or brands.
Companies paid an average of $4 million for a 30-second spot during the SUPER BOWL, played SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 3rd, 2013 between the BALTIMORE RAVENS and the SAN FRANCISCO 49ers.
THE RAB boasted, "Radio works hard to register a marketer’s message at a fraction of the cost."