In a recent post Gaëlle Bodson made a clear statement of the relative pros and cons of the big three players in online advertising: Google Adwords, Facebook and LinkedIn. Three good examples of online interruptive/top-down advertising. Even more recently, the results from a Reuters/Ipsos survey throw some light on the efficiency of Facebook adcampaigns:
Four out of five Facebook Inc users have never bought a product or service as a result of advertising or comments on the social network site, a Reuters/Ipsos poll shows, the latest sign that much more needs to be done to turn its 900 million customer base into advertising dollars.
The fact that the social media giant – nearing 1 billion users – can only boast poor results in turns of advertising efficiency is ample reason for me to publish the following infographic.It comes from an article on the Wordstream blog where the Google Display Network is also compared with Facebook advertising, and presents the specifics very clearly. First step in understanding why it fails at keeping its advertising promises for the time being.
The preceding copyright is also a disclaimer – Wordstream is an Adwords partner – but the infographic cannot be suspected of any bias as it presents factual information.
For my #LIVErtising students – a simple reason for the failure of this type of advertising – in my humble opinion – can be found in what it actually is: interruptive advertising on a paid medium (what I consider type 1 among 3 types of online advertising) , copying traditional advertising online. Oh, by the way, this is background information to illustrate the course – no essential study stuff!