Another seven days have passed, so it's time again for our weekly stats roundup.
Statistics include real-time marketing, the New York Times, Financial Times, showrooming, mobile commerce, and suspicious bot traffic.
For more digital marketing stats, check out our Internet Statistics Compendium.
Whilst the adoption of native advertising is a significant decision for publishers, advertisers also need to think carefully before adopting a content marketing strategy.
Done well, it can positively transform a brands reputation but, done badly, it can backfire and destroy credibility.
Before launching a native advertising campaign, brands must consider at least five different questions:
With native advertising the buzz phrase among marketers for 2014, London is poised to lead the way in innovation in what is one of the most creative digital ad formats to emerge in recent years.
In November AirBnB co-founder Nathan Blecharczyk claimed that London was ‘stuck in a Silicon Valley Roundabout’ and held back by its failure to produce a ‘billion dollar’ online business.
Many in London found the comments annoying. Phil Cooper, a digital veteran who launched the UK’s first video ad network and was until last year European MD of Brightroll, was one of them.
Cooper, who launched his latest digital venture six months ago, London based accommodation platform Kippsy.com, a competitor of AirBnB in the London market, believes that what London does best is innovation; taking an established model, technology or platform and turning it on its head.
Content marketing costs less than advertising, and more people engage with it.
It sounds like a revolution but actually there are some rather unkind hidden truths in all of this.
Much like the pigs at the end of Animal Farm, with the evil predecessor gone, what’s replaced it looks… very similar indeed.
Native advertisements should tell compelling narratives that are tailor-made to contextualize the brand for a particular audience in a way that makes the brand personally relevant to that audience.
When discussing (editorially) native advertising we focus too much on how integrative it is instead of how relevant it is.
Perhaps someday native advertising will mature into a viable alternative to traditional web advertising but today it creates more problems than answers.
The New York Times revealed a brand new website on 8 January 2014, replete with responsive design and native advertising.
As I mentioned in my article from earlier this week, native design: 12 examples of good and bad practice, it seems that with The New York Times adoption of sponsored content, 2014 will bring this marketing trend to larger, more mainstream publishing sites
Dell is the first company to take advantage of The New York Times new advertising model, with a six-figure, three month long deal. The deal also includes display ads as well as sponsored content.
Here’s a look at the current New York Times homepage.
Adjusted for inflation, the US newspaper industry is now generating roughly the same level of print ad revenue as it was in the 1950s.
The main difference is that back then they were on an upwards trajectory which lasted until the year 2000, when US newspapers’ ad revenue reached $60bn.
Since then, the mass adoption of the internet has seen digital advertising increasingly eat into print ad revenue. You’d be forgiven for thinking that advertising on newspapers’ websites would form a significant part of the overall digital ad spend, what with their high-quality content, pre-existing relationships with agencies and brands, and their well-established audience.
Yet only a small fraction of digital ad spend is going to newspaper publishers’ digital sites and despite US newspapers’ print ad sales more than halving to $19.5bn in 2012 since 2000, according to the Newspaper Association of America, their digital ad sales have only reached $3.4bn.
Part of the problem is that ads on newspaper sites just aren’t as effective as those of the world’s best known sites, like Facebook, Google and Twitter.
While many newspapers’ digital sites are still running standard ad formats, or worse, ads which annoy the consumer and intrude on their content browsing experience, many social media sites have instead deployed native formats, which sit within the digital content, and match the look and feel of the site.
You’re more likely to survive a plane crash than click a banner ad.
That’s my favourite stat of 2013, thanks to Solve Media.
Faith in traditional digital display advertising is fast decreasing, with many experts believing that banner ads just don’t work. 60% of consumers do not remember the last display ad they saw, according to Online Media Daily.
Display ads don’t work because we’ve become used to ignoring them. They used to be an annoyance; a creatively barren distraction, but now we’ve trained ourselves, almost subconsciously, to glance down a webpage and not even notice them.
Mobile banner ads are far more insidious and harder to ignore. According to GoldSpot Media, up to 50% of clicks on mobile ads are accidental.
So what’s the alternative?
I wrote an introduction to the world of native advertising last November in which I discuss the various merits or otherwise of this content driven approach to advertising.
Here I’ll be presenting examples of this much argued-over marketing trend, and trying to ascertain whether there is any good or bad practice to be gleaned from the more popular native ads hosted on publisher’s sites.
The rise of native advertising and content marketing have represented a fundamental shift in business model for many online publishers. Indeed, for some players such as Buzzfeed it’s been the main reason behind their success.
Having looked at the three main approaches to native advertising in my previous post, I now want to break it down and look specifically at what the medium means for publishers, where the opportunities are and what the potential pitfalls might be.
When done well, content marketing can be a win-win-win for publishers, advertisers and readers alike. Done poorly, however, the fallout can be significant and costly.