Misdirected Money

Advertising confuses me.

Take drugs. (I guess you can read that sentence two ways.) I would never think to "ask [my] doctor" about some drug which was the subject of a 30 second TV spot. Especially since I often am not sure that the spot was actually for a drug. And almost all of the time, I don't know what the drug is for. "Doc. Here's a list of TV ads that I think are for drugs. I don't know what they are for; but, could you check me out see if I can take any of these? Please, please?"

Actually, Viagra and Cialis are exceptions to this. Few men would have gone to their doctor seven or eight years ago and raised the subject of erectile dysfunction. Physicians didn't have the "disorder" high on their screening radar. The drug companies had to create a demand for a product that no one admitted to needing. Consumer advertising made sense. (While on the subject of male enhancement - isn't that a great phrase - the ad agency that turned the legal disclaimer into advertising gold, should get a lifetime achievement award. "If your erection lasts more than four hours, see your doctor immediately." Insert your own jokes here.)

I suppose I'm wrong about drug ads in general. The ads keep coming at a cost of tens of millions of dollars a year. They must work. Physicians must long for the simple days of "detail men (now pretty women)" with their pens, scratch pads and free staff lunches.

Now BASF. What's up with that. Raise your hand if you ever bought anything because it contained a BASF product. No hands. Purchasing Agents - when was the last time you poured over the BASF catalogue the morning after seeing one of its commercials? Hands?

McDonalds. I understand advertising Happy Meals and Ronald McDonald to kids. There is a valuable whine factor created. But McDonalds spends millions on, for wont of a better phrase, presence advertising. I know it's there. I'd be much more likely to respond to advertising that trumpeted that McDonalds' food now tasted good. I guess they can't do that without violating truth in advertising laws.

The Internet. I have three or four programs running on my computer that fight pop-ups, -overs and -unders. Are you like me and have subconsciously learned to scan a web page without actually seeing the ads? When using Google to shop, I almost never click on one of the blue results. For some reason, I'll click on the real result for the same site that usually is there, or just enter the URL for the advertising site. I think it's because I feel guilty for costing the company money when I am only window shopping.

I suspect that a lot of advertising spending is done on if "it ain't broke, don't fix it" and "we have money in the budget" bases. What would happen if we didn't advertise? CEO's get fired for cooking books, not spending ad dollars.

Finally, Tivo. Proof that God loves us and one big reason that advertising will change rapidly in the near future. In the past three or so years that I've had Tivo I've watched almost no TV advertising. Did you know that there is a rythmn to fast forwarding? I can half watch the commercials speed by and pick up visual cues that the program is about to come back on. I'm usually within a few seconds of the restart of the show. I shouldn't have written that since the channels will change their rythmns to fool me more often. I'm kidding guys. I can't really do that.