Commentary
It's Not Just Age; ¾ of Americans Have Found TV Commercials Confusing
- by Jack Loechner , Staff Writer @mp_research, October 8, 2010
According to a recent study from the Council for Research Excellence, reported by Marketing Charts, TV advertising and program promotions reach 85% of adults daily. Viewers typically see 26 advertising or promotional breaks, at an average of two minutes and 46 seconds per break, accounting for 73 minutes each day.
But, the findings of a new Harris Poll show that 75% of Americans have found a commercial on TV confusing. 21% often find commercials on television confusing, while 55% say that TV commercials are not very often confusing. Just 14% say they never find commercials on television confusing, and 11% do not watch commercials on TV.
Age plays a small role in how confusing these commercials appear to people:
- 29% of people 55 years or older say they often find the commercials on television confusing
- 17% of those 45-54 year old often find commercials confusing
- 18% of those 18 - 34 years old often find commercials confusing
- 13% of those 35- 44 often find commercials confusing
- 10% of those 55 and older are less likely to say they never find commercials confusing
- 13% are more likely to say they do not watch commercials on television
Looking at levels of confusion by education there still is not much of a difference, says the report, 75% of those who have an education level of high school or less, 75% of those who have some college education, and 76% of those who have a college degree or post graduate education say they have found commercials on TV to be confusing. And, 21% with an education level of high school or less, 22% of those who have completed some college, and 19% of college graduates often find commercials on television to be confusing.
Confusion Frequency While Watching Commercials on Television (% of All U.S. adults) | ||||||||
| Age | Education | ||||||
| Total | 18-34 | 35-44 | 45-54 | 55+ | HS or less | Some college | College grad+ |
Watch commercials on TV (NET) | 89% | 90 | 90 | 90 | 87 | 88 | 90 | 91 |
Ever find commercials on TV confusing (NET) | 75 | 75 | 75 | 74 | 77 | 75 | 76 | 76 |
Often find commercials on TV confusing (NET) | 21 | 18 | 13 | 17 | 29 | 21 | 22 | 19 |
Very often | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 3 |
Somewhat often | 16 | 16 | 11 | 14 | 20 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
Not very often | 55 | 57 | 62 | 57 | 48 | 54 | 54 | 57 |
Never | 14 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 10 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
Does not watch commercials on TV | 11 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 13 | 12 | 10 | 9 |
Source: Harris Interactive, September 2010 (Percentages rounded | ||||||||
And the autor of the report concludes that, while commercials are supposed to be somewhat clear, they can be both entertaining and informative as well. But, a commercial's main focus needs to be selling a product or service. If consumers watching these commercials are unsure of that main focus, the marketers are doing something wrong. If the ad is confusing, the prospective consumer may dismiss that product from consideration.
For additional information about the Harris Poll, please visit here.
Jack Loechner is the Editor of The Center for Media Research's daily Research Brief. You can reach him at jack@mediapost.com.
I love this.
I think what I love most about it is the irony. Here we are in the post-millennium, with a zillion channels of communication and ads being beamed into our brains and everyone arguing about context and location and behavioral targeting and so on ... And what these guys are suggesting is that the net result of all this disruption and leveraging is inevitably to return us to the 1870s, when newspaper ads read like: "Ponds Soap - It is truly the best soap for face and hands!"
I have a feeling that the 21% who report being confused often by TV commercials are probably frequently confused about many aspects of life.
Asking people if something has "ever" happened to them is worthless. Asking them "how often" is infinitely better. Notice the "very often" responses were only 4 percent, but the headline screams "75%" (3/4) to bait a response. That's what happens when you let journalists attempt to understand numbers....
Could the ad industry possibly ever believe that some ads they create are just plain bad? Many of my colleagues and I bemoan the fact that this is so. A big beef is that the creative in ads seems to fall back on some kind of sports motif, when most consumers are women. Many women's juices do not begin flowing when they see a boxing, football or basketball themed ad. I figure there are too many male decision makers sitting around the boardroom patting each other on the back for these imbecilic ads. The ads aren't confusing, they're just not interesting.
I think 100% of us find some commercials confusing, if we're honest. I once did some in-house training on advertising and marketing to non-marketing professionals -- all of them young and very bright college grads. I played a pod of commercials I had videotaped (this was more than 20 years ago). Immediately after I played 6 or 7 commercials, even though the trainees were fully focused on what they were watching, they couldn't name the brands for most of the commercials. In the majority of cases, they couldn't even tell me what was type of product was being sold.
If I were selling Pond's Soap, I think 12 words, with the word "soap" in there twice, sounds like a decent idea in comparison.
Spot on, and the number of confusing executions only seems to be growing.
As an industry, we seem to be so focused on debating media platforms...online, offline; inbound, outbound. We also continue to pursue the newest and latest production techniques in hopes of appearing “edgy” and different. However what we really should be more focused on, as this piece alludes, is the messaging. Be interesting? You bet. Use technology where it makes sense? Of course. But first things first….be obvious in what you want people to learn and respond to. Because without understanding, there is no need for any of the other things such as novel production techniques, trendy media selection, big budgets, user segmentation, etc…none of that will matter because comprehension, let alone interest, won’t be a problem. There won’t be any.
Ever wonder why we tend to snicker a bit when we look at ads from a few decades or so back? Bad acting? Made up characters? Perhaps these are ingredients, but I think our collective chuckle is more due the fact that they were so painfully obvious in what the consumer was to take away. So over time, we’ve fooled ourselves into thinking that this approach was mindlessly off and that it was better to be much more obtuse in approach. I guess the thinking was you don’t want to look like you’re selling them something when what you’re really trying to do is, well, sell them something. Sadly, today it's become much more weighted to someone’s conception of art….and many times by someone who isn’t particularly artistic. More important though, is that this energy shift comes at the expense of function often times.
Yet, there are still many brands that while they will never win a creative award as judged by artful creative’s, they nevertheless somehow manage to succeed. How does Snuggie sell $60 million of those things with the creative they employ? Why, their stuff looks like what Lucy and Ricky used to do when live pitching Westinghouse kitchen products. Or even more astonishing, how does that attorney generals nightmare, Kevin Trudeau, sell books on subjects he has absolutely no expertise in? His production looks like a bad porn movie. The answer is that they both make it easy to understand what you get, why you need it and just how great a value it all is.
If commercials were indeed pieces of artwork, the Snuggie and Trudeau stuff would never hang from my walls. But ads aren’t artwork….they’re ads. Pieces of interesting communication that the people we target are supposed to be able glean some relevant information from in making decisions and which is also easily comprehendible.
At least that’s what that Ogilvy guy used to say. But then again, that was from the dark past when we didn’t know any better.
Not only commercials do their bit in confusing the viewers but do take the high degree of responsibility in decline of viewership numbers. According to <a href=http://www.vc-india.com>online market research</a> company Visha Consultants in India, viewership has increased at the time of no-commercial break programs as comparison to high profile programs with more than half of the telecast time spent on commercials.