Don’t get me wrong, it's not that advertisers don’t see the appeal, especially with digital services ad spending likely to hit nearly $10 billion by 2027. But the money being spent belies the missed opportunity that persuasive and memorable creative advertising delivers.
As terrestrial radio nears its 100th birthday, we’re reminded that the ads in its early days were predominantly scripted by sponsors and read live by the on-air host. Fast-forward to today, when we see (or hear) that we’ve returned to those “thrilling days” of yesteryear when on-air hosts read what the in-house sales or marketing team has produced.
If this is the predominant technique, how do you ensure that your brand’s live read is differentiated from others the host is reading?
advertisement
advertisement
Furthermore, there’s a marketing mindset that whatever is communicated on audio channels is “good enough.” The belief is that the media buy is much more important than the actual ad. It’s been a reality for years in the agency world that when a radio assignment comes up, it’s handed to the “C” team.
There is so much more to be gained through a produced piece of creative that a stiff script cannot deliver. Just as the ad industry saw the potential in producing memorable ads for a growing radio audience back in the day, why wouldn’t it see the same value in creating strong, produced spots for these transformational media outlets?
Produced spots deliver a clear and more refined reflection of brands/products. There is also a higher level of polish and professional quality, which has been proven to generate higher degrees of engagement with the listener and better recall vs. a live read. And once produced, that spot can run on any number of platforms with the same consistent sound and feel.
What is it that brands and agencies aren’t seeing or hearing?
While it’s true that audio lacks the visual/sex appeal of video, the power of the content on audio platforms, and hence the ads that run on them, is the ability to tap into the theater of the mind among listeners. Great advertising has always flourished when it’s directed at this most immersive of media form
This truly is the golden age of radio, or more accurately, audio. The Spotifys and streaming services of the world show no signs of slowing down. It’s mind-boggling marketers are failing to take advantage of the true power and potential of the spoken-word medium.
Marketers are clearly not turning a deaf ear to podcasts and the like, but with billions of dollars being pushed in the audio arena, you’d think they’d crank up creativity with their sound investment.
What needs to be said is that great audio is a particular talent and takes some work to create theatre of the mind but once achieved is likely more powerful than video.
There are many reasons why national advertisers have largely abandoned radio---but that's another story.
One of the reasons many advertisers pay extra to have radio personalities on talk radio and all-sports radio, in particular --as well as podcasts-- do their commercials is that, as a rule, the core listener base has bonded with said personality and research indicates that because of this the response to the ad meessage is greater than to an average and obviously "canned" spiel.
Another reason why there is a preference for personality -driven commercials is that advertisers rarely pre-test "produced" radio ad messages or monitor their selling prowess after usage and, consequently they have no body of evidence to guide them about such commercials. However it's not true that the media buy is considered to be more important than "the creative". It's just that radio creative is not the big deal that TV "creative" is---so, as you say, it's often relegated to underlings. However those underlings don't just write whatever they want--there is an approval chain, eventually involving the client, that must be follwed.