The Dark Ages of Data-Driven Advertising

This month when our team met to brainstorm blog topics, we reached the consensus that we should write about a current advertising campaign that we admire. However, when we went about looking for a campaign to highlight, it was slim pickens. Actually it was no-pickens, since we didn’t find anything we were inspired to write about. That said, what we did find may be even more interesting. Read on.

Data & Generative AI Advertising

I’m not sure the world of video advertising has ever changed as much or as quickly as it has in the past few years — big data now allows advertisers to gauge audience desires with laser-focused precision. Generative AI makes putting that data to work a sinch. But what’s missing is a fundamental understanding of what good ad storytelling is really meant to do — surprise, enthrall, delight, and engage in a way that makes audiences associate a feeling with a product or service.

Where once there were novel campaigns predicated on a deep understanding of audiences preferences, now there are data tools which don’t just suggest what audiences might respond to, but what audiences want. This is a crucial difference when compared to the “old ways” because where advertisers used to take risks on lofty novel concepts that could be surprising and therefore memorable, now the data can be used to identify what the audience wants to see. But what the audience wants to see isn’t necessarily what will move them most.

Advertising in the 80s & 90s

I doubt audience sentiment would have informed the creation of the Jolly Green Giant. There’s almost no way that audience data would have ever suggested that three frogs in a swamp saying “Bud-Weis-Errrr” could have become the biggest ad hit in recent history. Or that a bunch of dudes saying “Wasssssuuuuuup?!” would become a cultural phenomenon. I could go on. And on. And on.

Celebrities, Celebrities & More Celebrities

So what does the data say about today’s ads? Well, I can point you to many resources which will fill you in on what advertisers are seeing, but all you have to do to figure this out is look at the televised ads we’re getting and reverse engineer. Let me save you some time because I’ve already done that: what we’re getting is celebrities, celebrities, and even more celebrity cameos paired with a “whatever it takes” approach to making ad storytelling work to connect disparate, unrelated famous people that are joining together (for big bucks) to promote a product or service they probably don’t even use and may never even have heard of.

Basically it’s just absurdly connected plot points which rely on audience confusion to jump from celebrity to celebrity, grasping at the thinnest of connective tissues — like a game of 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon except that every celebrity is Kevin Bacon. 

Absurdity serves as an easy alternative to storytelling when creatives are asked to jam in celebrities, celebrities, and more celebrities — look how convoluted the Capital One Blimp Battle is. We can’t pretend Seal is an actual Seal is a motivated brand story. How many times have we seen “Matthew McConaughey be crazy”? Just go ahead and try to count the number of celebrity cameos in that one. And I can’t help but wonder how many dump trucks full of money Apple must have driven up to Pedro Pascal’s house to get him to dance around in a colorful no-plot wonderland studio backlot. Not my favorite Spike Jonze film but guarantee Spike got himself a nice sized cash dump truck delivery too. 

What Happened to the Risk Takers?

I’m not just cherry-picking: this really does describe almost every single ad that makes it to the small screen today. 

I don’t want you, dear reader, to get me wrong: these ads aren’t “capital-T” Terrible…well maybe the Apple one is…but I’d even go so far as to call the rest of them watchable. But what they truly aren’t is capitol-G Good! 

In the 1990s this wouldn’t have flown — creative directors would have been yelling “lazy!” at the top of their lungs. Today’s ads are safety first — no risk, limited reward but limited potential blow-back as well. Nobody’s getting fired here but also nobody’s getting even close to the creativity of the 1990s and data-first decision making is to blame. In short, advertising isn’t that fun because ad pros are staying between the margins of what the great cloud computer in the sky tells them is safe. Risk appetite has fallen to zero and that means mundanity rules the day. 

Shouting at the Clouds

Of course there will be a shift backwards — always is. In fact, the data suggests it’s already happening. But there’s a big lag between theory and practice, especially when risk appetite appears to be at an all time low. And while this whole article could read as a “man shouts at cloud” kinda deal, that’s a risk I’m willing to take since if even one person at WPP takes note (lofty goal, I know) maybe it means in the near-future I’ll get to see a commercial or two that actually work. 

If this blog post struck a cord, or if you’re into thinking about how your video marketing & advertising can earn more eyeballs simply by being more creative and interesting, feel free to drop a line to benjamin@metamer.io and of course check out our digital storefront at www.metamer.io.