Authenticity vs Efficiency
Traditionally, when a marketer talked about the audience, they meant somebody else’s audience, gathered there to watch or read something else. The marketer would craft a message to that group of people already knowing something about them. If the audience is at a baseball game, the marketer can assume the audience likes baseball. With this comes opportunities for the brand to bond with that audience. We like baseball. This shared attitude promotes authenticity.
Sometimes the relationship between the marketer and publisher is in itself enough to promote authenticity. A Gucci ad in Vogue magazine helps sustain the authenticity of both the marketer and the publisher. We like fashion is an attitude they both share with the reader. People who go to baseball games or read Vogue magazine are opting-in to be part of those audiences; this opt-in can be extremely valuable because it is the only information marketers can use to deliver relevant advertising that is understood by the individual. This opt-in is also critical for individuals to understand their involvement in the value exchange.
The content of the advertisement doesn’t always have to be directly relevant for an ad to be seen as authentic. Authenticity is created when the audience understands that the marketer supports the same things they do. This is completely broken when the individual doesn’t understand why they are seeing the ad that they see. This is the primary experience in digital. In the age of programmatic, authenticity is often thrown out the window in favor of efficiency.
Today, when a programmatic marketer talks about the audience, they mean the target audience that they wish to reach. The true efficiency of programmatic advertising lies within a marketers ability to reach their own audience that they define. This allows the marketer to “eliminate the waste” and exclusively target users that fall exactly into their target audience. This certainly makes the ad spend more efficient, but it also means that the individual has become completely disconnected from the reason they are seeing that ad! This makes the user feel commoditized and not part of the consideration for what ad was shown. The targeting may have been executed perfectly, but the user is not aware of the targeting techniques unless it is based on information they have provided and thus no longer part of the value exchange.
Although ad targeting has become significantly more sophisticated for the marketer, internet users are having experiences that suggest the opposite. It seems silly to advertise the same pair of shoes to someone who already bought them, or distract someone with cheap flights to New York when they are really looking to go to Seattle. In a world where success is measured by “How many people clicked on the ad?” did anyone stop and wonder “how many people did this ad annoy?”. The increased usage of ad blockers shows that perhaps more people were annoyed than clicking.
In the eternal quest to maximize efficiency, it is important that marketers stay authentic to their audiences by allowing individuals to understand why they are seeing the ads that they are seeing. Individuals feel disconnected and commoditized when they are not given the opportunity to self identify. It is better to have an imperfect audience of empowered individuals who are open to your message than a “perfect” audience that is disenfranchised and uninterested.
Digital environments introduce many more opportunities to involve users in the value exchange, it’s time that we recognize the importance of innovating in this category.
