How do we solve advertising bombardment?

Jon Mew, CEO, IAB UK

“Optimedia reckons that in 1980 we got 300 commercial messages a week, from fairly predictable sources, the places you’d expect to find them. Now we get more than 3,000 and they can come from anywhere. Can we possibly absorb more than a fraction?” wondered Andrew Cracknell, then Executive Creative Director of Bates UK, writing for Campaign in 2002 [1]. His piece, ‘Drowning in ads’ was written over 20 years ago and is proof that advertising bombardment has long been an issue for the industry.

But what was unacceptable to Cracknell back in the early noughties is just a drop in the ocean compared to the volume of ads we come across today; in 2017, the average American saw up to 10,000 ads a day [2]. This jump – from 300 in 1980 to 3,000 in 2001 and then to 10,000 in 2017 – is part of what we mean when we say ‘bombardment’. But ad bombardment is difficult (if not impossible) to distil into a single, neat definition because it is highly subjective and dependent upon a number of variables. While we’re undeniably seeing more ads, our expectations and tolerance for them has also changed. And while volume is a key factor when it comes to bombardment, we can’t discount other factors such as the relationship someone has with a brand (a good relationship potentially makes advertising more welcome), the context in which it is served (both of the ad and the individual), the impact of entertaining creative…the list goes on.

However, what’s certain is that there is a strong link between feelings of bombardment and distrust in advertising. According to research by Credos [3], bombardment is the single largest driver of distrust in advertising and how we tackle this challenge will shape the health of our industry now and in future years.

In this piece, I’ll be considering the different facets of what constitutes bombardment via a predominantly digital lens. That’s not because bombardment is solely a digital problem (Credos’ own research has highlighted the cross-media nature of this issue) but it is undeniable that the rise of digital media has changed the shape and scope of the challenge. As the CEO of IAB UK – the industry body for digital advertising – I can speak to how digital has reconfigured our relationship with advertising, introduced unique challenges, and is now offering novel solutions to combat the problem.

Not just a question of volume

In 2019, Credos’ research [4] broke bombardment down into four components: excessive volume, repetition, obtrusiveness (when advertising interrupts what you’re doing), and irrelevance. All four factors threaten to ignore people’s boundaries, tip the scales from acceptable to bombardment, and damage the relationship with consumers that sits at the heart of effective advertising.

And it’s not just ads themselves that we need to consider. It’s also the way they impact the overall online experience. A page jam-packed with ads takes longer to load, making people more likely to abandon the content. IAB UK research shows that slow website load time is cited as the most annoying thing about being online by consumers [5], while 40% of people will reportedly abandon a website if it takes longer than three seconds to load [6]. A negative online experience will only add to consumers’ frustration with ad bombardment, while pages overloaded with ads also require more energy and therefore use more carbon – meaning that bombardment is undermining our industry’s sustainability efforts and the goal to hit net zero by 2030.

Another key issue that is laid specifically at the door of digital advertising – and one that arguably falls into all four categories outlined above – is that individual ads can follow users around the internet. When the amount of ad blockers in use increased by 7% in under a year between March 2015 and February 2016 [7], this became a well-worn and not wholly unfair argument among industry commentators. We’ve all experienced it: you spot something you want to buy and then find yourself trailed by ads for the product long after you’ve made the purchase. It’s repetitive, intrusive and ineffective all in one.

This doesn’t mean that advertisers should eschew personalisation out of hand; consumers do want to see relevant ads. According to IAB Europe, 75% of Europeans say they have benefited from relevant, targeted advertising and the same proportion would prefer to maintain an ad-funded internet – complete with targeting – than pay for access to online content [8]. Added to this, relevant advertising can boost attention scores by 107% [9].

However, treading on the right side of the line between welcome personalisation and intrusive bombardment is essential and requires advertisers to account for all four factors outlined by Credos’ 2019 study, not just volume of ads served. It’s not a straightforward case of ‘advertise less’, but instead, ‘advertise better’.

In practice, that requires a multi-pronged strategy: employing a holistic ‘full-funnel’ approach to targeting across channels; adhering to the ‘better ad formats’ [10] outlined by the Coalition for Better Ads that form a key part of the IAB UK Gold Standard [11]; employing frequency controls to ensure the same person isn’t overserved the same ads; and, ideally, using contextual insight to ensure an ad resonates within its environment.

What’s the sweet spot? 

When discussing ad bombardment, it’s not only important to consider when ‘relevant’ becomes ‘annoying’, but also to understand what the optimum frequency is to maximise ‘opportunities to see’ without straying into stalking.

As Natalie Lock, Account Director at Quantcast, says: “‘The rule of seven’ is one well-known piece of received industry wisdom that a person needs to see or hear your marketing message at least seven times before they take action. Whilst this narrow approach is too simplistic for a complex digital world, understanding what level is appropriate is vital when it comes to gaining consumer trust and, eventually, love.” [12]

The answer lies in identifying the right frequency range for the objective/s and working with research partners to pinpoint and target “the frequency sweet spot between bombardment and lack of impact”, according to Lock. Rather than a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution, achieving optimal frequency and avoiding ad bombardment requires a tailored approach based on vertical, brand and campaign objectives. Understanding and mastering this balance on a campaign-by-campaign level is key to resolving the cumulative issue of ad bombardment.

Beyond this, there are multiple other factors at play that contribute to whether someone feels bombarded by ads. So much comes down to each individual’s tolerance threshold for advertising. 52% of Gen Z say that they are receptive to online ads [13], while Americans are exposed to more advertising than BBC-weaned Britons [14] and therefore have different expectations.

However, there remains a huge range of subjective factors that feed into unpicking tolerance at an individual level. Background, environment, age, occupation, and the existing relationship that someone has with a brand all shape how they receive advertising and where the line lies between enough and too much. That is why smart, responsible, and privacy-safe use of data to achieve relevant targeting is so crucial when it comes to successful online advertising. It allows brands to reach the right people, in the right place, at the right time, and in the right way.

Is ad bombardment getting better? 

In 2019, the Advertising Association’s five-point plan to improve people’s trust in advertising spotlighted the fact that bombardment – across both offline and online channels – was the biggest driver of the public’s distrust in advertising. By 2021, an update of the Credos study [15] that underpinned the plan revealed that bombardment was still the most significant factor in fuelling distrust, despite trust in advertising improving since its low point in 2015.

While this clearly indicates that there is still work to be done when it comes to bombardment generally, it doesn’t provide digital-specific insight into how concerned consumers are by the issue. The subjective nature of what constitutes bombardment makes it difficult to answer this conclusively, but looking at ad blocking trends in the UK does give an indication of people’s sentiment towards digital advertising. A surge in ad blocking rates in 2015-2016 – partly driven by an increase in the availability of ad blocking technology – led to talk of an ‘ad-pocalypse’. This sparked a process of recalibration, bringing key players together to establish shared good practice standards around intrusive advertising. This includes the IAB Gold Standard, which was introduced in 2017 and incorporates tools to curb interruptive digital ads and improve people’s online experience as a key pillar of the criteria.

According to the most recent data, ad blocking rates have stabilised since 2016. While it would be a leap to interpret this as a direct result of people feeling less swamped with ads (just as it is a leap to directly attribute an increase in ad blocking to ad bombardment) creating positive ad experiences is essential to drive down the number of people utilising ad blockers.

So, what should the industry be doing?

We know that consumers respond negatively to excessive advertising and that, at a certain volume, it becomes ineffective, so tackling ad bombardment must be an ongoing, cross-industry priority. People will naturally seek out environments where they don’t feel bombarded and – whether on or offline – media channels must get the balance right in order to compete for audiences’ attention, as well as advertisers’ investment.

However, a catch-all solution to ad bombardment isn’t realistic. The nuances of what constitutes bombardment for different people, paired with the proliferation of ever-advancing ways to reach consumers, requires a suite of solutions encompassing frequency tools, respectful targeting, contextual awareness, and industry-agreed responsible formats.

Another factor that is key to reducing and improving digital ad bombardment is how advertisers measure digital display advertising. Historically, digital display advertising has been viewed as a bottom-of-the-funnel tool to encourage potential consumers to click, leading to a preoccupation with click-through rates as a measure of success. While this doesn’t relate exclusively to bombardment, an obsession with securing clicks can result in shouty creative, over-targeting and intrusive ad formats to cut through people’s shortening attention spans [16].

Yet, there is a growing awareness among our industry that digital advertising, in all its many forms, does have brand building capabilities and can drive long-term results [17]. By continuing to encourage marketers to embrace more advanced measurement strategies (a key focus for us at the IAB [18]), we can further shift the perception of digital as a short-term sales tool and, in doing so, undermine the ‘old-school’ tendency to corral people into clicks via intrusive and overzealous ads.

Keeping on top of the challenge

Staying on top of the bombardment challenge is particularly important given the structural changes within the digital ecosystem. The phasing out of third-party cookies and in-app identifiers is the single biggest shift that digital advertising has seen since its inception, providing an opportunity for advertisers to positively reset their relationship with consumers online. But that will only happen if all parts of the supply chain are informed and prepared for how replacement solutions can be used to reach relevant consumers in an efficient, effective and measured way. If not, we risk exacerbating bombardment via a ‘a spray and pray’ approach to targeting with no ability to effectively manage frequency.

It’s also essential that ad bombardment remains top of mind as new technologies are developed and go mainstream. For example, can AI help mitigate the issue by improving our frequency capping capabilities? And, with VR redrawing the advertising experience to be more immersive than ever, we now need to be especially careful of not breaching the barrier between acceptable and intrusive.

Against this shifting backdrop, what remains constant is our fundamental understanding of the core principles that constitute bombardment: volume, repetition, obtrusiveness, and irrelevance. It is essential that media plans are mindful of these factors and respectful of the consumer experience if we’re to maintain the viability of the ad-funded web. We know that the vast majority of people would rather access online content and services for free (with ads) than pay for them (without ads) [19], but if advertising oversteps the mark then it undermines the fundamental value exchange that sits at the heart of our industry. It’s imperative that tackling bombardment and adopting a consumer-first approach remains front and centre as technology matures and we gain yet more creative and innovative ways to speak to people.

References

[1] https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/campaign-essay-drowning-ads-andrew-cracknell-fears-consumers-bombarded-ads-first-piece-new-series-prominent-writers-will-air-issues-polarise-business/139271

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2017/08/25/finding-brand-success-in-the-digital-world/?sh=4922eb81626e

[3] https://adassoc.org.uk/our-work/new-credos-report-highlights-how-consumers-want-advertising-to-change/

[4] https://adassoc.org.uk/our-work/new-credos-report-highlights-how-consumers-want-advertising-to-change/

[5] https://www.iabuk.com/research/consumer-attitudes-towards-digital-advertising

[6] https://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2019/08/28/why-slow-website-killing-your-conversions

[7] https://www.iabuk.com/research/ad-blocking-2020

[8] https://iabeurope.eu/all-news/iab-europe-news/latest-research-shows-eu-citizens-understand-and-appreciate-the-ad-supported-internet/

[9] https://www.iabuk.com/research/rules-attention-five-ways-maximise-ad-attention-online

[10] https://www.betterads.org/standards/

[11] https://www.iabuk.com/goldstandard

[12] https://www.quantcast.com/blog/ad-bombardment-might-be-damaging-your-brand/

[13] https://www.thedrum.com/news/2019/09/11/gen-z-believe-they-are-the-most-receptive-online-ads-finds-adobe

[14] https://ipa.co.uk/knowledge/ipa-blog/how-many-ads-are-too-many-ads

[15] https://adassoc.org.uk/our-work/new-credos-research-trust/

[16] https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/are-attention-spans-really-collapsing-data-shows-uk-public-are-worried-but-also-see-benefits-from-technology

[17] https://www.marketingweek.com/digital-offline-marketer-brand-building/

[18] https://www.iabuk.com/measurement

[19] https://www.iabuk.com/research/consumer-attitudes-towards-digital-advertising

Jon Mew

Jon is CEO of IAB UK, the trade body for digital advertising. The IAB brings its members together – including advertisers, agencies, ad tech, and media owners – to facilitate industry collaboration, develop shared standards, and promote best practices.

Having headed up marketing at Orange, Jon joined IAB UK in 2008 as its first Head of Mobile. He went on to become Director of Mobile and Operations and Chief Operating Officer, before taking on the role of CEO in 2017.

A self-confessed tech lover, Jon often speaks about digital advertising at high-profile events and regularly writes for publications such as The Media Leader, Campaign, New Digital Age and PoliticsHome.