Today JupiterResearch announced that viral marketing campaigns have proved to be ineffective for advertisers. Only 15% of viral campaigns in the past year achieved the goal of prompting consumers to promote the marketer's message.
Les Luchter, announcing the study findings at MediaPost.com writes:
Social networking sites have definite pitfalls associated with them, explained David Schatsky, president, JupiterResearch. "While these sites may appear to be the most effective manner of delivering a message regardless of brand appropriateness," he said, "by failing to truly understand the audience, viral marketers stand to alienate as many consumers as they interest.
This is just one of a growing number of studies that prove that many of the ad dollars pouring into new media are being wasted. Too many companies are falling for the allure of on-line and viral marketing, diverting old media dollars to new media.
As it turns out, pulling those dollars from old media increases the risk that a campaign will fail. For a campaign to work, new media need old media more than old media need new. A few months back Nielsen's BuzzMetric showed that on-line buzz is directly related to ad spending in traditional media. Those companies with heavy traditional ad budgets created much more on-line buzz than those without traditional advertising.
Each new medium alters the marketplace, but no new medium has ultimately hurt let alone killed the media that preceded it. Radio station operators (and the Chicken Littles who supposedly serve radio) need to realize this and start capitalizing on the new opportunities that new media have created for it.
Comments