socially enabled advertising research patrick xu

Socially Enabled TelevisionPrepared for: Dr. Helen Katz, SVP Research Director, SMG. Prepared by: Priyanka Bose, Cloris Tong, Rob Watson, and Patrick Xu December 9, 2014 !!

!1

STARCOM MEDIAVEST GROUP

!EXECUTIVE SUMMARY !Thanks to social media, watching TV in American homes has become an interactive experience. People interact with each other on multiple social networking sites while watching their favorite shows, creating and sharing their own show related content in ways that were never before possible.

Socially enabled TV advertising seeks to engage consumers in the same way, using social media to interact with them on a personal and more relevant level. However, Starcom Media Group wanted to learn more about how audiences respond to such advertising, so our class conducted a qualitative research study in which we conducted 13 interviews with a wide range of informants who watch TV with a second device in hand to discover how they feel about social enabled TV advertising.

We then hand-coded each interview and came up with several findings, from which we developed a number of implications and recommendations for advertisers to use when developing socially enabled TV advertising campaigns in the future.

!Key Findings:

• People rarely notice social media in commercials

• Socially enabled TV ads need to be simple and clear

• People of all ages are concerned about privacy

• Personal relevance and incentives are key to making a successful ad

• Age group influences levels of participation

!

!2


!TABLE OF CONTENTS !Introduction 4

Methodology 8

Findings 9

Implications and Recommendations 14

Limitations and Future Research 15

Appendix 1-4: Socially Enabled Advertising Examples 16

Appendix 5: Interview Questions 20

Appendix 6: Informant Bios 23

Appendix 7: Informant TV and Social Media Usage 26

Appendix 8: Informant Reaction to Ads 28

References 31

!!!!

!3


!INTRODUCTION !!Not so many years ago, families would sit together in the living room, watch the same television show, and talk about it amongst each other. If the show was particularly exciting and popular, the discussion might extend to the water cooler at work or the playground at school the following morning. But now, things are a little different. Thanks to social media networks, watching television has become an activity that heavily involves online communities and people across the world interacting in real time as they watch their shows through their various devices. In fact, according to a 2012 report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project entitled “The Rise of the Connected Viewer”, 52% of all cell phone owners actively use their cell phones while watching TV. The numbers have continued to increase over the past two years, and this new phenomenon of interpersonal interaction via social media is commonly referred to as socially enabled TV.

!4


(Twitter Advertising Blog,TV x Twitter: New Findings for Advertisers and Networks)

What does this mean for advertisers? According to a Nielsen Social Guide report analyzing Twitter data pulled from 59 broadcast and cable programs, only 30% of TV tweets are sent during commercial breaks. In fact, the heaviest Twitter activity appears to happen during real-time programming minutes (Crupi, 2013). Another study has found that Twitter users are 8% less likely to change the channel during ad breaks than TV viewers who are not multitasking and also have a higher ad recall (53%) compared to people fully focused on the TV (40%). !In addition, a 2013 IPG Media Lab study found that 60% of TV viewers look at second devices during TV ad breaks, and viewers switch their attention between screens an average of 27 times per hour. In fact, another study researching how frequently US smartphone users used their phones to search for brands after being exposed to offline advertising found that TV advertising is still more effective than other forms of offline advertising to reach out to consumers. Judging from the evidence, there seems to be room for advertisers to engage with people using social media in new ways during commercial breaks. !

!5


!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(SMG Source, Twitter, SMG Release First Results from Social TV Lab) !User Generated Content

User Generated Content (UGC) is another phenomenon of the social media era that has changed the way people engage with the media they consume. In addition to those who post original video content such as tutorials and instruction videos, there are many people who post reviews of products, react to television shows with videos, memes (popular images and/or quotes that spread quickly through the Internet) and original photographs on platforms such as Youtube, Instagram, and Vine. Hashtags allow social media users to share their creations and gain visibility with an audience who share the same interests, as well as engage with brands in new ways.

Uses and Gratifications

Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch’s (1974) seminal article on Uses and Gratifications states that audiences actively consume mass media rather than passively viewing. Katz et. al also state that much of mass media “can be derived from data supplied by individual audience members

!6


[and that] people are sufficiently self-aware to be able to report their interests and motives in particular cases, or at least to recognize them when confronted with them in an intelligible and familiar verbal formulation” (p. 511). In other words, people actively respond to and engage with media that relates to their interests.

!What kind of insights can advertisers gain from this data? The 30-second TV commercial has traditionally been a passive, one way communication tool. However, the advent of social media has made it possible to instead create ad campaigns that are more like interactive narratives that actively encourage consumers to engage and directly respond to brand messages using their second devices instead of simply sitting in front of the television and receiving them as passive viewers. And in fact, research shows that people using smartphones and social media are more likely to remember ads than those who are fully focused on the television—however, how open are these audiences really to interactive advertising? !!Research Questions We already know that people like to talk about their favorite shows on social media, but we wanted to know more about how they would respond to new forms of socially enabled advertising that would encourage them to interact with brands in the same way. To gain insight into how consumers feel about socially enabled TV advertising, we decided to look into the following questions:

1. What do audiences know or think about socially enabled TV advertising?

2. Do they notice/attend/like these sorts of advertising, and why?

3. Do they find these types of ads authentic, novel, intrusive?

4. Do they think this is a fad or long-lasting?

5. How likely are they - or someone they know - to participate in these sorts of things?

!7


!METHODOLOGY

Advertising 582, Qualitative Research Methods in Advertising, from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign met with Dr. Helen Katz for an introduction to socially enabled advertising. The class was tasked with providing primary research to Starcom MediaVest Group regarding consumer perspectives on socially enabled advertising. All thirteen students in the course completed University IRB ethics training to become “certified” investigators.

Professor Nelson solicited all campus faculty, staff, and students to participate in this study via the university’s E-Week, a weekly digital newsletter. Those interested in participating had to meet the requirements that they watch TV and use a smartphone or other mobile device at the same time, and had to be between the ages of 18-64. Professor Nelson gathered the names of interested parties and assigned them to students in the class who completed in-depth interviews with the selected informants.

The students each completed the 30-minute interviews, during which informants were asked about their TV viewing and social media habits before being shown 4 examples of socially enabled TV advertising (Appendix 1-4) and asking them their opinions and recommendations on the ads and the future of similar advertising (Appendix 5). The interviews were conducted following the guidelines for conducting interviews as outlined by Danny Jorgensen in his article “Observing and Gathering Information”. Finally, everyone transcribed their own interviews and shared them with the class. A brief description of each informant can be found in Appendix 6.

Our group read each interview through one time and conducted an pre-coding to gain an understanding of participants tones, thoughts, and initial reactions to content. The second time reading the interviews we did the initial coding where we identified and marked key comments, phrases and ideas. Focused Coding helped to refine findings into clearer categories and provided ideas for further research.

!!

!8


FINDINGS !Social Media Usage

Our research found several interesting insights regarding the social media habits and attitudes informants have toward various social media networks. Facebook (10 out of 13), and Twitter (5 out of 13) are the most popular networks among the informants, although several showed an awareness of Instagram as well as some other newer networks (Yik Yak, Snapchat) but did not say they were active users. Further specific details on informant social media and TV usage can be found in Appendix 7.

Content and subject matter determine which networks informants tend to gravitate towards. Many of them reported that they differentiate between social media networks when deciding what kind of content they want to share. For example, while Instagram is frequently used to share pictures of fashion and food, informants tend toward Facebook when they want to share the details of their day-to-day life. In addition, although a vast majority of informants use Facebook on a regular basis, when asked about which networks are beginning to decline in popularity, several mentioned Facebook.

Several informants mentioned that they prefer Twitter when sharing content related to TV, because it makes them feel like part of a community that shares the same interests and it is easy to find other relevant content they are interested in, often mentioning the prevalence of Twitter hashtags.

In fact, the term hashtag has become synonymous with social media posting. It is frequently and easily identified as a tie-in to social media content. When viewing the four socially enabled ads, most informants reported noticing the hashtags themselves, but few remembered or even realized what the actual topic was.

!

!9


Capturing Audience Attention

Although it has been several months since socially enabled ads have started to enter the media landscape, it is not yet clear how effective they are. A key finding of this research is that informants rarely noticed social media used in the commercials.

They were not surprised by the presence of social media content within the ads, but registering a reaction depended on if they even noticed it in the first place. Case in point: when one informant was asked about the use of social media in the commercials, he responded "They said Twitter or Instagram, pictures of your dogs, yeah [referring to the Pedigree ad]... I didn't notice any other three [commercials].”

Several other informants responded in similar ways, mentioning that they had focused on other attributes of the ads rather than paying attention to the social media aspects. The Honda ad, for example, was popular among many informants, who mentioned that they liked it because of the technology, product innovation, and futuristic elements—not because they had the ability to engage with it through social media.

!!!!!!!!!!

!10


Why Isn’t Socially Enabled TV Advertising Being Noticed?

Limitations for Engagement

If the ad execution is too distracting or unclear, the audience will not pay attention to or even understand the advertising message, let alone understand how to socially interact with the brand. For example, many informants focused on and remembered the hamster from the Sprint ad, but could not recall the brand name, the product, or which social network to use, because they were too distracted by the process of trying to figure out the actual narrative of the ad.

The Crystal Light ad also suffered from a lack of clarity— even though most informants noticed the #tinywin hashtag, they were confused by the call to action and could not connect the message to the brand itself and reported disliking the ad as a result. On the other hand, the Pedigree commercial was well-

liked by many, but many informants were confused by who Giggy was and what it had to do with the Pedigree brand.

!Privacy

Because socially enabled advertising is so new, there are a number of unknowns which consumers will help identify. One such unknown which informants stated would restrict their willingness to engage with the ad is privacy concerns. It is the biggest issue according to the informants, regardless of gender, age or race.

Detailed overall informant reactions to all 4 ads can be found in Appendix 8.

!11


Small Logos

The other reason is that the social network logos within the ads are too small, or in a color which is so blended the environment that cannot be noticed easily. For example, few informants paid attention to Vine in the Honda ad. Even after a second viewing, several informants had difficulty differentiating the social media content from the background and also felt that the Vine logo and account names were not on screen long enough to read.

!!How Advertisers Can Make Socially Enabled Advertising Work

Personal Relevance !A key factor influencing audience attention is perceived personal relevance to the brand or product. Several informants mentioned that even if the ad is engaging and interesting, if they are not already interested in the brand or do not have a prior relationship with it, it is highly unlikely that they would participate in a socially engaged TV ad. For instance, two informants were uninterested by the Honda commercial—one because he already owned a Honda, and the other because she had already seen too many car commercials and was uninterested in watching another one, regardless of how interesting it was. !Another informant mentioned that even though she was not currently interested in the Sprint ad because she was not in the market for a phone, if she were to see such an ad in the future, it would pique her interest because of the personal connection and potentially put Sprint at the top of her consideration set when the time comes to buy a new one. The solution to this may be highly targeted media buying, to ensure that socially enabled ads air when they are relevant to the highest number of audiences. !

!12


Factors Influencing Participation

Incentives !Another key finding of our research is that incentives play a large role in stimulating audience participation in social media. The most popular incentives among informants were coupons and contests where they could win something, although there were also several informants who felt that as long as the ads were fun or entertaining, they would participate as well. Some informants stated that an immediate response was one important factor that would encourage them to socially interact with the ad/brand. They need the brand to respond to them so that they feel they are actually communicating with the brand, not a one-way post. !Another interesting finding was that many informants were interested by the idea of a small moment of fame as an incentive, although they did not frame it as such. Even informants who were less willing than others to respond directly to socially enabled ads mentioned that they would think “it’s cool” to see their own posts or their friends’ posts on an actual TV commercial. !Age group Age is a strong mediating factor in determining whether the audience is likely to share content. There are three age groups, according to the informants: 1) people under 18 who have been exposed to social media since childhood, 2) college students and twenty-somethings who post selectively, and 3) older people who are conservative about sharing information on social media. !Group 1 has the largest group of consumers who would be most likely to post after watching a socially enabled TV commercial because they “grew up with it [social networks]”. The older generation (usually defined as 30+), on the other hand, are the group least likely to interact with the brand using social media. College students and twenty-somethings are somewhere in between, and are also fond of incentives.

!13


!!!IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS !• Advertisers should make sure creative execution does not get in the way of the social media

message and the audience should be provided with clear instructions on how to participate.

• Socially enabled ads have the potential to be a highly effective way of maintaining pre-existing relationships between brands and consumers if they make use of incentives and tailor their message to consumers who already have a positive opinion of those brands.

• Socially enabled ads may not be an effective way to appeal to and recruit new consumers, as they are unlikely to make the effort of actively engaging with a brand they are not already interested in.

• Socially enabled content within an ad has little relevance to how people feel about the ad itself; however, a poorly worded social media appeal can negatively influence their overall impression of it (e.g. Crystal Light).

• Advertisers should make sure to clearly address privacy concerns and find out how to make consumers more comfortable with the idea of sharing their personal content. It is important to have transparency about how personal content will be used and distributed and also make activities opt-in instead of opt-out.

! ! !!!!!!!

!14


!!!LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH !• When asked about the future of socially enabled TV advertising, most informants thought it

would “stick around”, at least until the next powerful advertising tool appears. However, as our sample size was only 13 informants, further research with a larger informant pool would result in a more holistic overview of whether this is a common attitude across regions and demographics.

• When we showed the example ads, several informants mentioned that they had seen similar ads before, or, in some cases, the actual ads themselves. As a result, their reactions were affected by their previous experiences. Overall, most informants did not seem against the idea of socially enabled TV advertising, but it is possible that like any creative, the execution must be done well in order to capture audience interest in the first place.

• Privacy concerns were consistent across almost all informants, but varied in level—some were willing to share pictures of their pets but not of themselves or their family members, whereas others were completely willing to share all of their own personal information while expressing concern for their family and friends. Further research into the nuances of privacy concerns could potentially result in several interesting insights.

• The relationship between incentives and willingness to participate in socially enabled TV advertising is another subject that merits further research, in particular, a comparison between how existing consumers vs. new consumers respond to such advertising.

!!!!

!15


!!Appendix 1: Sprint Ad!!Ad 1- SprintThe Sprint ad encourages consumers to submit photographs using social media and tag them with the hashtag “#superdad”. Selected images are included in the ad.

!!!!!

!16


!!!Appendix 2: Pedigree Ad!!Ad 2- Pedigree. The Pedigree ad invites consumers to submit photographs, via Twitter or Instagram, of their dogs with the hashtag #GiggysBFF” to win the competition of dog images; the winners have their dog’s images shown during the ad.

!!!

!17


!!!Appendix 3: Crystal Light Ad!!Ad 3- Crystal LightThe Crystal Light ad invites consumers to share photographs of themselves via Instagram with the hashtag “#tinywin" to share their successes; selected individuals have their photos displayed as part of the ad.

!!!!!

!18


!!!Appendix 4: Honda Ad!!Ad 4- HondaThe Honda ad collects content from user-contributed content and has incorporated it into its ad. Honda is attempting to get consumers to look for their own content in the ad. This ad incorporates Vine and Instagram using the hashtag #makethingsbetter”.

!!!!

!19


Appendix 5: Interview Questions!!

ADV582 Nelson (Fall 2014) Social TV Ad Model Research

Interview Guide (V 2.0) !

!Pre-Research Homework Assignment!

Prior to attending the research sessions (likely during email exchange to set up interviews…), all informants will tell us about their favorite TV program and social media use. !

Total Discussion Interview Time: Approx. 30 minutes!

Section 1 –Introductions & Establish Context! ~5 minutes!Goal: Learn about respondents while developing a rapport and creating a comfortable environment

for sharing thoughts and feelings. In this part, we will discuss their media preferences and behav-iors. !

I see that you said X (fill in from ‘homework’ the name of show) – is your favorite show. Can you please tell me a little bit about it – including when you watch it – with whom – on what device etc.

On which device do you normally watch TV? (why/when/where) !

CHAMPAIGN-URBANA DATES: October-November 2014

Adults who watch TV on a television (“live” at times) and use social media

Adults: Men & Women 18-34

Adults: Men & Women 35-54

!20


Section 2 – Media Usage! ~7 minutes!Goal: Explore their media preferences and experiences, look for intersection of social media with

TV viewing !We’re going to talk a little about your social media use now.

o Do you have a favorite social network? o Which are the up-and-coming social networks? Are any fading away?

• Do you ever use social media while you are watching TV (on your regular TV screen)? o Tell me about this… give me some specific examples of these occasions o Which social platforms are you using while watching TV? o What are you doing on social media at the same time you are watching TV? o Is the content of the two ever related? If so, how? Share examples. (For example do

you ever tweet or use Facebook to talk about the show with others? With friends? With other fans of the show?)

o Have you ever seen or shared any content related to the advertising ? ▪ What did you share? ▪ What compelled you to want to share? !

Section 3 – Experience with socially enabled ads! ~10 minutes!Goal: Gauge reactions to the various socially enabled ad approaches !

Now we’re going to show you 4 brief advertisements and we’re going to ask you a few ques-tions about them. !

• Sprint – brand spot with tag to share photos of #superdad • Kraft /Crystal Light – share photos of #tinywin healthy moments • Pedigree – share photos of your dog for a chance to appear on TV as #giggysbff • Honda – TBD !

After informants watch all 4 ads, ask them. !• What do you think of the ads? !• What do you remember about the ads?

o Did anything stand out as unique or different? o (if so): How was it different (if it was perceived as being different)? o What specifically did you like or dislike about the advertising? !

Let’s watch them again (show 4 clips again). !!21


Did you notice the social media in each case? !• Which of the ad approaches stand out above the others? Why

o What made this one more interesting or compelling? ! !Section 4 – Social Advertising Comparison ~8 minutes

Goal: Exploration of perceptions, attitudes, and feelings about TV advertising with a socially en-abled component !

The Advertising industry has been experimenting with this idea of “Social engagement with TV advertising”

• What are your feelings about the concept of contributing/posting/tweeting related to a TV ad • Would you be open to sharing personal content or content related to brands you use?

o Would you do this? Would your friends/family? Why/why not? o What do you think would compel or encourage people to contribute?

• Would they feel about seeing yourselves or your content in a TV ad? Or their friends/family? o How would this make you feel about the brand? !

• Does having the social component help make the ad itself more interesting or relevant? [role of personal relevance] !

Do you see these sorts of ads on TV? Do you think they are persuasive? (why/not?) Do you think these kinds of ads are just a ‘fad’ or do you think they will become the advertis-ing of the future? !Section 5 – Wrap-Up and Closing ! ~1 minute!

Goal: Follow-up on any open issues, wrap-up interview session • What advice do you have for people trying to integrate social media and TV viewing? !!

Thank you very much for your participation. !!!!

!22


Appendix 6: Informant Bios!!!

Informant Age Race Gender Description

Jenna 20 Caucasian Female Slender, athletic build and long blond

hair. She was a talkative,

enthusiastic sorority girl, a junior at UIUC and often peppered

her speech with “like”.

Lavena! Asian Female UIUC college student, religious

Ashley Female Undergraduate

Mark 21 Male Medium build and wore hoodie and jeans. He is a senior who majors in Food Science and Human Nutri9on. He is also in the Na9onal Retail Federa9on, and travels cross coun-‐tries

Julianna 25 Asian Female Born in the U.S. She studies German, French and music as a part 9me student in UIUC. She is a mu-‐sician who plays the viola and teach vio-‐lin as well as viola

!23


Emily mid-30s Caucasian Female short blond hair, who works as an

administrative officer at UIUC. She said

she graduated from the Department of Advertising quite a long time ago. She wore a casual black

trench coat and black pants. She

was holding a small black 2g cell phone when she walked in

Jeff 45-55 Caucasian Male Works for AITS and is in a professional role. Slender in build and wearing glasses. He wore khakis and a polo shirt with 2 out of 3 buMons done. He had to squeeze the inter-‐view in between two other mee9ngs.

Diana early 20s Chinese Female Engineering student at UIUC who immi-‐grated to America at 10 years old. She had done internship in several corpora-‐9ons in her field.

Heather 21-22 Chinese Female Senior at UIUC

Laura 20-21 Female Junior at UIUC

Noah 40 Caucasian Male IT guy


!24

!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mary 19 Female UIUC student major-‐ing in community health.She wore a nice red sweater. She is a liMle bit shy and talked not that loud and not that much.

Rebecca 30-something Female Works in the school’s research laboratory. Has a newly born baby. Reserved personality and is not a typical social media user.


!25


Appendix 7: Informant TV and Social Media Usage!!How they watch television 6 primarily laptop (5 using Netflix, 4 using various streaming sites) 6 using primarily TV 1 using mostly iPad, iPhone !1: mostly online on laptop on different sites, occasionally on TV2: on TV, sometimes on laptop for Netflix3: Laptop, on Hulu or Netflix4: Laptop, online on different streaming sites5: iPad, iPhone- fox, youtube, netflix (presumably on laptop)6: mostly TV, occasionally on iPad or laptop7: on TV8: connect laptop through HDMI cord to TV9: on TV, on rare occasion on iPhone10: on smart TV and phone- connects to Netflix, on TV at home11: on TV (directTV media package) 12: on laptop13: on TV, Netflix!!Favorite social networks 10 out of 13 use Facebook on a regular basis or obsessively 5 out of 13 use Twitter regularly or at least occasionally 3 use Instagram, 1 mentioned it as a favorite in their household 2 mentioned Yik Yak as a favorite !1: Instagram, Twitter, Facebook2: Facebook, Youtube3: Facebook, (also interacts with Tumblr, Reddit, Instagram, LinkedIn)4: Instagram, Snapchat, Yik Yak5: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter (barely uses Twitter)6: Facebook7: Twitter8: LinkedIn, Facebook, 9: Snapchat, Facebook, Wechat10: Facebook, Twitter11: Twitter, Reddit; Daughter: likes instagram, tumblr12: Facebook, Yik Yak, sometimes Snapchat13: Facebook

!26


Appendix 7: Informant TV and Social Media Usage!!!Upcoming social networks 4 interviews didn’t bring up the question of upcoming networks 3 interviewees had no knowledge of upcoming networks 4 mentioned Instagram 3 mentioned Facebook 2 mentioned Snapchat 2 mentioned Yik Yak !1: Instagram, Snapchat2: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Younow3: Tumblr, Reddit, Instagram4: Yik Yak, Snapchat, Instagram5: no knowledge6: wasn’t brought up7: wasn’t brought up8: Facebook, LinkedIn, Youtube9: wasn’t brought up10: wasn’t brought up11: doesn’t know12: Facebook, Yik Yak13: doesn’t know!!Fading social networks 5 interviews didn’t bring up the question of fading social networks 1 interviewee had no knowledge of fading networks 4 interviewees mentioned Facebook 2 mentioned Twitter !1: Facebook, Vine2: MySpace, MSN Messenger (dead)3: Orkut (dead), Facebook4: Facebook5: Twitter6-10: wasn’t brought up11: Facebook12: Twitter, MySpace13: no knowledge!

!27


Appendix 8: Informant Reaction to Ads!!Sprint 4 people have seen this ad or similar ads before 4 people either hated it or strongly disliked it 3 people were confused by it/how they used 3 people liked it !1: dislike2: liked it upon first viewing but would not want to watch it again,3: confused, did not realize it was a Sprint ad at first, thought it was an insurance ad, can’t understand why Sprint is advertising dads4: remembers “dad moments” but not what the ad is about 5: thought it was stupid, confused about narrative plotline, upon second viewing thought it made best use of social media6: has seen ad before, thought it was long7: was confused by what exactly the ad wanted to accomplish8: expressed no specific opinion9: favorite ad, has meaning behind it and talks about dad10: funny but stupid, has seen similar Sprint ad, doesn’t associate it with brand at all11: has seen ad before + similar ads, did not notice social media previously12: upon being pressed said she liked this one best because of the “best dad” component/different approach13: hate, has seen similar ads and dislikes them a lot !Crystal Light 11 people disliked the ad 5 could not connect to/was uninterested by the call to action 3 thought it was sending the wrong message to women 2 thought it was too fast 2 were irritated by the pictures of unfinished sandwiches 2 had seen a similar ad before !!1: favorite because it is relatable to many people, easy ask, liked how pink it was2: disliked it, called it “fitness” ad and said there was nothing interesting about it, thought it was too short, can only remember that the woman in commercial did not finish her sand-wich!

!28


Appendix 8: Informant Reaction to Ads!!3: liked ad because it wasn’t “in your face” about social media as she is not a fan of this kind of advertising, but still thought it was kind of annoying4: can’t relate to the ad, is least favorite of the four5: thinks it is silly, sexist, and annoying, believes it is sending wrong message to women6: thought it was too fast, didn't really connect with call to action7: disgusted by pictures of partially eaten food, uninterested by call to action8: feels like she has seen similar ad before, believes message is “zero calorie drinks/drink this and you’ll be beautiful”, uninterested in message9: felt lost/was confused about what it was asking10: has seen similar ad before, thought it was familiar11: was offended by message of ad/call to action, thought it made things competitive12: expressed no specific opinion13: dislike, thought it was stupid!!Pedigree 9 people thought it was cute or enjoyed looking at the pictures of the dogs 5 people were confused about the connection between the brand and the dog 2 people were able to figure out the social media connection upon a second viewing !1: thought it was cute, but was confused about connection between brand and dog2: enjoyed looking at the pictures of dogs 3: very confused about who Giggy is/what the ad is, whether it is an ad, could not figure out connection to brand until second viewing 4: likes the ad second best out of the four5: thinks it is targeted toward old ladies with dogs 6: thought it was very involved, would do it if she had a dog/used twitter 7: was the only ad he was interested in, connected strongly as he has his own dog8: cute but couldn’t remember what it was about at first, upon second viewing remembered it a bit better but not the brand9: felt lost/was confused about what it was asking—thought it was cute but unrelatable for people without a dog; said nothing about brand10: thought it was cute but had to think about connection to brand11: thought it was cute but too cheesy/celebrity-esque, didn’t say anything about brand12: expressed no specific opinion but smiled while watching13: thought it was cute, enjoyed

!29


Appendix 8: Informant Reaction to Ads!!Honda 6 people liked the ad because of the technology, product innovation, and futuristic el-ements 4 people said it was their favorite ad 2 people were uninterested because they already had a car or had seen too many car commercials 2 people thought it was too long 1 person had already seen the ad before !1: indifferent, thought it was too long2: favorite ad, enjoyed the futuristic elements and enjoys car commercials in general 3: thought it was interesting and made use of idea of shared human experience, was an-noyed by “pop-ups”4: has seen ad before, is favorite among the four because of interesting technology and “things you’ve never seen”5: thought it was interesting because it featured new technology + innovation and progres-sive thinking6: favorite ad, flashy with a lot of things happening, liked idea of product innovation, thought the length was perfect7: uninterested, already has a honda so he has no reason to watch it8: remembered the most after first viewing, enjoyed concept of technology advancement9: uninterested, has seen too many car commercials, confused about social media ask upon second viewing10: favorite, likes the crispness and futuristic feel11: thought it was cool but did not notice any social media on first viewing12: expressed no specific opinion 13: thought it was too long!!!!!!!!!!

!30


References!!Crupi, A. (2013, September 18). Commercial Breaks Aren't Twitter Breaks. Retrieved No-vember 30, 2014, from http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/commercial-breaks-aren-t-twitter-breaks-152507!Katz, E., Blumler, J., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and Gratifications Research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509-523.!Midha, A. (2014, February 5). TV x Twitter: New findings for advertisers and networks | Twit-ter Blogs. Retrieved November 30, 2014, from https://blog.twitter.com/2014/tv-x-twitter-new-findings-for-advertisers-and-networks!!Smith, A. (2012, July 17). The Rise of the “Connected Viewer”. Retrieved November 30, 2014, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/07/17/the-rise-of-the-connected-viewer/!The Second Screen Fallacy: What It All Really Means. (2013, October 7). Retrieved No-vember 28, 2014, from http://ipglab.com/2013/10/07/the-second-screen-fallacy-what-it-all-really-means/!!Twitter, SMG release first results from Social TV Lab. (2014, June 17). Retrieved November 29, 2014, from http://blog.smvgroup.com/twitter-smg-release-first-results-from-social-tv-lab/!!Zero-TV Doesn't Mean Zero Video. (2013, March 11). Retrieved November 29, 2014, from http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2013/zero-tv-doesnt-mean-zero-video.html!

!31


http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/commercial-breaks-aren-t-twitter-breaks-152507

https://blog.twitter.com/2014/tv-x-twitter-new-findings-for-advertisers-and-networks

http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/07/17/the-rise-of-the-connected-viewer/

http://ipglab.com/2013/10/07/the-second-screen-fallacy-what-it-all-really-means/

http://blog.smvgroup.com/twitter-smg-release-first-results-from-social-tv-lab/

http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2013/zero-tv-doesnt-mean-zero-video.html

socially enabled advertising research patrick xu

Documents