The late Sir William Crowford propounded the most concise yet complete recipe for good advertising in a three-word precept: Concentration - Domination - Repetition. It applies over the whole field of marketing and advertising, in the design of advertising layout –and certainly not least in the media plan for an advertising campaign. In longhand it may be translated into the three fundamental rules of an advertising plan:
1. Do not disperse your emphasis or your appropriation or your advertising design;
2. Be sure of being the biggest factor in your market at some point; be dominant with one appeal out of the many which your product and its competitors can advance; be dominant in some form of media if you cannot be dominant in all; be sure that some one factor emerges vigorously from your advertisement design.
3. Since advertisements have to create continuing habits if they are to reward the advertiser who invests in them, it is not enough to stop after a single impact or jump about from one advertising objective to another, or from one product appeal to another, or from one set of media to another.
The precept sounds so simple, as well as so sensible, that it is surprising how often it is not observed or has to give way to some conflict of intentions on some over-ambitious desire to attract everybody all the time.
The consideration of this context is limited to the media plan within the campaign plan, but there is no better way to outline the principles of media planning than to examine Sir William Crawford’s three factors.
Concentration. The first of his three elements is probably the most important.
The greatest (and most frequently encountered) mistake in advertising is excessive dispersal of resources. A product may have several good selling points but it is wise nevertheless to concentrate its advertising campaign on making a thorough conquest of the market with one only: the one that is chosen for its maximum effectiveness in the particular marketing and competitive circumstances of the time. The public does not readily understand two equally good points put to it simultaneously, though it can focus on, and accept, two points successively. If you throw two balls to a person he probably will not catch either of them, when he would easily have caught one. It is too much to expect the public to make the mental effort of concentration for you; you must do it for yourself. It is the advertiser’s job to make it easy for the public (who, after all, have plenty to think about apart from his particular arguments for his toothpaste or his soap or his store) to understand the one point which makes his product specially good for a type of customer or a type of purpose. The trouble is that advertisers tend to be too greedy in their objectives. An emollient may be particularly good for the hands, but the advertiser cannot also resist saying that it is good for the complexion, and for sunburn, and for a hundred and one other uses, for which it is also quite properly to be recommended.
A hot drink may have its best market in the evening, but the advertiser finds it extremely difficult to refrain also from recommending it at elevenses, for nursing mothers, on picnics, and for invalids, having had some direct evidence of its success on all these occasions. In selling a toothpaste it may be much more valuable to concentrate on persuading young people of the late teenage, who are just forming their adult habits for life, and particularly the young women who are more conscious of these matters; but the advertiser cannot resist also the temptation to try the much more difficult job of changing the settled habits of older people, or to tackle the quite different and far more short-term custom of children.
Here are some examples of the risks of dispersal of aim. The positive side of the case is the advantage of building up a product to have in the mind and memory of a large public, the complete answer to one uncomplicated need, and of concentrating on filling this requirement and on nothing else.
In the field of media selection the principle of concentration equally applies, partly in carrying out the concentration of the marketing and presentation policy and partly in the quest for outspending competitors and making a strong impression on the public in a given medium.
Taking first the former of these two contexts, clearly if the marketing and advertising objective is defined as being a certain type of customer, then the media planning will concentrate on reaching this section of the public. In the sphere of mass advertising, this is a question of focusing, as well as the case permits, on a general area selected from the whole public rather than picking out a very precisely defined section. The mass media themselves are largely not capable of very sharp definition; but there is considerable value in narrowing both the target and the aim as far as possible, so as to ensure a better and more economical use of resources. Where the marketing target takes the form of a specialist or geographical group, it may prove much easier to select media so as to achieve a parallel concentration.
The second, however, of the two contexts stated above – the concentrating media so as to ensure creating a strong impression on at least one particular section of the public – is an application of the principle of concentration, which applies primarily to media selection. It is of very great importance. Each medium represents a section of the public either numerically or in terms of atmosphere, mood, or circumstances. The mass national morning papers, for example, have their own particular mood and circumstances, and within this group each one of them selects its own section of the total public. Even the least of these sections represents a market of considerable size. To select this one section of media, or any one of its component newspapers, and to dominate it thoroughly, may well represent for a given advertiser a fully sufficient scope for his marketing ambitions.
In a rather different mood and circumstance the same people travel by transport to their jobs and thus the transport media may create their own separate world of advertising, because of the way in which they are seen, the colour employed, the shape and positioning of them, and so on. The magazines, again, create a rather different advertising mood and circumstance from the daily press, even among the people, men or women, who read both. The hoardings, the radio, the shop display, the cinema, and every other medium create its own particular effects. It is possible, therefore, for an advertiser who is outspent by some competitor in say the daily papers, to turn to another advertising field and be the most dominant advertiser in his class, within the type and mood and quality of coverage offered by the field. This second field may not offer the type and mood and quality of coverage the advertiser would have chosen first; but he may well do better to make his mark effectively in this more limited field than to be an also-ran in the best field.
The only reservation is that the more limited field of advertising thus selected should be large enough to provide, when properly exploited, a return which justifies the expenditure on a normal ratio of advertising the same time a more universal coverage would spread the advertising impact too thin, then the whole basis of the advertising costing needs re-examining and possibly a radically different solution will have to be sought.
The issue, which arises at all stages in media planning can be settled only by a careful balance of pros and cons. In a simple case an advertiser may have the choice of ten insertions of given size in one newspaper; or five in each of two; or ten in each of two but only half the size. The balance of the decision will lie in whether five is adequate frequency, or whether the half-size will enable him to do the job the campaign requires; or whether he will do better to limit himself to the one newspaper and achieve a full success among the more limited public so covered. More complicated examples of the same issue arise when a larger budget offers scope for a variety of media of different types.
The rule must be that it is far better to do a given job – in terms of size and frequency – in a limited type of media, than to risk doing an inadequate job in all types cut of a desire to expand the total coverage. It is a decision, which is often hard to reach because of the anxiety to widen the coverage which always arises. The temptation to make the resources cover just one more set of possible customers is difficult to resist; but it must be resisted. Moreover, there are often conflicting counsels and desires to be reconciled, and it sometimes seems easier to affect the reconciliation by giving everyone a little of what they want rather than go through the labour and trouble of deciding priorities. This is once again an example of the danger of dispersal of advertising effort.
The issue particularly calls for god judgment because if the principle is applied too far, there is a complementary risk of wasting resources. In another context reference has already been made to the diminishing return that sets in at a certain point of advertising expenditure on a given medium. Too great a size of space, too much frequency of insertion, too much money spent in a single medium, can be a waste of resources, just as too little can be. At a certain point of spending in, let us say, one newspaper, it becomes better to add a second newspaper and thus broaden the field of total coverage.
The right course is therefore to start by defining clearly what size and frequency of space the tactical situation requires and ensure that no medium is included which cannot be afforded an adequate strength of campaign.
There are various methods of concentrating an advertising budget, and where concentration is necessary (as it usually is because virtually no budget is sufficient for everything) the following possibilities may be reviewed:
a. Numerical concentration; i.e., choosing only a few (naturally the most economic) media of a certain type.
b. By choice and continuity of position within a type of media, pre-selecting an even more limited section of the whole audience, which has particular interest in the product.
c. Seasonal concentration; i.e. limiting the advertising to a part (probably the peak period) of the selling season.
d. Geographical concentration; i.e., proceeding by intensive coverage of a selected area or sequence of areas.
e. Economic class; i.e., not attempting to cover all classes equally. Such a form of media concentration must be linked with parallel concentration of marketing and creative effort.
f. Age; i.e., limiting the advertising objective to a special age group with all the consequent narrowing of the media field.
g. Interest groups; i.e., choosing, within the general scope of the product appeal, some more limited group of interests, e.g., social religious, sporting, etc., which can then be reached with a more restricted list of media. The creative appeal would be limited in parallel.
The scope for deliberate concentration of objective is almost endless, because of the vast variety of media available. These suggestions are only examples of how a general principle can be worked out.
In summary, therefore, the need for concentration in media planning lies in:
a. the need to focus the media as far as possible on the section of the public prescribed by the marketing and advertising objective; and
b. the need to concentrate on the best media for the purpose until a pre-defined strength has been achieved in each, and not proceed to widen the media list until it has.
Domination. The advertising complex may be envisaged as a market place in which a large number of salesmen are crying their wares. The resultant hubbub is continuous and the public gets accustomed to it, to the stage where it discounts it. Moreover, the public is going about its own affairs, which lie to a large extent outside the field of buying. It has interests, anxieties, preoccupations with earning its livelihood, recreations, family affairs, and other influences far removed from what the salesman is trying to sell.
To catch the attention of the public in these circumstances requires a very skillful technique. There may be a factor of unusual novelty, or a vast appropriation, or a product of close relevance to the moment’s interests of the public, or some other element in the situation, which gives an advertiser an advantage. To suggest that such a factor can be invented if it is not present is to underrate the extent to which the public can subconsciously distinguish between the real and the false novelty or interest.
There may be some appropriations, which are so great that they can by very volume make themselves heard across the whole market place. But the average case is one in which the resources available permit of only a normal volume of salesmanship. In these circumstances the salesman must as it were pitch his booth in that section of the market place where from previous knowledge his likeliest customers will circulate in greatest numbers, and at least ensure that within this limited area his resources permit his voice to be heard above the general din.
This is the principle of concentration, already described; its purpose is to dominate. So, too, in the choice of media the advertiser must dominate at least for some of the time and in relation to some of the public.
Domination may be achieved by scores of different methods of media planning. The most obvious way is to use large spaces; and even if this cannot be afforded throughout the whole campaign, it will probably be possible for a short period – enough to make its mark on the relevant public for a time. It is often imagined by the inexperienced that novelty and ingenuity are what make advertising successful; and for a short time and in certain circumstances this may be true. But in the long run it is weight of money, which generally controls the situation. Therefore to outspent competitors is the surest way to dominate, and once again the argument reverts to the need to concentrate resources in order to do this.
On the other hand, merely to do something different from competitors in the sphere of media may go some way to achieve the object; for example, suing a medium that is new for the product or an unusual shape of space; or choosing poster sites of noticeable size or quality; or using colour pages where competitors have hitherto used only black and white; or skillfully finding means of getting news printed in the editorial columns; or turning up with a sample offer through the unexpected medium of the consumer’s own letterbox.
In a competitive market, domination is particularly necessary, and few markets nowadays are not competitive. But what makes the problem more difficult (and tends to stress the factor of sheer spending power rather than new ideas or ingenuities of presentation) is that an advertiser has to compete not only with others making similar products, but also with manufacturers in other fields who are bidding for the same money with different kinds of interests. Chocolates do not compete only with other chocolates or with other sweets, but also with tobacco, and nylons, and cinemas, and biscuits and football pools, and all other forms of recreational spending. Television sets do not compete only with other television sets but with washing machines, and household cleaners, and family holidays, and new clothes. To some extent indeed competitive products in the same field assist each other because their combined spending tends to outbid competing interests from other fields.
Bigness, as we have already remarked elsewhere, is an important quality in advertising; therefore, to be bigger and more noticeable than competitors is to dominate. But the idea of domination is not only in relation to being better and bigger than other advertisers, but also to taking control of the potential customer’s mind and interest for the necessary space of time, and to continuing to control it partly by the quality of the goods sold and partly by repeated domination of his or her subconscious inclinations.
Repetition. This brings the argument to repetition. The average advertiser is not aiming to make a single sale; he wants the customer to come back again and again for his product. The investment in advertising cannot otherwise be repaid. All the time other interests are crowding in upon his customer with new ideas and products, and with alternative means of enjoying the pennies or shillings he wants spent on his own product. He must dominate the market and take control of the customer’s interests at least once in order to get his own idea or product noticed and tried; but thereafter, he must keep the impression so created alive forever afterwards. This process requires neither the bigness nor the dominance, but it entails spending advertising resources continuously over a period, and allowance for this continued outlay must be made in deciding what media the budget can afford to use.
The proper frequency and size of this element of repetition are matters, which need a chapter to themselves. They depend on a wide variety of factors such as the seasonal peaks of the purchase of the product, the frequency of consumer purchase, the amount the buyer is prepared to spend at a single purchase, and similar factors.
The most important point to grasp in this context is the basic factor that, because the only kind of buying that can reward the average advertiser for his outlay involves repetition, therefore repetition is necessary to the selling process which advertising represents. If one may use the alternative description (which the writer prefers) in which advertising is defined as adding a subjective something to the very product itself, then repetition of advertising appeal is clearly as much a necessity to the continuing process of production as is repetition of the labeling process or that of putting into cartons. It is the process of continuing to hallmark the product in which the public places its confidence.
There are many media especially suitable for repetition and generally it is possible (as well as necessary in view of the need to make resources go round) to make do with less expensive forms and sizes of space. This is because:
a. The stage of breaking through the barrier of public ignorance of the product is over, at least for the time being; and
b. It is usually unnecessary, at the repetition stage, to state the selling points in as much detail as when they are first being put across; and a reminder type of advertising can be adopted.
The process of repetition cannot go on indefinitely. After a stage, which must be judged from the tactical circumstances, it will be necessary to create new impact – a new effort of domination – before the repetitive process can be resumed. Repetition is by its very description the repeating of something, and each repeat gets a little fainter. The fresh impact may take the shape of a new presentation of the marketing and advertising message, or it may be judged sufficient to use the existing message over again in larger and more dominant spaces.
In the same way too much exact similarity in the medium of repetition may cause the value of it to diminish quicker than would otherwise be the case. It is for this reason that posters, which are seen by their public so frequently in the course of a week’s normal journeys, are thought b many experts to lose their repetitive value rather quickly. The same poster, or the same hoarding, passed at the same stage of the daily or twice daily journey becomes a mere part of the scenery. Changes of poster design can help to overcome this disadvantage, but it is a factor to consider in relation to what otherwise is the most convincing medium of repetition.
Some variation in the shape, size, and even the actual media of repetition can be very helpful. The same message striking at the viewer from a different angle, in a different context, or catching him in a different mood and circumstance, can almost convey a little of the feeling of a new impact. Repetition must not be allowed to result in a blind spot in the vision of the public.
In newspaper and magazines the risk of this is not so great because the surrounding material – news, features, pictures, and other factors that go to create the context – are constantly changing. An exception may be the earspaces alongside the newspaper titles, which are a favourite repetition medium but which , like the poster sites, can wear a blind-spot with the regular reader of the publication. There is no doubt that where repletion is spread over a variety of media each with its different context, it sustains the freshness of the first impact over a longer period.
Concluding this chapter it will be useful to restate the four basic principles of media planning which have been emphasized in this and the previous chapters.
Definition – Getting the campaign objective into clear focus (by methods outlined in the previous chapter)
Concentration – Avoiding dispersal of resources over too many different objectives or media.
Domination – Ensuring that at some part of the market the campaign dominates its competitors, and takes control of the mind and interests of the potential customers.
Repetition – Providing for the continuation of the message in reminder form regularly over a period.
Definition – Concentration – Domination – Repetition. It may be useful thus to expand Sir William Crawford’s original precept for sound campaign planning in the field of advertising media.
Source : the Selection of Advertising Media by J.W. Hobson, M.A.,F.I.P.A.