'I'm a PC' Ads Don't Play Well on DVRs

[Editor's Note: Much of the research content in this post appears in another one on Apple Watch.]

The commercials are largely ineffective when fast-forwarded on digital video recorders, or so I conclude after applying findings from a Boston College study of television viewing to the TV spots.

GOT A TIP OR RUMOR?

Professors Adam Brasel and James Gips conducted three related studies, which appear in the November issue of Journal of Marketing (PDF of the article). Briefly, the BC professors found that DVR users fast-forwarding through commercials pay more attention to the TV. Centrally placed brands get noticed more.

Microsoft's "I'm a PC" commercials don't come close to meeting the standards for good DVR viewing, or so I conclude after reviewing the research and TV commercials. According to Leichtman Research Group, 27 percent of U.S. households have a DVR and 30 percent of DVR households have more than one unit. LRP released the findings in early October.

One-quarter of U.S. households is a big number for advertisers, who have grappled with the impact of time-shifting—recording of TV programs to be watched later—since VHS recorders reached mass markets in the 1990s.

DVRs make fast-forwarding commercials even easier than VHS recorders. Some advertisers have sought to stop fast-forwarding or they cut back advertising in response to the DVR practice. But the Boston College professors assert that advertisers should embrace consumer behavior as a marketing opportunity. "Rather than attempting to eliminate fast-forwarding, a more productive strategy for marketers may be to make their television commercials as effective as possible when consumers view them in a fast-forwarded mode," they write.

The professors conducted three studies to see how fast-forwarding affects brand/product recognition, with special attention given to brand placement. The first two studies revealed that viewers tend to strongly remember brands placed in the center area of the screen and nearly not at all elsewhere. The researchers write:

Although fast-forwarding harms ad effectiveness overall, there is considerable variance between commercials. Fast-forwarding viewers focus their attention on a small central portion of the screen. Only brand information within this central diagnostic area is visually attended to, and the disparity in visual attention between central and peripheral brand information attention is strongest for fast-forwarding viewers.

The professors found that DVR fast-forwarders paid attention to centrally placed brands for 67 percent of video frames and 54 percent of frames when auto-fast-forwarding. By comparison, fast-forwarders paid attention to 1 percent of frames where brands appeared somewhere else on the screen. Shocker: Normal viewers, those who didn't fast-forward, only paid attention to centrally placed brands for 45 percent of frames but 6 percent of frames when placed elsewhere. My conclusion: Centrally placed brands can be more effective for reaching DVR users who fast-forward than people who let the whole commercials run.

The third test introduced a fascinating nuance: commercials for products not sold in the United States. Researchers chose candy bars Aero and Flake, which are U.K. origin but are also sold in Canada. I grew up along the New Brunswick border. My friends and I would forage into Canada for Aero bars—and Coffee Crisp, too. Americans are deprived. Oh, Canada has great chocolate.

The researchers conducted two commercial tests, one where "brand information was on screen and central for 12 of the commercial's 30 seconds, and one with limited branding, in which the brand information was on screen for 3 seconds," the professors write. Fast-forwarding viewers correctly chose—remembered—the candy bars 67 percent of the time compared with 64 percent for people watching the whole commercial. The professors explain the significance:

Although the chocolate bar commercials were reduced to approximately 1.5 seconds without audio for fast-forwarding viewers and though the viewers had no prior brand exposure, participants chose the chocolate bar with the heavily branded commercial at a ratio of two to one over the chocolate bar with the limited-branding commercial.

Fast-forwarding doesn't have to be bad for advertisers. "Although the advertisements last little more than a second and lose all audio and narrative consistency, those with strong central branding can break through fast-forwarding and still achieve brand memory," the researchers write.

Now compare the study's results to Microsoft's "I'm a PC" TV spots. The ads heavily rely on the viewer watching and listening to them. The actual Windows logo and brand flashes for about 2 seconds at the commercials' end. The BC researchers found that light branding—brand exposure for 3 seconds—was much less effective on fast-forwarding and regular viewers (about 32 percent and 35 percent, respectively). That makes Microsoft's branding approach less for both DVR fast-forwarders and regular viewers, I say.

This isn't the first time I've criticized Microsoft's light branding approach to the "I'm a PC" ads. They demand too much attention—even for people who let commercials run—and don't aggressively promote either the Microsoft or Windows brands.

For comparison, T-Mobile G1 commercials have broader reach. For example, the "Questions" ad exposes the phone and/or brand for the last 10 seconds of the spot. That's right up there with the BC study's heavily branded Aero and Flake commercials, for length of brand exposure.

I see the "Questions" ad as a great example of how to effectively reach fast-forwarders and regular viewers. The first 20 seconds of the commercial asks questions that people can answer using the G1. The approach is engaging and emphasizes Google search benefits associated with the smart phone. Fast-forwarders will miss this content but see the phone and brands for 1to 2 seconds.

Microsoft and ad agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky should really rethink the $300 million marketing campaign—at least for television. The first commercials, featuring Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates and comedian Jerry Seinfeld, also play poorly when fast-forwarded. Try it out and see for yourself. With the agency taking on Zune advertising, too, now would be a great time to rethink the impact for fast-forwarders and regular viewers. Some suggestions:

• Place brands or products more centrally on the screen; fast-forwarders are more likely than regular viewers to remember the brand or product.
• Maximize branding exposure. According to Brasel and Gip's research, both fast-forwarders and regular viewers have high brand retention when brands are centrally placed for at least 12 seconds.
• Combine story-line/people approaches with long brand exposure, so as to better reach both kinds of viewers, those who watch and those who do not.

I rather enjoyed fast-forwarding through commercials to see how they compared (I looked at more than just those from Google/T-Mobile and Microsoft). Try it. Channel surfing is boring, anyway.

[Please send your tips or rumors to watchtips at live.com].

Related Posts:

• Why 'I'm a PC' Is a Brand Failure, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 20, 2008
• 'I'm a PC': It's Viral Now, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 23, 2008
• 'Hello, I'm a PC', Microsoft Watch, Sept. 19, 2008
• Windows: Life Without Walls, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 18, 2008
• Canceled: The Bill and Jerry Show, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 18, 2008
• Mojave Goes Prime Time, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 13, 2008
• Bill and Jerry: A Couple of Coenheads, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 11, 2008
• Clowns but No Windows at the Shoe Circus, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 4, 2008
• Walls Without Windows, Microsoft Watch. Aug. 21, 2008
• Why the 'Mojave Experiment' Fails, Microsoft Watch, July 30, 2008
• Viral Vista: The 'Mojave Experiment,' Microsoft Watch, July 29, 2008
• Can Negative Vista Perceptions Disappear?, Microsoft Watch, July 28, 2008