Pixel Creative Group, Inc.

Welcome to the Pixel Blog. Here we like to share what's on our minds. Might be about some creative insight or discovery. Could be a tip we've learned and want to pass on. Or, sometimes, we might just put all business aside and talk about our everyday lives. We hope you enjoy, comment, participate in discussion and share this blog with your friends and colleagues.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Adobe survey finds readers 'engaged' with ads on Apple's iPad

Published: 09:55 AM EST

Adobe on Monday released the results of a new survey which found that advertisements in digital magazines on devices like the iPad can "more effectively engage readers and create stronger purchase intention" than in print.

Dave Dickson revealed the results of the survey in an official post on the Adobe Digital Publishing blog/ The research paper, entitled "Digital Ad Engagement: Perceived Interactivity as a Driver of Advertising Effectiveness," was conducted by Alex Wang, Ph.D. at the University of Connecticut.

The test studied readers between ages 18 and 32, and had them view print and iPad versions of advertisements featured in a past issue of a digital magazine. Participants were asked to rank their perceived interactivity, engagement, message involvement, attitude toward the adds, and purchase intent.

"The result is a new brand advertising paradigm where advertisers can engage customers with a brand in the immersive context of a digital magazine -- in contrast to the interruptive, templatized, and commoditized nature of current digital display ad inventory," Dickson wrote.

Participants ranked ads in each category from a score of one to nine. Interactive ads on the iPad carried a purchase intent significantly higher than their static counterparts, as the interactive ads earned a score of 3.98, compared to just 2.50 for print.

"The study also found clear statistical connections among the five measured categories in the experiment," he wrote. "By using interactivity such as motion graphics, sound, slideshows and animation, advertisers can engage readers and create favorable attitudes toward their brands.

"Once engaged, readers are then more likely to interact with the ad, resulting in a higher probability that they will purchase the product or service being promoted."

While the advertisements might be more effective, details of magazine purchases in late December indicated that they have significantly declined since many of them debuted earlier in 2010. For example, Wired -- a magazine powered by Adobe -- launched in May and sold more than 100,000 copies, but the more recent issues had much lower sales of 22,000 and 23,000 in October and November, respectively.

Publishers are said to be anxiously awaiting the ability to offer recurring subscriptions on the App Store for iPad versions of their magazines. Currently, publishers must make due with a pay-per-issue approach, something they believe has hurt sales.

Like Adobe, Apple has bet in the interactive advertising market potential on the iPad with its own mobile advertising network dubbed iAds. The iAd network on the iPad launched in late 2010 with just one advertisement, but is expected to significantly expand in 2011.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Banner vs. Search Ads

Internet players who win similar trust and popularity could command premium rates for advertising and related services. Below them, in Tobaccowala's view, a vast contingent of competitors will sell ads at commodity rates, the online equivalents of pork bellies and West Texas crude. The battle ahead in every branch of Internet advertising is to gain a foothold among the ruling class.

Online advertising breaks roughly into two camps. The fastest-growing side has been search-engine advertising, led by Google and Yahoo. This industry has zoomed from zero to an estimated $5 billion in six years. The process starts as advertisers bid for keywords, whether "Viagra" or "Miami hotels." When a Web surfer enters those words, their ads show up alongside the search results. And they pay an agreed price to the search engine every time the ad is clicked. When it works, search provides such rich data that advertisers can calculate minute by minute the return on investment for each keyword. It's an unprecedented level of accountability -- provided the clicks are real. Last year search-related advertising was on pace to grow 27%, as was the competing camp, display ads.

But advertising executives predict that the display banners and videos that appear on Web pages will outpace search this year. "Most of the big money [advertisers] -- cars, movies, packaged goods -- are putting more of their budgets into display," says Jeff Lanctot, general manager at agency Avenue A/Razorfish (AQNT ), the world's largest buyer of Internet ads. "We think growth in search will fall back in '06." Google's chief financial officer, George Reyes, hinted much the same when he indicated on Feb. 28 that Google's per-customer growth in search advertising had topped out, triggering an investor stampede.

As brand advertisers push into display ads, they're hungry for new measurements. With the page view as its standard metric, display has always been far less accountable than search. Sure, Web sites can count the times an ad pops up on a page someone visits. But how many of the readers actually focus on the ad? Studies show that they take in only an average of one of every 12 Internet ads. What's more, in display advertising, even the more concrete metric of clicks is questionable. "Click measurement has been abused," says Greg Stuart, president of the Interactive Advertising Bureau in New York, an industry group. "There's no relationship between clicks and brand awareness."

Some 18 months ago, Stuart's group set out to quantify the value of Internet ads and to compare them with advertisements in other media. The agenda was clear: to attract advertisers, who were placing only about 3% of their budgets online. The resulting IAB studies, which involved 30 major advertisers, including Procter & Gamble (PG ), Kraft Foods (KFT ), and Ford Motor (F ), used testing methods similar to those of social scientists. They created control groups, exposed them to mixes of advertisements from various media, and tracked their effects in recall, brand recognition, and intent to purchase. The IAB concluded that most of the advertisers were underspending online -- and advertisers agreed. Ford, which was spending less than 5% of its ad budget online, quickly moved to triple it.

The ideal is not only to reach viewers but also to get them to spend time with the ad -- and signal to advertisers what interests them. Clicks achieve that, but many surfers are wary of detours and fearful that unknown sites might infect their computers with spyware. This has led advertisers to their latest wrinkle: measuring the movements of the mouse. New interactive banner ads spring to life when the Web surfer crosses them with the cursor. No click necessary. Some of them balloon into mini Web pages as you browse. Others sprout arms and legs pitching cars or recipes.The advertisers don't always know who the Web surfers are, but they often know which Web page they have come from. They can track which parts of the banner appear to interest visitors and how long they spend there. This contributes to an avalanche of data. "We have so much data that agencies are hiring teams of analytic people, PhDs in statistics, to make sense of it all," says Greg Rogers, director of strategy and insights at MEC Interaction, a New York media agency.

Kraft Foods builds entire campaigns around interactive banners. Before holidays, it serves them up on the major portals like MSN.com (MSFT ) and Yahoo's main page. Web surfers whose cursors pass over these banners are served recipes featuring Kraft products. This feature enables Kraft to gauge the popularity of each food. Advertisers and agencies now monitor the performance of their online ads with so-called computer dashboards, which allow them to track their portfolios of ads. Like social scientists, they test ads against "placebos," usually a give-away ad for a charity such as the Red Cross. If one ad fares better than another against the placebo, they make adjustments on the fly.


Monday, August 16, 2010

What now?



Inside news companies, the most immediate concern is how much revenue lost in recession the industry will regain as the economy improves.

Whatever the answers, the future of news ultimately rests on more long-term concerns: What are the prospects for alternative journalism organizations that are forming around the country? Will traditional media adapt and innovate amid continuing pressures to thin their ranks?

And with growing evidence that conventional advertising online will never sustain the industry, what progress is being made to find new revenue for financing the gathering and reporting of news?

The numbers for 2009 reveal just how urgent these questions are becoming. Newspapers, including online, saw ad revenue fall 26% during the year, which brings the total loss over the last three years to 41%.

Local television ad revenue fell 24% in 2009, triple the decline the year before. Radio was off 18%. Magazine ad pages dropped 19%, network TV 7% (and news alone probably more). Online ad revenue over all fell about 5%, and revenue to news sites most likely also fared much worse. 

Only cable news among the commercial news sectors did not suffer declining revenue last year.

The estimates for what happens after the economy rebounds vary and even then are only guesses. The market research and investment banking firm Veronis Suhler Stevenson projects that by 2013, after the economic recovery, three elements of old media — newspapers, radio and magazines — will take in 41% less in ad revenues than they did in 2006.

For newspapers, which still provide the largest share of reportorial journalism in the United States, the metaphor that comes to mind is sand in an hourglass. The shrinking money left in print, which still provides 90% of the industry’s funds, is the amount of time left to invent new revenue models online. The industry must find a new model before that money runs out.

The losses are already enormous. To quantify the impact, with colleague Rick Edmonds of the Poynter Institute we estimate that the newspaper industry has lost $1.6 billion in annual reporting and editing capacity since 2000, or roughly 30%. That leaves an estimated $4.4 billion remaining. Even if the economy improves we predict more cuts in 2010.

Network news division resources are likely down from their peak in the late 1980s by more than half — which amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars — and new rounds of cuts came in the last 12 months. Local television is harder to gauge, but one estimate puts the losses in the last two years at over 1,600 jobs, or roughly 6%. Staffing at the Time and Newsweek since 1983 is down by 47%.1

So what about the new-media experiments growing around the country? There are certainly exciting things happening, from former journalists creating specialty news sites and community sites, to citizens covering neighborhoods, to local blogs and social media.

In 2009 Twitter and other social media emerged as powerful tools for disseminating information and mobilizing citizens such as evading the censors in Iran and communicating from the earthquake disaster zone in Haiti. The majority of Internet users (59%) now use some kind of social media, including Twitter, blogging and networking sites, according to a new PEJ/Pew Internet & American Life survey.

Citizen journalism at the local level is expanding rapidly and brimming with innovation. This year’s report includes a new study of 60 of the most highly regarded sites. The prospects for assembling sufficient economies of scale, audience and authority may be most promising at specialized national and international sites — efforts like ProPublica, Kaiser Health News and Global Post.

For all the invention and energy, however, the scale of these new efforts still amounts to a small fraction of what has been lost. While not all of the blogs and citizen efforts can be quantified, J-Lab, a project led by Jan Schaffer that studies new media, estimates that roughly $141 million of nonprofit money has flowed into new-media efforts over the last four years (not including public broadcasting). That is less than one-tenth of the losses in newspaper resources alone.

Michael Schudson, the sociologist of journalism at Columbia University, sees the promise of “a better array of public informational resources emerging. ” This new ecosystem will include different “styles” of journalism, a mix of professional and amateur approaches and different economic models — commercial, nonprofit, public and “university-fueled.”

Clay Shirky of New York University has suggested that the loss of news people is a predictable and perhaps temporary gap in the process of creative destruction. “The old stuff gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place,” he has written.

There is something important in these notions. As Schudson notes, the news industry became more professional, skeptical and ethical beginning in the 1960s. Many journalists think that sense of public good has been overtaken by a focus on efficiency and profit since the 1990s. In the collapse of those ownership structures, there is some rebirth of community connection and public motive in news.

Yet the energy and promise here cannot escape the question of resources. Unless some system of financing the production of content is developed, it is difficult to see how reportorial journalism will not continue to shrink, regardless of the potential tools offered by technology.

And as we enter 2010 there is little evidence that journalism online has found a sustaining revenue model. A new survey on online economics, released in this report for the first time, finds that 79% of online news consumers say they rarely if ever have clicked on an online ad.

There was certainly more talk of alternative approaches to advertising in the last year. Entrepreneur Steve Brill and others launched JournalismOnline.com, which offers news sites a mechanism for charging, but at this point it is more a possibility than a business reality. Rupert Murdoch announced discussions with Microsoft about higher payments for searching his content and insisted that everything his company produces would go behind pay walls. Columbia University produced a report that explored nonprofit and public funding sourcing and assessed the state of startup new media. The New York Times announced it was giving itself a year to figure out a way to charge for content to “get it really really right.” And more new-media startups were planned, a growing sign that as old media continues to shrink, the ecosystem is changing and some things are growing.

But if a new model is to be found it is hardly clear what it will be. Our survey, produced with the Pew Internet & American Life Project, finds that only about a third of Americans (35%) have a news destination online they would call a “favorite,” and even among these users only 19%2 said they would continue to visit if that site put up a pay wall.

In the meantime, perhaps one concept identifies most clearly what is going on in journalism: Most news organizations — new or old — are becoming niche operations, more specific in focus, brand and appeal and narrower, necessarily, in ambition.

Old media are trying to imagine the new smaller newsroom of the future in the relic of their old ones. New media are imagining the new newsroom from a blank slate.

Among the critical questions all this will pose: Is there some collaborative model that would allow citizens and journalists to have the best of both worlds and add more capacity here? What ethical values about news will settle in at these sites? Will legacy and new media continue to cooperate more, sharing stories and pooling resources, and if they do, how can one operation vouch for the fairness and accuracy of something they did not produce?

The year ahead will not settle any of these. But the urgency of these questions will become more pronounced. And ultimately the players may be quite different.

“I think the answer may come from places staffed by young people who understand the new technology and its potential and who have a passion for journalism,” said Larry Jinks, the highly regarded former editor and publisher who transformed the San Jose Mercury News a generation ago and who still sits on the board of the McClatchy Company.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Apple's iPad Review

At first glance the iPad looks like a large iPhone or iPod Touch, but once held in your hands you find it’s much more. The simplicity of the iPad as like the iPhone and iPod Touch continues Apple’s great quest to make computing less intimidating and user friendly. And yet again with the iPad they’ve achieved that with flying colors. The iPad comes in two different versions: WiFi and WiFi + 3G (3G version includes a separate monthly fee from AT&T). Within each version there are three models with different memory sizes: 16 GB, 32 GB and 64 GB. The starting price for an iPad is an affordable $499.

As you will find out quickly what the iPad does it does wonderfully. The first thing you will notice when you pick up the iPad is the bright gorgeous screen. The picture quality is nothing like anything you have even seen in a portable device. The internet is quick and responsive. Emails are a snap. Web browsing is a breeze. The iPad’s near full size keyboard makes typing a cinch. Movies start with just a push of your finger filling the vibrant screen. Nearly all the games and apps from the App Store work instantly with the iPad giving the user instant access to thousands of great apps. And daily, developers are updating their iPhone/iPod Touch apps to work exclusively for the iPad’s larger screen size and resolution. Following the iPhone/iPod Touch the App Store and iTunes Store are accessible right from the iPad with no need for a desktop computer making it simple to access all these great apps right from you iPad. In addition to the iTunes and Apps Store Apple added another called iBooks. This is a bookstore in your hands. If your a reader this is a dream come true. No longer are you forced to read digital books on a small black and gray screen. With the iPad books come to life in full color. With the iBook store you have a choice of hundreds of books right at your finger tips. To read a book it’s as easy as one push of your finger and within seconds your reading. With the combination of the iTunes, Apps, and iBook stores the iPad will continue to grow better and better everyday.

But after saying all these great things there are a few draw backs. One, as like Apple’s other portable devices the iPad has no support for Flash. But to counter this many well known websites are making their websites 100% compatible with the iPad so there is no need for Flash. I personally feel you’ll see more and more websites follow as the portable era grows in popularity. Another draw back that many where hoping to find at launch was a camera. It would have been nice to have video chat on the iPad but heres hoping for the future. Another draw back worth mentioning is the lack of inputs. Other than the typical headphone and charging jacks there are no USB or memory stick inputs. This kinda is a shame because it causes the iPad to still have to rely on a standard computer for other activities such as burning CDs or printing documents.

Minus these little nuisances the iPad is an incredible device. I personally own a MacBook Pro (laptop) and a Mac Pro (desktop) but I constantly find myself picking up my iPad for everyday simple actives such as email, web browsing, networking and casual gaming. It sure beats lugging a heavy laptop around or sitting at a computer desk away from my comfy couch. To sum it up. If your daily computer activities include, music, video, email, web browsing, reading, photos, word processing, networking and casual gaming the iPad is for you.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

The Year in Review

The visit in September 2008 of Hurricane Ike was closely followed by a dramatic dip in the financial world.  Those two events, at least for the Texas Gulf Coast area, seemed to put a near halt to many marketing initiatives by the first of 2009.  Some companies saw this an an opportunity to re-brand and make a mark in their fields while their competitors cautiously held tight.  Others, either unsure of what the future may hold or mindful of the appearance of frugality in volatile times, chose to slow or stop their marketing efforts altogether.  As the fears of the bottom dropping out seem to be subsiding, many companies are now emerging from their year long hibernation with new energy and ambitions.  Those who recognized the value of reinforcing their identities through the economic downturn will have a much better position as we head into 2010.  Those who have been in a holding pattern may find they have a lot of work to do to get back into the game.  Either way, 2010 looks to be a busy year as companies revive their marketing efforts and look for ways to reinforce their brands and images in a more competitive marketplace.

Monday, November 9, 2009

Taking the Emotion out of Crisis Situations

One of the biggest obstacles to overcome in any organization undergoing a crisis is emotion: Stakeholders, especially management and employees, often become defensive because their livelihood may be at stake. It’s basic human nature.

When defensiveness rules, the lawyers are usually put in charge. Virtually all outside communication is then shut down or limited to stilted legalese, the goal being to limit discoverable materials and protect the organization from lawsuits. The problem with this sort of response is that it smacks of a cover-up. Unanswered questions lead to speculation and speculation leads to rumor and eventually, perception can become reality and you’re doomed.

Consider Arthur Andersen. When representatives of that firm aided and abetted Enron in perpetrating its massive fraud on investors and energy consumers, AA adopted a purely defensive posture. Andersen’s legal team and managers couldn’t see the forest for the trees. The central issue was not protecting the company against lawsuits by angry investors who had relied on its audit opinions regarding Enron’s financial situation, it was preserving the franchise itself. But AA’S lawyers, senior management and Board of Directors never realized what was at stake until it was too late. As a result, the franchise that had been built up over 89 years was destroyed, along with 85,000 jobs.

AA could have weathered the fallout. A new leadership team, headed by some prominent person with impeccable credentials, could then have launched an internal investigation into how the AA-Enron scandal came to be and into how conflicts of interest among Andersen’s different lines of business might have contributed to the scandal. Changes in policies and procedures, divestiture of conflicting lines of business, full cooperation with the authorities and perhaps a name change might even have saved the firm.

Crises that threaten an organization’s reputation or franchise are essentially public relations problems. A good consultant will put all emotion aside, examine the situation as a detached observer and thereby identify the essence of the crisis, the true costs involved (both short- and long-term) and what it will take to fix the problem at hand. Sure, they may have legal implications that could cost significant money over the short term, and the lawyers have their job to do in limiting that liability. But this short-term focus can lead to winning the battle but losing the war.

-Posted by Tony Lentini 11/9/09

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Learning to Speak Twitterese

The Twitter Dictionary aka Twittonary provides explanations of various Twitter related words. Here are a few examples, to find more visit www. twittonary.com

Teletwitter: experimental open source client. –Teletwitter

TikiTwit: match your iChat status to your last tweet using your mac.

TinyTwitter: works with any Java enabled device (includes the BlackBerry) and any Windows Mobile Pocket PC or Smartphone. –TinyTwitter

TrashTweeter: someone who tweets trash or talking trash on twitter

TreoTwit: easily check and update your Twitter right from your Treo.

Twitophant/twitophantic: one who repeatedly tweets the Top 100 in an attempt to gain more followers.

Twabe/Twabes: Twitter Slang. A young woman. Or informal. Sweetheart; dear. Used as a term of endearment.

Twabulous: fabulous tweet or fabulous information or fabulous take...

Twad: wad, bunch; viral twitter outrage over something thats misunderstood

Twadget: Simple gadget that lets you view and submit tweets right from Vista’s Sidebar

Twaffic: Twitter traffic.

Twaigslist: to sell something via Twitter (also Twebay).

Twantrum: a tantrum thrown by excessively tweeting!

Tweet You Later!

-Posted by Ron Cutsinger 11/5/09