One Half Amazing!

Google content advertisers can now run what is called a network blast or surge campaign. It involves serving display ads from one advertiser on most of Google’s content network pages during a specific block of time, to users in a specific geographic area or age range. Basically they Nagasaki users with a display banner to get the most bang and awareness possible.

How big is a google network blast? On average, blasts can deliver 100 million ad impressions in 24-48 hours.

Michael Bloomberg ran a blast right before election night in NY to remind users to get out and vote. I wonder how they augmented it with search, social, email and traditional advertising?

The Google Adwords Agency blog indicate that blasts require no advance booking and deliver relevant ads at a much lower CPM than portal takeovers. I personally haven’t tried this, but would love the budget to get at it once or twice.

Next time you’re in Times Square with your iPhone, download the Prius app and graffiti all over their billboard. I’m sure we’ll see more of these richer brand interactions in the future.

The trend for advertisers over the past year has focused on consumers being frugal, saving and budget conscience.  I think you’ll begin to see a new shift towards staying healthy, sanitary and germ-free as colder weather and (swine) flu season begins.

Gimmicks will always be there.  Step outside of traditional thinking and create real value for your users.  They’ll thank you much more in the end.

Instant Campaign, from Brazilian agency Gringo, recently created a self-promotional site poking fun at so-called social media rockstars and their digital drivel. Put in a big budget and watch Father Pop-up give you the golden treatment.  Via Adverblog.

A new advertising trend I’ve seen recently isn’t groundbreaking by any means, but I think it signals a new shift in the way major companies and advertisers are thinking about social media in their campaigns.  I’m starting to see both online and offline ads pushing users to their facebook page rather than their .com homepage. Check out the Bud Light banner ad below or watch one of the new Vitamin Water 10 commercials.

My quick thoughts on why this is a good thing;

• Once the user takes an action, the advertiser doesn’t have to pay to retarget you with new ads.
• The advertiser gets more bang for their buck.  The word of mouth marketing is worth a lot more than a visit to a lame website with only nutrition facts available.  Your entire network now knows you’re a fan.
• If you google ‘Vitamin Water 10′ the only page (besides paid placements) that is related with Glaceau is in position 5 and falls below the fold. This probably has to do with the entire site being in flash, lacking detailed product page titles and basic SEO, but I guess if you can’t own your brand name, then you change the rules.
• Facebook allows you to create almost an exclusive club for the product, providing a stream of new content and interactions with the brand on a regular basis.
• Directing users to your social site allows you to talk to them in the space they spend a lot of  their time without the waste of the usual banner ads.

What do you think?  As a consumer, would you rather interact with a brand on Facebook? If you’re an advertiser, have you tried this approach? If so, how did it work?