Ads and Social Media
Well, the 49ers almost made it. Ugh, so close. I could hardly sit still watching the 4th quarter. However, it’s fair to say the first half of the game was rather dull. Luckily, I was preoccupied playing “ad bingo” until things picked up.
This week is going to have a little less structure and a little more free-form talk. We just want to pull out some things we noticed this year with the Super Bowl ads. There were some funny ads, some grandeur, and others just icky (yes, Go Daddy). Also, Dodge’s “God Made a Farmer” ad had us Midwesterners all up in a nostalgic tizzy.
But what separated this year’s Super Bowl ads from the past? The emphasis on social media, the interaction between consumers and the companies, the attempt to connect – that’s what was different.
Twitter was King
According to Marketing Land, there were 52 national TV commercials during the Super Bowl. Of those 52 ads, 26 mentioned Twitter – that’s 50 percent! Facebook only got 4 mentions, and Google+ was left in the dust with none. But isn’t G+ reportedly the No. 2 social network in the world? Hm, interesting.
Let’s take a look into Twitter then, since it was the hot topic.
While 26 ads featured Twitter, did their hashtags actually work? Did Subway’s clunky hashtag “#15yrwinningstreak” find its way into onto our home feeds?
^^Those are pretty good numbers for Doritos and CK, and as Sysomos mentions, the two ads that used their own name as a hashtag had better results.
If we look at those numbers on their own, thousands of tweets for Doritos looks great, but if you consider the millions of tweets in America every day, that’s actually a pretty small number. While many tweets were about the Super Bowl or the advertisements, few people actually used the designated hashtags.
That doesn’t mean people did tweet about the Super Bowl ads. Taco Bell received 215,000 tweets after their funny “Viva Young” commercial – and they didn’t use a hashtag.
So maybe the mentions of Twitter in the ads didn’t quite work, but Twitter mentioning the ads sure did.
Forbes had a clever line about the power outage – “Call it the Super Bowl of real-time marketing.” Usually viewers are wrapped up in the game and ads, but the power outage slowed things down. Since there were no commercials during the outage, people grew bored, pulled out their smartphones, and started chatting on social media – about the game, the ads, and who pulled the plug.
Smart advertisers knew what to do with the outage with a spike of tweeters online. Companies like Walgreens, Oreo, Tide, and Audi hit the Twittersphere and capitalized the opportunity by tweeting clever lines about their product and the outage.
The power outage was the epitome of real-time marketing.
Maybe Twitter was more popular this Super Bowl because of its immediacy and simplicity. A consumer can tweet without talking too much attention away from the game. But why did Facebook lose so much attention? And why did Google+ receive no love for the second year in a row? Let us know what you think, and we can toss around ideas.
Go More In-Depth…
We never want you to feel limited to only what we’ve posted. Here are a list of other articles you can check out: