7 Proven Ways to Integrate Social Media on Your Site

Overview The explosive growth in social media marketing over the past few years has rended scores of carefully crafted corporate websites irrelevant as marketing tools. But don't take our word for it. Just Google it. Analysts, journalists, bloggers and marketing thought-leaders have been singing thi tune for awhile. Jeremiah Owyang started leading the chorus back in 2007 when he was at Forrester Research (he's now at Altimeter Group.). The corporate website is an unbelievable collection of hyperbole, artificial branding, and pro-corporate content, " he said. "As a result, trusted decisions are being made on other locations on the Internet... networks, rating sites, chat rooms, and even blogs."....

7 Google Tools to Improve Your Marketing Effectiveness

In this document, you will have chances to know and understand about helpful tools of Google can help your marketing effectiveness. Include: Google Adwords, Google Docs, Google Keyword Tool, Google Alerts, Google Reader, Google News, Google Places.

99 Tools to Help You Generate Leads with Social Media

Let discover how to generate your leads whith 99 tools from Social Media.

Sugarshots Results: The Call to Action

To determine if featuring a call to action in the form of a button on a banner will increase response rates.Despite its reputation for being a creative and innovative field, advertising has always had its share of conventional thinking. Advertising classes teach aspiring creatives the difference between the right way to create an ad and, if not exactly the wrong way, then the not-so-right way to create an ad. There are right places to put the logo, and wrong places. Good uses of type, and bad....

Conversion Rate và thách thức nhân đôi lợi nhuận

Một sáng đẹp trời chúng ta được sếp triệu tập đến một cuộc họp và đưa ra một mệnh lệnh đơn giản nhưng sét đánh: “Em làm sao anh không cần biết, nhưng công ty cần nâng lợi nhuận tháng tới lên… gấp đôi”

Showing posts with label Articles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Articles. Show all posts

Tuesday, 30 August 2011

15 Case Studies to Get Your Client On Board With Social Media

15 Case Studies to Get Your Client On Board With Social Media


Jonathan Rick is a social media strategist in Arlington, VA. You can follow him on Twitter @jrick and read his blog atJonathanRick.com.
In business, definitions are everywhere. They’re your first line of defense in mission statements, job descriptions, expense accounts, statements of work, accounting principles and the like. If you fail to define the parameters and jurisdiction of a tool or concept, you’ll be left with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous but ultimately vague application: “I know it when I see it.”
Understandably, the plague of ambiguous definitions is why a plethora of pundits have sought to corner the elusive term “social media” within the scope of the dictionary. For instance, Booz Allen Hamilton defines the phenomenon as “electronic tools, technologies, and platforms.” Wikipedia prefers to dub social media as “Web-based and mobile technologies.” Finally, Duct Tape Marketing nominates social media as “the use of technology combined with social interaction.” Got all that? If you don’t, your clients surely won’t follow either.
In order to sell the field that everyone is talking about, but on which few can illuminate, we first need to reframe the conversation. Instead of striving for Merriam-Webster precision, social media strategists would do better to focus on case studies.
Specifically, social media strategist Ari Herzog has argued, when you reach for the term “social media,” don’t spew broad buzzwords like Facebook or Twitter or YouTube. Instead:

  • Narrow your focus to responding to customer complaints, as Comcast does on Twitter.
  • Build brand loyalty, as Bisnow does with e-newsletters, as Skittles does on Facebook, and as the Wine Library does with its podcasts.
  • Issue blog posts and tweets instead of news releases, as Google does with its blog, and as its now-former CEO did with Twitter.
  • Re-purpose your existing content, and thus enlarge your audience, as The New York Times does with Twitter, as the FBI does with Scribd, and as Dell does with SlideShare.
  • Manage your reputation, as countless companies do — or try to do — with Wikipedia.
  • Conduct crisis communications, as Johnson & Johnson does with its blog.
  • Hold contests to improve your algorithms, as Netflix did with the Netflix Prize.
  • Crowdsource your challenges, as the U.S. Army did with its field manuals.
  • Demonstrate thought leadership, as recruiter Lindsay Olson does with her blog.
  • Research free advertising opportunities, as Allstate does on YouTube.
  • Showcase your wares, as Zappos does with its blog, and boost your sales, as Dell does on Twitter.
  • Recruit employees, as Booz Allen does on LinkedIn.

In these contexts, “social media” refers not to platforms, but to what those applications enable: social interaction.
Think of these interactions the next time you confront a reluctant client. Instead of touting Twitter in general, instead emphasize the importance of reaching new and savvy stakeholders using the platform. Instead of evangelizing for a blog, show how blogging can generate leads. Instead of pointing to videos gone viral, explore video tools that will help your client develop a brand identity.
By unpacking social media’s broad definition on a case-by-case basis, you will not only render it familiar to a client, but also present it as something entirely doable.

Saturday, 27 August 2011

101 Marketing Quotes 2011

Thursday, 25 August 2011

Half of Parents Say Kids Watch More TV in Summer - Marketing Charts

Half of Parents Say Kids Watch More TV in Summer

Many parents of those 17 or younger and living at home say their children consume various types of media more, including watching television and playing video games, during the summer months, according to a Harris Poll/Adweek survey released today. Almost half of parents say their children consume more television (49%) and video games (46%) in the summer, with a quarter saying their children consume much more of these types of media and entertainment during the summer (23% and 24%).

One in six or less say their children consume less of these types of media in the summer (16% and 13%) while three in ten say the amount consumed is neither more nor less in the summer than at other times of the year (29% and 27%).
Increased television viewing was most prevalent in the South and West regions of the US, where 58% and 52% of parents, respectively, said their children were watching more television. 55% and 53% said video game use was up.

In looking at Internet use and watching movies, the survey found similar results — 44%-45% of parents say that their children do more of these activities in the summer, compared to 13% and 14% who say they do less.

In general, with school out of session, children have more hours to consume media, but their habits may also be influenced by a few changes in the household. Almost six in ten parents say they loosen the rules during the summer, allowing their kids more freedom (57%) to consume various types of media.

One quarter of parents say they do not loosen media consumption rules in the summer (26%) and fewer say that they do not have any rules for their children’s media consumption at all (17%).

While dads and moms are equally likely to loosen (56% vs. 57%) or not loosen (27% vs. 25%) the rules for their children’s media consumption in the summer, there are noticeable differences by region.

The findings are based on responses of 2,950 U.S. adults surveyed online between August 5 and 9, 2011, by Harris Interactive.

Saturday, 20 August 2011

Conversion Rate và thách thức nhân đôi lợi nhuận | Apo's Blog

Conversion Rate và thách thức nhân đôi lợi nhuận | Apo's Blog


Vừa qua tôi được tham gia một lớp tập huấn. Lớp tập trung khá nhiều người làm online marketing trong khu vực, người hướng dẫn cũng là một chuyên gia hàng đầu trong lĩnh vực này, tiến sĩ Brian Clifton – ông từng làm việc cho Google và hiện tại đang là CEO của Omega Media.

Trong một session, ông hỏi đưa ra một câu hỏi khá thú vị: “What is the ROI of measuring your ROI?” (đây là một cách chơi chữ, ROI viết tắt từ chữ Return of Investment – tạm hiểu như là hiệu quả đầu tư), và ROI ở đây được dùng cho trường hợp của online marketing.

Ông đưa ra tình huống là một doanh nghiệp đã nhận định được khá rõ ràng về tầm quan trọng của online marketing. Và đang cố gắng để tối ưu hóa hiệu quả của các hoạt động online marketing họ đang làm, trong đó việc quan trọng là tối ưu hóa tỉ lệ conversion rate.


Đầu tiên chúng ta cần nói sơ qua về khái niệm Conversion Rate (CR), CR có thể hiểu đơn giản đó là tỉ lệ giữa tổng traffic của website trên một mục tiêu (trong internet marketing, những mục tiêu này được gọi là Goal) nào đó ta đặt ra. Với website thương mại điện tử thì những Goal này dễ dàng thấy hơn, đó có thể là doanh số đặt hàng (check-out), thanh toán (payment) qua mạng. Với những website cung cấp nội dung hay xây dựng cộng đồng – không phải là website thương mại điện tử – thì những Goal này có thể là số lượng thành viên đăng ký, số lượng người đăng ký nhận enewsletter… Việc đo lường này được xác định bởi việc những trang tương ứng được load, ví dụ với site thương mại điện tử đó là tỉ lệ trang checkout, hoặc trang payment được load.

Công thức tính conversion rate như sau:
Conversion rate = Tổng số lượng Goal Achievements / Tổng traffic của website

Tỉ lệ CVR cao có nghĩa là các hoạt động marketing của chúng ta đang đi đúng hướng, đến đúng người cần, đúng nơi cần và đúng lúc họ cần. Ngược lại nếu tỉ lệ CR thấp, điều đó tương đương với việc chúng ta đang lãng phí tiền của cho các hoạt động online marketing không đúng đối tượng. Đây chính là một trong những chỉ số quan trọng đo lường hiệu quả các hoạt động online marketing của chúng ta.

Nắm được khái niệm này, chúng ta sẽ dễ dàng quay lại với câu hỏi bấy lâu nay. Làm sao để tối ưu hiệu quả của online marketing? Câu trả lời đơn giản là tăng tỉ lệ Conversion Rate, vì sao lại vậy?

Trước khi đi sâu vào phân tích chi tiết, ta điểm sơ qua thêm một số thuật ngữ chuyên ngành của online marketing.

CPC – Cost per click: Đây là chỉ số dùng để định giá cho quảng cáo online, hiểu nôm na đây là số tiền mà marketer phải trả cho một lần click lên banner, quảng cáo online của họ. Đa số marketer thường chỉ thích CPC thấp, đây là một quan niệm sai lầm, vì CPC thấp trong nhiều trường hợp chưa chắc đã tốt, vì CPC còn phải đi song song với mức độ tập trung của cộng đồng. Quảng cáo trên một website báo điện tử đại chúng, CPC sẽ rẻ tuy nhiên nếu mặt hàng của chúng ta là một mặt hàng chuyên biệt, ví dụ là xe ô tô chẳng hạn, thì quảng cáo trên otosaigon – CPC sẽ cao hơn tuy nhiên đối tượng nhận được thông điệp quảng cáo lại chính xác hơn.

Conversion(s): Đây là tỉ lệ được tính ra từ Conversion Rate, ví dụ website của chúng ta có tổng traffic là 1000 visitors, với CR là 10% – suy ra số lượng conversion(s) chúng ta có là 100.

Đến đây chúng ta sẵn sàng cho việc quay trở lại với câu hỏi: Đâu là ích lợi của online marketing? Tôi đã trả lời rằng đó là việc tăng tỉ lệ CR. Trong phân tích này ta đặt một tình huống là chúng ta có một website có tổng traffic hàng tháng là 100.000 visitor (khách đến website). Lợi nhuận (doanh thu sau khi trừ chi phí) của chúng ta là $12.500.

- Đặt v là tổng Visitor(s), ta có: v = 100.000
- Đặt c là tỉ lệ Cost per Click (CPC), giả định tỉ lệ này là 1 đô la, ta có: c = 1
- Vậy suy ra tổng chi phí (ta gọi là cT) cho 100.000 visitors sẽ là: cT = v x c = $100.000
- Giả sử website của chúng ta đang có tỉ lệ CR là 3%, đặt r là tỉ lệ CR, ta có: r = 3.0%
- Suy ra tổng Conversion của chúng ta là (gọi là C): C = r x v = 3.000
- Giả sử chúng ta đang bán một mặt hàng với giá là 75usd, vậy ta có Revenue/Conversion = $75, ta gọi chỉ số này là V = $75
- Suy ra tổng doanh thu (ta gọi là T) của chúng ta là: T = V x C = 3.000 x $75 = $225.000
- Tiếp tục ta trừ chi phí sản xuất, quản lý, nhân công… giả định tỉ lệ này là 50% (tạm gọi là bán 1 lời 1). Ta gọi tỉ lệ này là m = 50% , vậy chi phí sản xuất (gọi là n) ta cón = m x T = 50% x $225.000 = $112.500
- Mang tổng doanh thu ta trừ tỉ lệ này cộng với tổng chi phi online marketing (cT), ta ra được tổng lợi nhuận (gọi là P), ta có: P = T – (n + cT) = $225.000 – ($112.500 + $100.000) = $12.500
→ Đến đây ta đã có tổng lợi nhuận sau khi trừ chi phí sản xuất, chi phí marketing là $12.500 mỗi tháng.

Một sáng đẹp trời chúng ta được sếp triệu tập đến một cuộc họp và đưa ra một mệnh lệnh đơn giản nhưng sét đánh: “Em làm sao anh không cần biết, nhưng công ty cần nâng lợi nhuận tháng tới lên… gấp đôi”

Chúng ta về vắt óc suy nghĩ và thường thì giải pháp của chúng ta là xin nạp mạnh kinh phí marketing hơn nữa để tăng Traffic của website lên. Và đây là lựa chọn dễ dãi nhất của các bạn marketer lười biếng nhất và nó cũng tiềm ẩn nhiều rủi ro nhất. Vì sao?

Nếu làm theo cách đó chúng ta sẽ phải nâng chi phí lên gấp đôi.
v = 200.000
c = 1
cT = v x c = $200.000
r = 3%
C = r x v = 3% x 200.000 = 6.000
V = $75
T = V x C = $75 x 6.000 = $450.000
m = 50%
n = m x T = 50% x $450.000 = $225.000
P = T – (n + cT) = $450.000 – ($225.000 + $200.000) = $25.000

Yep!!! Chúng ta đã hoàn thành mục tiêu sếp đề ra.

Nghe có vẻ hợp lý, sếp muốn tăng lợi nhuận gấp đôi thì cho em kinh phí để để làm marketing gấp đôi. Và bạn hào hứng trình bày cho sếp vì sao bạn cần kinh phí gấp đôi với những công thức trên. Nhưng cẩn thận, những điều nghe chừng có vẻ rất hợp lý đó có thể khiến chúng ta nhận được quyết định… cho thôi việc

Case Study: How Colgate Used Online Video, Social Media and Mobile to Drive Engagement and Purchase Intent


Colgate-Palmolive had a unique marketing challenge in launching Colgate Wisp, its new mini disposable toothbrush. Colgate began introducing the mini brush in April 2009 with help from Big Fuel, a social media marketing agency. The mini brush created a new product category for Colgate and meant marketing to a young, urban target—18- to 25-year-old men and women—a demographic the personal care giant doesn’t typically focus dedicated attention on. It was clear that the company needed to figure out how to introduce the product into relevant conversations and contexts where its college student and young professional target hangs out.

Challenge: Colgate wanted to get Wisp into the hands of young, urban consumers who are active daters. The audience is active and mobile and dating opportunities can be created in an instant via text. “Wisp is almost a brand new product category,” said Avi Savar, Founding Partner and CEO of Big Fuel. “It’s an on-the-go product. The biggest challenge for us was making the product and brand relevant to the young consumer market.”

Not surprisingly, Colgate turned to social media to help it launch a multi-pronged campaign. But who wants to “friend” or follow a disposable toothbrush on Facebook? Colgate and Big Fuel tackled the challenge by conducting a lot of research. Big Fuel worked up several creative strategies and testing the concepts. “We wanted to know, what does this product represent or mean to the audience?” Savar said.

Typically, Colgate talks to moms, but with Wisp, the marketer knew it needed unique social media components to introduce the product and seed interest. Big Fuel worked closely with Y&R and VML, Colgate’s creative and digital agencies respectively on the TV campaign, microsite, online banners and social media elements.

Strategy:Big Fuel came up with a “Be More Kissable” creative platform that positioned Colgate Wisp as a kind of technology advancement that it believed would connect with the target audience. The idea centered around self-confidence: “Everyone wants to be more kissable not just within the context of a physical kiss, but all the time. Feeling kissable is about feeling confident. From a social media standpoint, we thought it was a good platform,” Savar explained. Colgate thought so too.

The concept, one of four that Big Fuel developed, was tested in four different markets. The linchpin involved creating irreverent online video content and syndicating it on YouTube and other video-sharing hubs. Along with a strategy focus on online video, Colgate Wisp developed a Facebook application and a Be the Face of Wisp photo contest.

At the heart of the strategy—online video. Big Fuel developed a series of viral videos, partnering with eight different publishers including CollegeHumor and YourTango and Web celebrities like Kip Kay, known for his how-to and prank videos, to syndicate the content. It released eight wacky videos targeting niche interests among the target audience, contextually integrating Colgate Wisp into how-to, comedy and talkshow-genre video content. The goal was to achieve a seamless content integration with no heavy brand sell. Online video syndication offered Colgate the potential to scale its vast consumer target.

The photo contest sought to identify the most kissable person in America: Participants who entered the contest uploaded a photo to colgatewisp.com and received a widget that enabled friends to vote for them. The widget was shared via the Facebook and MySpace networks and via the microsite. “It was like a syndicated version of ‘Are you hot or not?’, Savar said.

Big Fuel turned the contest into a social experience by enabling the widget to syndicate the photo content. Participants uploaded their photo, chose a specific Wisp color and placed it in the photo as an overlay. The contest enabled segmentation by geographic area as well. For example, when a man entered the contest, he could choose to look only at women in Chicago who entered the contest and decide whether they were kissable or not. On average, Big Fuel reports that there were 11 votes cast per person or one individual voting on 11 different people.

To drive brand engagement further, Big Fuel created a Facebook app called Spin the Wisp. Once the app was installed, it had the names of the consumer’s Facebook friends. Consumers could have the app randomly pick Facebook friends for the game or they could handpick up to 16 people to fill it. The Wisp landed on exotic locations and flavors—a woman could send a virtual kiss from Paris to her crush. Spin the Wisp became a novel way to flirt.

Results: Big Fuel reports that a Real Life Twitter video produced with CollegeHumor netted more than 1.7 million plus views. The video featured man-in-the-street style interviews by a standup comic who walked around blurting out things like: “I just found this new wisp. Anybody want a kiss?”

The Kip Kaye video “Quick Draw Gadget” in which Kip constructs a quick draw gadget out of a Colgate Wisp, has generated more than 1 million views. In total, the eight videos in the “Be More Kissable” series racked up more than 4.1 million views on YouTube as of late June 2010.

The two most recent videos for Colgate Wisp are College Humor POV “New Year’s Eve” which logged 1,255,872 views and Michelle Phan’s “Kissable Lips” video which has 1,791,352 views as of late June. All the videos were seeded on multiple video-sharing sites.

The game saw a 10% click-through rate. Each time someone received a virtual kiss, they got a notification that appeared on their wall. The 10% click-through rate was based on the total number engagements vis-à-vis the notifications.

The average number of spins per install on Spin the Wisp was 7.6. There were more than 100,000 engagements and 40,000 + installations of the widget and more than 1 million unique impressions of the widget. There were 500,000 views of a faux Wisp infomercial.

Overall, as of May, 2010, Big Fuel reported 6 million+ total engagements with the Wisp campaign (widget installs, video views, game plays, pass-alongs). Big Fuel considered “engagement” as active participation, meaning someone played the game, shared it, watched a video—there was a 10-second minimum on viewing—and commented on a video, Savar said.

Key Takeaways: Colgate learned the value of what an engagement is, according to Savar. “It was the first time they ever measured anything based on engagements. They are accustomed to the number of impressions.”

Now, Colgate is working to extend the engagement metric to its more mature brands. The brand has begun to understand what the value of video, game and other content is vs. framing content only within the context of an ad buy, Savar explained.

While the campaign was in the market for four months, the videos and game continue to run.

Next Steps: Colgate has moved forward with content marketing and social marketing for others of its product brands. Colgate shot new videos for the Wisp product site and two additional viral video. The brand says it’s looking to turn customers into audiences and its brands into social identities.

Image via Facebook

Sugarshots Results: The Call to Action - iMediaConnection.com

Sugarshots Results: The Call to Action - iMediaConnection.com


The Test Objective

Campaign Details:
Client: Sugarshots, Inc.
Agency: Basement, Inc.
Ad Network: 24/7 Real Media
Ad Serving + Tracking: Atlas DMT
Site Analytics: Think Metrics

Useful links:

Tracking Report:

To determine if featuring a call to action in the form of a button on a banner will increase response rates.
Despite its reputation for being a creative and innovative field, advertising has always had its share of conventional thinking. Advertising classes teach aspiring creatives the difference between the right way to create an ad and, if not exactly the wrong way, then the not-so-right way to create an ad. There are right places to put the logo, and wrong places. Good uses of type, and bad.
One of the better known rules, or conventions, is the call to action (CTA). To many direct marketing practitioners, not having a CTA is the equivalent of a yellow pages ad without a phone number.
At times, the CTA may be a legitimate claim. There’s limited supply, or the offer ends soon. However, often in online advertising, ‘click here’ or ‘learn more’ are tossed onto the ad just because conventional wisdom says to do so. But are those CTAs really bringing anything to the party? That’s what our test this week will try to determine.
To recap the creatives, we’re testing two ads that are identical except for one has a call-to-action button that states ‘learn more,’ and the other has no call-to-action button. To review the intro to this test, refer to Monday’s article.
Charts & Analysis

This test is primarily a response measurement. Does our ‘learn more’ CTA add anything that will increase the banner’s response rate? The most accurate way to calculate this is with the click-visits to the landing page metric. In this case, we’re using the home page for the landing page. For more information on this metric and why we’re using it, please refer to the explanation of the metrics terms.
In the click-visits column on Chart 1, we see a 27 percent lift in performance for the ad without a button. That’s not only a sizeable increase, but the impression counts and differences in responses place these results in a 99 percent confidence interval. Clearly, from a response standpoint, the button not only isn’t adding to the banner’s performance, it’s actually detracting by a considerable amount.
Chart 1: Home Page Click-visits
Creative DescriptionImpressionsClicksClickthrough Rate (%)Click-visits
Strategy 1:Button391,7502970.076173
Strategy 2: No button391,5953420.087220
TOTAL783,3456390.087393
I mentioned that this test is primarily a response test. The button/no-button factor is almost entirely based on immediate visual impact. And that’s what the click-visit data is covering.
Of course, we don’t want to take anything for granted, no matter how trivial it may seem. So we’ll take a look at some broader data, the page-views that each ad generated. Chart 2 shows us that the two ads are driving almost the same number of page views per click-visitor. Metrics-savvy readers will also notice that an average number of page views per visitor of 1.86 isn’t very high. In an upcoming test we’re going to try to increase that.
Chart 2: Click-visit Page View Totals
Creative DescriptionImpClicksClickthrough Rate(%)Home Page VisitsPage Views - Total
Click-visitsClick-visitsPer Click-visitor
Strategy 1: Button391,7502970.0761733261.88
Strategy 2: No button391,5953420.0872204061.85
TOTAL783,3456390.0873937321.86
I would expect two ads so similar, except for the CTA, to produce similar results once people are on the site. The expectations the ads have created are identical.
Now let’s look at purchase intent. Just to make sure our no-button visitors are as interested in purchasing as our button ad visitors, we’ll compare the visit to purchase page conversion rates for the button and no-button ads.
Chart 3 reveals that the banners are generating an almost equal purchase intent effect, as well. And while our purchase page visits data is still a little sparse, the results are on trend.
Chart 3: Click-visit Traffic to Purchase Page Conversion Rate
Creative DescriptionHome Page VisitsPurchase Page VisitsVisit to Purchase Page Conversion Rate
ClicksClicksClicks
Strategy 1: Button1732514%
Strategy 2: No button2202913%
TOTAL3935414%
This test has shown that the ad without a button performed at a considerably higher rate than the banner with the ‘learn more’ button for our key metric in this test, the click-visit response rate. Additional metrics further validated the findings.
Here’s a quick recap of what we’ve learned.
  • Response Rates: The no-button ad produced an increase in performance of 27 percent above the button ad, at a confidence interval of 99 percent.
  • Depth of Visit: The two ads performed almost identically in page views per visitor. This would be expected for ads so similar strategically and emotionally.
  • Purchase Intent: A similar response comparison as with Depth of Visit, above.
  • Target Audience Continuity: The response rate data held consistent across the general target audience breakdowns. Data levels were sparse in some areas.
Why did the no-button ad perform better? There could be several reasons.
From a graphic design standpoint, the less information a piece of communication has, the more likely it is to pop off the page and get noticed. For that reason alone, the no-button ad would be more likely to capture someone’s attention, and thus more likely to draw a higher response rate.
In Mies van der Rohe’s immortal words, ‘Less is more.’
However, there’s another angle to this which is worth considering. We’re in an era where the consumer is increasingly in control of his media. Consumers are growing accustomed to reading articles when they want to, watching streaming videos when they want to, and downloading music when they want to. And of course, all of that is happening online.
Furthermore, today’s typical online viewer is quite different from many of the newbies of just a few years ago. He's far more sophisticated. So while button/no-button tests may have produced opposite results a few short years ago, a lot has changed since then.
Thus, when our web-savvy viewer sees an ad and then notices the ad’s spurious attempt at generating urgency, maybe he's a little turned off. Perhaps we’re talking down to him, in a subtle but recognizable way.
The viewer knows you can click on a banner. And he knows that there’s more information readily available online. Which means that when we make a call-to-action that states ‘click-here’ or ‘learn more,’ we’re quite possibly putting a parenthetical ‘stupid’ right next to it.

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More