Print newsbrand ads are increasing in effectiveness

Source: Newsworks, The ROI study 2016

Print newsbrand ads also drive long-term business effects Campaigns including print newsbrands are particularly successful at delivering increases in customer acquisition, loyalty and profit. They also deliver increases in market share – but the increase in the proportion of short-term campaigns using print in 2016 means that this advantage is perhaps not being fully exploited by advertisers and their agencies. Source: IPA Databank UK case studies 2012-2016 (52% of all cases)

Adding to this, print newsbrands are becoming more effective over time Everyone knows that newspaper print circulations have declined, (though over 14 million people do still read a print edition daily, which is still a significant proportion of the UK population, especially considering much-hyped digital sites like Buzzfeed only reach 163k daily, according to NRS PADD). But does a decline in scale mean a decline in effectiveness? Clearly not. Just as growing digital numbers in themselves don’t mean heightened impact on brand business results. Overall, ad effectiveness is in decline. But this latest analysis shows that in fact, print effectiveness is growing over time across key business measures. This is also apparent for other “legacy media” – as digital media expands, TV, newspapers and the like are actually working harder in the media mix. Source: IPA Databank UK case studies 2012-2016 (52% of all cases) compares users of print to non-users, data aggregated over 6 years for robust sample sizes

They’re increasingly effective at delivering new customers There is often an assumption that digital channels are most appropriate for bringing in new customers, especially those trendy digital natives who apparently don’t watch, listen to or read “traditional media”. But the data shows that in fact print is increasingly effective at delivering new customers to brand advertisers. Campaigns including print were 39% more effective at delivering new customers than campaigns without print in the 6 years ending 2004. But this rose to a hefty 67% differential in the 6 years to 2016. Source: IPA Databank UK case studies 2012-2016 (52% of all cases) compares users of print to non-users, data aggregated over 6 years for robust sample sizes

They’re also delivering greater market share uplifts over time Print newsbrands are highly effective at delivering market share. There is an upward trend for print to deliver very large uplifts in market share. (The risk is that, if short-termism takes an even stronger hold among advertisers and agencies, media effectiveness will be severely compromised. This is a particular concern for print newsbrands, as over a third of 2016 cases using print are already short-term) Source: IPA Databank UK case studies 2012-2016 (52% of all cases) compares users of print to non-users, data aggregated over 6 years for robust sample sizes

Why are print newsbrands becoming more effective?

Ad recall has improved over the past decade and all other measures have increased among people noticing the ad Print’s effectiveness has increased over the last decade across all of RAM’s measures, through recall, recognition, engagement and action. Ad recall: Do you recall seeing the ad? % saying yes Attention: How closely did you read/look at the ad? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Branding: How difficult or easy was it to understand the source/sender of the ad? % scoring above 9 on 10 pt scale Familiarity: How well did you previously know the advertiser? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Like ad: How did you like the ad? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Easy to understand: The ad is easy to understand. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale New Information: The ad contains news or new information. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Positive: The ad makes me feel positive towards the advertiser. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Appeals to me: Ad appeals to you. % Yes Benefit: Have you benefited or will you benefit from something in the ad? % Yes Interesting: The ad is interesting. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Fresh approach: The ad has an original design. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Emotional Reaction: Did you react to the advertisement emotionally? % Yes Look for more information: Have you looked for or will you look for more information as a result of seeing the ad? % Yes Visit a website: Have you visited or will you visit the website as a result of the ad? % Yes Visit advertiser: Have you visited or will you visit this advertiser as a result of seeing this ad? % Yes Have bought/will buy: Have you bought or will you buy something as a result of seeing this ad? % Yes Recommend: Have you recommended or will you recommend the company / product due to the advertising? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale (Added in April 2016) Discuss: Have you been talking about / discussing the company, offer or product as a result of seeing the advertising? % Yes (Added in April 2016) Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Base: 2007/8: 215 ads, 2009/10: 280 ads, 2011/12: 248 ads, 2013/14: 230 ads, 2015/6: 321 ads. Ad Recall base: read the newspaper. All other scores base: Noticed ad

With ad recall having increased by 45% since 2007/8 Those who recalling print ads after reading the newspaper has increased 45% over the last decade. Ad recall: Do you recall seeing the ad? % saying yes Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Base: 2007/8: 215 ads, 2009/10: 280 ads, 2011/12: 248 ads, 2013/14: 230 ads, 2015/6: 321 ads. Respondent base: read the newspaper. Question: Do you recall seeing the ad?

And close attention has doubled since 2007/8 The number of readers saying they paid close attention to the tested ad has doubled over the past decade. Attention: How closely did you read/look at the ad? % scoring above 7 on a 10 pt scale Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Base: 2007/8: 215 ads, 2009/10: 280 ads, 2011/12: 248 ads, 2013/14: 230 ads, 2015/6: 321 ads. Respondent base: read newspaper. Question: How closely did you read/look at the ad? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale

75% of readers look at each print ad on average Print newsbrands deliver high standout and dwell time 75% of readers look at each print ad on average Print newsbrand ads are viewed for 2 ½ times longer than an average digital ad Larger sizes, special formats and multiple ads per issue increase impact and dwell times The fact that attention is outstanding when it comes to print newsbrands backs up the findings of our recent eye-tracking study conducted with Lumen Research. The research established that print newsbrands deliver high standout and dwell time, where ads are viewed for on average 2½ times longer than digital ads generally (and that’s if the digital ad is viewed by eyeballs not bots, let alone viewable!). Lumen Research also shows that larger sizes, special formats and multiple ads per issue increase impact and dwell time. Source: Newsworks, Attention in a quality environment, 2017 Newsbrands = theguardian.com, telegraph.co.uk, independent.co.uk, indy100.independent.co.uk, thetimes.co.uk, ft.com, dailymail.co.uk, mirror.co.uk, standard.co.uk, thesun.co.uk, dailystar.co.uk, metro.co.uk, express.co.uk, manchestereveningnews.co.uk, walesonline.co.uk, dailyrecord.co.uk. Others = msn.com, uk.yahoo.com, digitalspy.com, engadget.com, mashable.com, ibtimes.co.uk, thisismoney.co.uk, bleacherreport.com, pistonheads.com, weather.com, howtogeek.com, theregister.co.uk, sportinglife.com, channel4.com, itv.com, channel5.com, marieclaire.co.uk, timeout.com, trustedreviews.com, goodtoknow.co.uk, bbcgoodfood.com, pcadvisor.co.uk, nme.com, autoexpress.co.uk, forbes.com, radiotimes.com

As well as commanding high levels of attention 80% 75% 73% 68% Newsworks’ 2016 study with PwC, ‘The Battle for Attention’, demonstrates that print commands the highest level of attention. 60% of regular newspaper print readers don’t consume any other media at the same time as reading their newspaper – ‘solus’ attention, meaning newspaper print comes in ahead of the likes of short online video, commercial TV, and social media on attention measures. 66% 54% Source: Newsworks, Battle for attention 2016

And attention correlates with action P=0.87 P=0.91 P=0.77 P=0.76 We know that attention is paramount when it comes to the ad effectiveness, but why? RAM data shows that there’s an incredibly strong positive statistical correlation between attention and action measures. Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Base: 2007: 84 ads, 2008: 131 ads, 2009: 103 ads, 2010: 177 ads, 2011: 117 ads, 2012: 131 ads, 2013: 131 ads, 2014: 99 ads, 2015: 172 ads, 2016: 149 ads, 2017: 53 ads. Ad Recall base: read the newspaper. All other scores base: Noticed ad. Pearson correlation coefficient. Strongest possible positive correlation = 1.

We see that people are now more likely to act in response to print newsbrand ads We see that people are more likely to act in response to ads they see in print as time goes on, with increases in measures such as ‘look for more information’, ‘visit website’ and ‘visit advertiser’. Look for more information: Have you looked for or will you look for more information as a result of seeing the ad? % Yes Visit a website: Have you visited or will you visit the website as a result of the ad? % Yes Visit advertiser: Have you visited or will you visit this advertiser as a result of seeing this ad? % Yes Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Base: 2007/8: 215 ads, 2009/10: 280 ads, 2011/12: 248 ads, 2013/14: 230 ads, 2015/6: 321 ads. Respondent base: Noticed ad. Question: Have/will you…look for more information, visit website, visit advertiser

And claimed buying has improved Claimed buying has also improved over this period. When you get concentrated attention, the benefits are clear later on down the purchase funnel. Purchase consideration, for example, has more than doubled in the last decade Have bought/will buy: Have you bought or will you buy something as a result of seeing this ad? % Yes Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Base: 2007/8: 215 ads, 2009/10: 280 ads, 2011/12: 248 ads, 2013/14: 230 ads, 2015/6: 321 ads. Respondent base: Noticed ad. Question: Have you bought or will you buy something as a result of seeing this ad?

Newsbrand print circulation Decrease in investment in print newsbrands is outpacing audience decline… this has gone too far Newsbrand print circulation In recent years, circulation of print newsbrands has fallen, that there’s no denying. However, the knock on effect this seems to be having on advertising spend is completely disproportionate with decrease in spend far outpacing this declining audience. The quality of the audience that print commands is rising, with fringe and occasional readers who less likely to engage with content or being the ones who are leaving print. The increasingly attentive audience that consumes print newsbrands is providing healthy returns to advertisers/brands from every category. Combining print and digital newsbrands, the picture is one of decline. Although investment in digital newsbrands is growing, it is not yet compensating for the exodus from print. Source: Total available categories SMI 2011-2015 Newsbrands = Newspapers (inc newspaper magazines), Digital newsbrands 13.7% 12.5% 11.4% 9.6% 7.6% 6.2% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: SMI (Standard Media Index)

Print newsbrand ads have increased in effectiveness Evidence demonstrates that print newsbrands are becoming more effective in terms of long-term business effects +50% uplift in price sensitivity in comparison to non-users +217% loyalty in comparison to non-users +85% customer acquisition in comparison to non-users +19% profit in comparison to non-users RAMetrics data corroborates this, showing that print ads are effective, and effectiveness is increasing over time. Since 2007/8 brand measures have had significant uplifts +45% ad recall +41% attention +143% claimed buying Print newsbrands are viewed 2½ times longer than the average digital ad, and these high levels of attention correlate with action Drop in spend far outpaces drop in circulation, meaning advertisers are failing to harness the full effectiveness of print as a channel Print newsbrand ads have increased in effectiveness Including print in your communications plan adds a whole host of benefits. We know from Newsworks’ study in conjunction with Benchmarkting that adding newspapers to your campaign boosts ROI by 3 times on average, with newspapers making TV twice as effective, and quadrupling the effectiveness of online display. Marketing consultant Peter Field’s analysis of the IPA databank compares campaigns that used print newsbrands with non-users, and shows that having print newsbrands as part of your campaign drives long term business effects such as price sensitivity, loyalty, customer acquisition, and profit. Another finding from the IPA effectiveness update, perhaps surprising to some although it shouldn’t be, is that print is in fact becoming more effective over time. It’s increasingly effective at delivering new customers, and is proving to be providing greater market share uplifts. At Newsworks, we’ve conducted analyses of RAMetrics data for the UK, to try to find out why print newsbrands are becoming more effective. With an in depth analysis showing the uplift in individual ad metrics over the past decade, the effectiveness of print has improved across every RAM measure, through brand and action measures. For example, ad recall has increased by 45% in the last decade, and attention 41% over that time. The fact that attention is outstanding when it comes to print newsbrands backs up the findings of our recent eye-tracking study conducted with Lumen Research. The research established that print newsbrands deliver high standout and dwell time, where ads are viewed for on average 2½ times longer than digital ads generally (and that’s if the digital ad is viewed by eyeballs not bots, let alone viewable!). Lumen Research also shows that larger sizes, special formats and multiple ads per issue increase impact and dwell time. Newsworks’ 2016 study with PwC, ‘The Battle for Attention’, demonstrates that print commands the highest level of attention. 60% of regular newspaper print readers don’t consume any other media at the same time as reading their newspaper – ‘solus’ attention, meaning newspaper print comes in ahead of the likes of short online video, commercial TV, and social media on attention measures. We know that attention is paramount when it comes to the ad effectiveness, but why? RAM data shows that there’s an incredibly strong positive statistical correlation between attention and action measures. We see that people are more likely to act in response to ads they see in print as time goes on, with increases in measures such as ‘look for more information’, ‘visit website’ and ‘visit advertiser’ and ‘have bought/will buy’. When you get concentrated attention, the benefits are clear later on down the purchase funnel. Purchase consideration, for example, has more than doubled in the last decade. This relationship is substantive evidence that print has multiple roles to play at various stages of the consumer journey. IPA evidence demonstrates that print is becoming more and more effective in terms of business effects. RAMetrics data shows the increasing effectiveness of print across a broad range of metrics. Print newsbrands command high levels of attention and there is a strong correlation between attention and action. In recent years, circulation of print newsbrands has fallen, that there’s no denying. However, the knock on effect this seems to be having on advertising spend is completely disproportionate with decrease in spend far outpacing this declining audience. The quality of the audience that print commands is rising, with fringe and occasional readers who less likely to engage with content or being the ones who are leaving print. The increasingly attentive audience that consumes print newsbrands is providing healthy returns to advertisers/brands from every category.