Evolving Ad Avoidance

Welcome to week 7! This week focuses on perception and how we view the world around us. However, this post will focus on the topic of ad avoidance and how it has evolved over the years. 

With so many projects coming to fruition next week, these next few days promise to be quite busy. But don't give up! You've got this.


As an Advertising and Public Relations major, the topic of ad avoidance is very important to me. I can make the best advertisement on Earth--one filled with pathos, and entertainment and whole message--but if the consumer decides to change the channel or use ad block, it doesn't matter in the slightest. For advertising, it's now a matter of just getting to that target audience.

If you're unsure what I'm talking about, ad avoidance is defined by our textbook as, "Mechanical ways for consumers to selectively avoid exposure to advertising messages." For example, when someone records an episode of Friends and fast-forwards through the commercials to get back to the show. The ability to record shows and movies gave way to many professionals freaking out; after all, this allowed the consumer to completely bypass advertisements if they so wished. People said that the release of the DVR was the very death of advertising as we knew it. However, as one can see (especially since we just passed the Super Bowl), commercial advertising is far from dead. However, that doesn't mean that ad avoidance is gone.

Emarketer (a blog dedicated to discussions on marketing practices and relevant topics), in their article, Ad Avoidance Isn't New—It's Just Evolving discusses with Walt Horstman offers his opinion on the evolving definition of ad avoidance:

eMarketer: In our current advertising landscape, what do you believe is the most prevalent example of ad avoidance?

Horstman: While this topic is extremely timely right now with the launch of the ad-blocker apps on mobile, technology has been at work trying to block ads for quite a while. Just look at the history of the DVR. When it was introduced, there was great concern over the health of TV advertising—the adoption of the DVR and how consumers use it didn’t bring about the catastrophe scenario that some worried it would. What it did inspire, was a change in the currency for TV advertising so the economic model can adapt to new technological introductions..

I take a very similar position to Horstman on this issue. Ad avoidance is far from dead--with the birth of the internet (and subsequent advertising integrated into it), people are still trying to find new and complex ways to avoid advertisements. Take AdBlock and AdBlockPro for example. These are two add-ons to Google that are becoming increasingly commonplace. Any computer that I open Google Chrome onto for the first time automatically downloads the software.

 Additionally, there's YouTube and the advertisements that are skippable after the first few seconds:

Is YouTube contributing to Ad Avoidance by offering to skip advertisements?

However, Hortmann concludes, that the DVR was not the death of advertisements. It merely changed the economy of TV advertisements and perhaps some practices of those who produced these ads. Likewise, I don't think that modern ways of ad avoidance will mean the end of advertising as we know it. It will simply change the practices as both consumers and advertisers evolve.

As advertisers create new and innovative advertisements that integrate into new technologies, so will customers create ways to avoid these advertisements--I feel as though this is unavoidable. The solution to solving this problem is innovation on the side of the advertisers: create vibrant advertisements on YouTube that catch an individuals attention and keeps them longer than 5 seconds. Use animals and cute children so people will feel a connection to your advertisement--do anything to draw in that audience.

Market Mavens or Opinion Leader?

Welcome to week 6, everyone! We've just had our first consumer marketing exam, so how are you feeling about it? Did you do as well as you hoped you would? 

This week, we're delving into reference groups and the various ways that they can affect your purchasing patterns. Included within these groups can be individuals called 'Market Mavens,' which is a concept that we're really focusing on today!


Being a society so focused on social media and the postings of others, it's safe to say that almost everyone has a market maven in their feed, posting about the latest products, offering their opinions, and keeping everyone up-to-date in their designated areas.

But what exactly is a Market Maven? Our textbook defines them as individuals that "provide significant amount of information to others across a wide array of products...services, and store types." These are individuals that are extremely knowledgeable about a wide variety of market products and offers this knowledge and advice to others.

People often associate Market Mavens as people who have vast connections and social links

However, market mavens are often confused with their similar counterparts, opinion leaders. These equally connected are more specific in their chosen field, oftentimes focusing on a few select genres or types of products. The textbook even states that market mavens are almost like a type of opinion leader,a sub segment, if you would.

When I first began to read this chapter, I immediately recognized a person I follow on Twitter as a market maven. Ray Navarez Jr., a popular Twitch streamer and Youtube personality, has a twitter page that he dedicates a lot to the proliferation of video game merchandise. He posts about upcoming games, popular hoodies and gaming figures. Not only that, in selling a lot of his merchandise through a popular website called "FramRate Merch," he is able to answer questions and concerns about orders and upcoming products to potential consumers. Here is an example of him keeping his customers updated about packaging of sold framerate merchandise:

https://twitter.com/RayNarvaezJr/status/1095543977288306688

However, as I sit down to write this blog, I realize, "Wait. Ray Navarez isn't a market maven. He's technically an opinion leader, isn't he?" Looking closer, I realized that he really only focuses on a select few categories: video games and video game merchandise. He is a connected person, but not so much that he has information about other markets of products. In all honesty, this blog post was going to be about him and the examples of how he's a market maven, that is, until I realized that I was incorrect.

Ray and his dog, Charlie

Take this as an example of how easy it can be to mistake the two. Looking back, I could see how I made this mistake; the two can be very similar. Ray Navarez is very good at creating buzz (exponential expansion of word of mouth information) for products among his fan base. His continual posts about upcoming products and his personal reviews of what is worth buying contribute heavily to the market that follows him and gives him a rather good impression among gamers. 

Like I said, it can sometimes be difficult to differentiate market mavens and opinion leaders, but you should notice a few key differences between the two. Market mavens will:

• Have large groups of connections and social links
• Have posts pertaining to many different markets and products
• Be very receptive to questions and opinions of others, engaging in conversations about products and services

So when you're trying to discern the two, remember to try and identity these aspects. Hopefully you won't make the same mistake as me.

Let me know in the comments if you follow any market mavens or opinion leaders!

Consumer Socialization and Company Exploitation

Welcome to week 4, everyone! In this week, we talk a lot about subcultures, household life cycles and family. However, I think that it's very important that we discuss one of the biggest determinants of a family's buying behavior: the children. With children influencing what mothers and fathers buy, it's a great idea to look into how they are molded into the consumers of tomorrow. 


You're at the grocery store and you hear whining from the other aisle. Glancing over, you notice a child, probably around 8 years old, pulling on his mother's shirt. "I want this one, mom! Ple-e-e-ase!!" He bellows towards the woman, pointing at a cereal with a well-known children's cartoon character plastered on the front. With a sigh of defeat, you watch as the woman places the cereal into the cart in an effort to continue with her busy day. The child promptly shuts up until they reach the next aisle and he spots another branded box of fruit gummies.

You've probably seen this scene numerous times if you've been to the grocery store. However, despite what it may seem like, these children are not just annoying their mothers; they're engaging in an activity to shape themselves as consumers. In essence, when children accompany their parents shopping, they're learning habits and social norms for consumption. According to McNeal's Model on children, there are 5 different levels that a child has when it is starting to be socialized as a consumer:

(Slide property of Dr. Kumar, Xavier Institute)

(Slide property of Dr. Kumar, Xavier Institute)

Based on these slides, we learn that the steps that children follow tend to be:

1. Observation
2. Making requests
3. Making selections
4. Assisted purchases
5. Independent purchases

These are essentially the basic steps towards consumer socialization, a very important part of development for anyone. However, as you think about this, take into consideration the next few pictures.

What you've just seen are several food items that have the faces of well-known cartoon characters. Having known these characters when I was younger, I'm sure that I would've DRAGGED my mother to the cereal and cookie aisle to pick out these foods specifically. I even remember begging her to buy the Scooby Snacks for me because, "It's what Scooby eats!!" And being the good mother she was, she bought me those Scooby Snacks even though they were $1.50 more than the unbranded graham crackers.

This raises an interesting question: Just how ethical is it for companies to market certain products as 'kid-friendly?' Is it ethical to raise the prices of these goods because of the character on the box, knowing that children will pester their parents to buy these branded goods? It's certainly a no-brainer from a business perspective, but what about parents that can't afford to purchase name-brand items for their children? Is it fair to take advantage of the control that children have on their parents' purchasing habits?

In my opinion, I don't really think it's that ethical. First of all, you're taking advantage of the peer pressure-driven minds of children. They're in their formative years, and if they're seen without those Scooby Snacks in their lunchbox, they could be ostracized. With that in mind, parents often give in and purchase these items despite not really being able to afford them. The companies create the hype around the product and the premium price, the children give the pressure to other children to fit in, and the parents buy the product that may bankrupt them. In all honesty, it's not really a nice cycle in the slightest.

But what do you think? Is this excusable because these are their characters? Should parents have a say when it comes to what characters can appear on (i.e, should cartoon characters be banned from appearing on food)? Let me know in the comments below!