Television Advertising that Works: An Analysis of Commercials fro ...

Companies such as Intel have moved traditional commercials to Internet sites such as ESPN and Yahoo!, and eMarketer projects online video advertising spending will reach $640 million in 2007 and $1.5 billion by 2009 (Maddox, 2006).

The future remains uncertain and technology clouds the video delivery models. Some see advertising models becoming user specific, basing targeting on opt-in characteristics and by tracking downloads of content. Others see pricing as an issue: viewers who consider it too high opt for current entertainment, thus leading to slower adoption of trends (www.tvn.com, 2006). Fragmentation—audience, personal, and media—contributes to the importance of making television advertising more effective.

Commercial Clutter

Not only are all forms of fragmentation an issue for television advertising effectiveness, but also the increase in commercial clutter has raised cause for concern. The television viewer experiences clutter during commercial breaks when the quantity of messages compete for attention (Azzaro, 2004). Clutter has increased with increasing commercial time per hour over the years. In the 1960s, a time with fewer television networks, commercial breaks totaled 8 minutes per hour (Strachan, 2005). From the 1960s until 2002, that time doubled to 16 minutes an hour during prime time (Arens, 2006). As of 2005, 18 minutes of every prime-time program is reserved for commercial breaks and commercial minutes increase to 21 for daytime programming (Strachan, 2005).

In addition to increasing commercial minutes per program, programmers and advertisers increase clutter within commercial breaks by buying smaller commercial units. For over three decades, the 30-second spot ruled as the standard unit in television advertising, with the 15-second spot a recent popular alternative. Because of fragmentation, advertisers now look for new and even smaller spot availabilities. Recently, advertisers have gone as short as :05 seconds.