Question

Topic: Advertising/PR

Effective Print Advertising Design - Local Paper

Posted by Anonymous on 11/9/2009 at 4:53 PM ET 250 Points
I am the owner of a publication. We are a local publication in my city written about personal development and inspiring stories to help our readership feel great. Part of our advertising philosophy is that if the reader is feeling optimistic and fantastic they are more likely to spend money and support the advertisers.

So far this has not been the case!

This is a 2 part question. Firstly, I'd like to know what typical response rates should be to know that I'm not just being overly optimistic. For our first issues I would estimate we're only at 5000 readers, plus or minus 25%.

I am looking for feedback on the design of both the lay out and advertisements to determine how we can improve them to benefit our advertisers.

If you're able to look, please visit our website [inactive link removed] and under back or current issue at the top menu bar you can view a pdf of the publication.

For advertisement design, should there be only 1 call to action available (many advertisers want #, email and website available)? I don't want all the advertisements to be mini sales letters or look identical, but will do what it takes to make the advertising = results.

Maybe having a contest relating to the advertisers would be effective, or other gimmicks to draw attention to them.

Basically I need a few sets of eyes much smarter and more experienced than myself to look over the layout and designs and give me their gut level reactions to what can be improved to drive more advertising results.

Note: When viewing the PDF, the publication is printed on B&W 11x17 paper, folded in the center.

[Moderator: Inactive link removed from post. 2/14/2011]
To continue reading this question and the solution, sign up ... it's free!
SUBSCRIBE
Or, SIGN IN

RESPONSES

  • Posted by Chris Blackman on 11/9/2009 at 5:48 PM Accepted
    Wait... Isn't there an axiom that good news doesn't sell, only bad news does?

    Anyway - looking at the current issue, it looks like you have only four stories. Think that's enough to hold and grow an audience?

    Leaving the good news/bad news issue behind, I'm not sure that four stories with niche appeal is enough to gain a toehold in a very competitive marketplace.

    Essentially your product is just a vehicle for advertising and the editorial content is the bait to to attract the reader.

    Maybe some more visual appeal, photos, and more content would help?
  • Posted by Jay Hamilton-Roth on 11/9/2009 at 6:30 PM Accepted
    Collect stores on how the products/services your advertisers are selling have made people better: healthier, happier, more financially secure. A sense of well-being in itself doesn't cause people to purchase anything.
  • Posted on 11/9/2009 at 6:33 PM Author
    Let me clarify.

    I'm not looking for your opinion of the world or negative feedback related to your mindset differing from mine. If that's how you get your jollies go elsewhere.

    I am looking for specific and detailed feedback relating to advertising design and layout. Tweak this ad this way, have larger headlines, eliminate boxes, spread out content etc.

    Dan.
  • Posted on 11/9/2009 at 6:40 PM Author
    Also advising me to change the National Economy, of a country I don't even live in (we're Canadian), doesn't help.

    I did make a few calls for you though to my man Obama and he's going to play with interest rates and add some stimulation packages just for you.
  • Posted by Gary Bloomer on 11/9/2009 at 11:10 PM Accepted
    Dear Dan,

    First of all, over the last two decades I've designed literally thousands of press ads—THOUSANDS. And you know what?
    Most of them have sucked.

    Why?

    Because 99 times out of 100, the layout has always been driven
    by some bone-headed halfwit with no background in either design or marketing, but a halfwit who "knew" what they wanted.

    The practical upshot here has been not only crap ads, but also, crap results. Now, am I PROUD of having produced so much crap? No, of course not. Am I WEARY of explaining the following point of view? You bet your boots I am. But this time, please God—just once—let this bloke Dan, up in Canada,—please God, let him listen to what I've got to say and then—pretty please—let him take action.

    Second, there's been a lengthy debate on this forum just recently about sarcasm and civility weighed against frankness and blood and guts answers and solid advice that often, the questioner refuses to listen to.

    OK Dan, here we go. Me? I've been at this game too long and I've got nothing to prove and no hidden agenda. I offer the following advice to HELP YOU, and if you don't like my advice, that's OK.

    You can read it and take it (or not—it's your choice), you can ignore it, you can do whatever the hell you like. All I ask is that you don't waste your time or mine cross examining me.

    Sound fair?

    You don't realize this but ALL the comments you've read above
    are from some of the sharpest minds on this forum, and what you need to understand is that whether you like it or not, what YOU think of THEIR opinion means bugger all.

    I mean that.

    You came to this forum looking for advice and opinion. If you
    don't LIKE what you read you've got to take a moment, just pause please, and think about your response before you shoot the messenger.

    I'm telling you this because your wise ass, snippy remarks above? They're doing you no favours. Right now, every publication that's selling ad space that wants to carry on selling ad space has to, how shall I put this? suck it up. And that, Dan, that includes you.

    So please Dan, for the next few minutes, keep quiet, curb your desire to fire off some cutting remark (because believe me, I've heard them all) and listen.

    The first issue I see is that your advertising philosophy—the one about if your readers are feeling optimistic and fantastic they are more likely to spend money and support the advertisers—is crap.

    It simply doesn't hold water.

    The perception of readers and their happiness has no bearing
    on whether or not they feel all warm and fuzzy about the ads a publication carries. None.

    That's why it isn't working.

    The feedback you're looking for on the design and lay out of your ads won't help you because layout alone will not save an irrelevant ad. The true issue here is NOT the design of the ads. The true issue here is the RELEVANCE of the ads, their SIGNIFICANCE, and their mental stickiness for your readers—NOT their layout.

    Advertisers want readers because readers represent eyeballs.
    But readers don't LIKE ads. Readers want relevant content—content that speaks to them about their felt needs, content that talks to them about what that THEY are experiencing right now.

    So what does this mean? It means that in order to make a connection between the reader and the ads you carry the threads that connect the ads to the content you produce have got to be stronger—there's simply got to be more relevance between the two. When your narrative speaks to a deeply felt need, any additional content (advertisement) that links to that subject matter instantly has greater relevance.

    When your ads benefit your readers your readers will begin to pay attention to the ads. But they'll only do this if the ads themselves provide reasons to act: date-related coupons; social proof in the form of testimonials; website only offers; limited quantity discounts; limited availability of numbers; odd or unusual guarantees, and so on.

    Only when you connect your editorial to these kinds of reasons
    to respond will you and your advertisers begin to see results.

    But until that happens, you're hosed. I don't care whether you're in Canada, the USA, or on the dark side of the Moon, the same rules apply.

    If your ads fail to connect, fail to make an instant impression that connects with some issue your editorial is covering, or if your ads fail to connect with some pressing concern, or fail to tempt readers with some instant, time sensitive and ultra temping offer right now, your advertisers won't see a return on their ad dollars.

    This means that after a certain period, your advertisers walk.
    Sound familiar?

    You've said you "don't want all the advertisements to be mini
    sales letters or look identical" but again Dan, whether it's your publication or not, what you want isn't the important thing here,
    it's what your readers want.

    So, consider working more closely with your advertisers on forming offers and reasons to respond.

    The more these things connect with your main editorial and the more your editorial connects with one main theme (that in turn, connects with the subject of your ads(, the more effective the whole thing will be.

    And when you use teaser copy "Join us for next month's feature packed edition where we concentrate on cat juggling for your home and office", you set up anticipation in the mind of your readers and you can also use additional e-mails and direct mail to pre-seed the ads in the next edition with tightly controlled offers that connect to the new ads.

    This way, your ads and editorial content combine to create a more detailed and dynamic approach.

    I hope this helps. Good luck to you. And yes, I really mean that.

    Gary Bloomer
    Wilmington, DE, USA


  • Posted on 11/10/2009 at 1:16 AM Author
    I want to thank everyone for their responses, and apologize for my earlier defensiveness. The "coffee news" etc comparison always strikes a nerve and I can be one ultra sensitive entrepreneur.

    While we are currently using the format of a Coffee Clutch etc we are and aim to continue providing high quality, intelligent content that provides a lot of value for our readers. My vision for the publication is far grander than the physical format demonstrates (perhaps the reason behind the sensitivity). As of this weekend we have almost a dozen contributers involved, all experts in their respective fields (from health, to finance and personal development). The format seemed to be the best way to build a readership on a budget.

    Randell, my readership estimate comes from copies of the paper removed from locations and feedback received via email as well as website hits traced back to direct url visits or googling our name (we aren't promoting the site other ways except the print publication yet). In terms of design and what to include, I want to do everything possible to serve the advertiser. The reason I addressed the website/phone/email is that perhaps providing just 1 direct call to action would = better results for the advertiser and I would advise them of such.

    In terms of the format, that may also be changing soon and I am open to suggestions. The current idea is to move to a magazine style format/layout and increase the pages to 8 or 12 to allow for room for larger ads and more content.

    Gary your advice is fantastic, and thank you for putting me in my place as well. I think one of the primary messages I take away from your message is that everything in the paper must be linked - > the theme of the content should match the theme of our advertisers and the ads should have time sensitive offers to drive the readers to action if they are interested.

    An ad for an accountants office beside the article on health with no offer was doomed from the start.

    Your point on content/ads makes me think a larger format with 1 or 2 highly relevant ads per page connected to an article on the same industry/topics would be much more effective.
  • Posted by Gary Bloomer on 11/10/2009 at 9:02 AM Member
    Dear Dan,

    To echo Phil above—THANK YOU!

    Dan, it truly wasn't my intent to put you anywhere, let alone in your place. You'd been given what I saw as great advice and I simply wanted to inject a little balance.

    Your sensitivity is understandable, really it is—no one blames you for being protective of your baby. From my point of view, were I in your shoes I'd be just as protective.

    But over the last year and a half I've learned to slow my punk ass down, to pull in my horns, and to admit, once and for all, that I knew less than I thought I did.

    As a result, an astonishing thing has happened.

    I've discovered all kinds of new support. I've made lots of new associations, connections, and friends, I've become a better judge of what works and what blows, I've learned to let other people make the mistakes they're going to make, and I've learned that it's not up to me to save the world.

    Because of this, I've become more focused and productive and I've opened up all kinds of new opportunities.

    I've also taken and am taking more risks and contributing more, and some of those contributions and risks are paying off in a major way.

    I've also learned more in the last 18 months than I'd learned in the previous ten years. I can't guarantee that this approach will work for everyone, but it worked for me.

    In a roundabout way I'm trying to tell you that no one knows it all.

    When we're inside the bottle—as you are now—it's pretty much impossible to read the label on the outside of the bottle.

    Yes, I'm a firm believer in linking elements in marketing: linked content and linked messages both give continuity, linked content also creates social and psychological anchors; it builds a sense of inside knowledge—of belonging to an exclusive group, and it helps to drive future sales by creating firm foundations on which to build.

    To do all this, you need a plan.

    If an architect sets out to build a house without a plan, without a firm foundation and without decent materials and ideas of where walls, windows, and doors are going to go and how weather tight the roof is going to be the structure's going to look like crap and it's going to topple over in the first breeze.

    True story for you: When Terry Gilliam was making the movie "12 Monkeys" his production designer went to see how work was going on with a critical element that was going to be in lots of close ups:
    A huge ball thing that was festooned with TV screens and cameras.

    In the workshop test, this thing wobbled like buggery.

    The production director turned to the maker and said "It wobbles"
    The maker said yes, he knew that, but that he thought it would be OK. The production director then said "You don't understand. This thing" he said, pointing to the ball "this thing is a critical element that's going to be featured in DOZENS of scenes. CLOSE UP scenes. It can't wobble. If it wobbles it's going to look like shit!"

    In the final movie, and in every scene it's featured in, the ball is rock solid ... and you know what? IT LOOKS MAGNIFICENT!

    So yes, integration and connection make all the difference.

    Is it hard work to make this happen? You bet your chicken nuggets it's hard work! But as in business and in life, we get out in terms of success ONLY what we put in in terms of elbow grease, sweat, torture, and pain.

    Why?

    Because we are professionals.

    We only get professional results when we put in super human and utterly professional efforts—which means doing more and going above and beyond.

    And sometimes, yes, sometimes, even if those efforts mean us having to admit we are wrong. I've been there Dan, and i've worn the tattered t-shirt.

    I call it "The Mill": the school of hard knocks. To "get it", you've got to go through it. And yes, it's hard lesson to learn. But once learned, it's never forgotten.

    That lesson is what sets us apart from the herd; that's what makes us stand out, and that's ultimately, what gets us the top class results that are rightfully ours.

    Why? Because two things set us apart Dan: one of those things is resilience. The other, is passion.

    I hope this helps you. Good luck.

    Gary Bloomer
    Wilmington, DE, USA
    Follow me on www.twitter.com @Gary Bloomer
BACK TO TOP

Post a Comment

Related Discussions

Community Info

Top 25 Experts
(Advertising/PR)