WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.819 My name is Stu Redwine and I am Vice President 00:00:02.819 --> 00:00:06.860 of Creative Services at Oxford Road. So what 00:00:06.860 --> 00:00:12.019 is Oxford Road? Oxford Road is the leading privately 00:00:12.019 --> 00:00:15.800 owned audio agency here in the United States 00:00:15.800 --> 00:00:19.379 where we work with companies like Shopify, Oracle, 00:00:19.579 --> 00:00:22.019 Indeed, Masterclass, Babbel, and Tommy John. 00:00:22.839 --> 00:00:26.300 to achieve their goals in audio and beyond. So 00:00:26.300 --> 00:00:29.660 I was looking at you on LinkedIn once I got past 00:00:29.660 --> 00:00:32.679 the recipes, obviously, and it says, we just 00:00:32.679 --> 00:00:36.710 want the ads to work. What does that mean? It 00:00:36.710 --> 00:00:39.890 means what it says. And the question is, well, 00:00:39.929 --> 00:00:42.229 what does it mean for an ad to work? And that's 00:00:42.229 --> 00:00:45.829 like I was saying, achieve our advertisers' goals. 00:00:46.109 --> 00:00:49.890 We come alongside them to test and then scale 00:00:49.890 --> 00:00:52.929 within audio. That's where we started in podcast. 00:00:53.590 --> 00:00:55.590 And they've got certain goals that they want 00:00:55.590 --> 00:00:57.369 to achieve. And a lot of times it's about getting 00:00:57.369 --> 00:00:59.549 clarity on exactly what that is. What's their 00:00:59.549 --> 00:01:02.030 entire comm strategy? How do we fit into that? 00:01:02.109 --> 00:01:04.650 How do we take the biggest... picture possible 00:01:04.650 --> 00:01:08.769 and the ads work when they achieve those goals 00:01:08.769 --> 00:01:10.730 and those may be long -term goals they may be 00:01:10.730 --> 00:01:13.549 short -term goals but that's what we want the 00:01:13.549 --> 00:01:18.950 thing that we do is help our advertisers bring 00:01:18.950 --> 00:01:21.750 their message primarily in audio to millions 00:01:21.750 --> 00:01:24.349 and millions of people every day and however 00:01:24.349 --> 00:01:27.409 they're looking at that to measure did this work 00:01:27.409 --> 00:01:31.430 was this investment in advertising worth it that's 00:01:31.430 --> 00:01:33.430 how we're going to measure ourselves to go did 00:01:33.430 --> 00:01:36.510 these ads work so it sounds as if one of the 00:01:36.510 --> 00:01:40.609 most important parts of writing podcast ads is 00:01:40.609 --> 00:01:43.090 actually getting a good clear brief what does 00:01:43.090 --> 00:01:45.670 your brief look like It absolutely is. I think 00:01:45.670 --> 00:01:48.469 that that's critical for all of this business 00:01:48.469 --> 00:01:50.730 of advertising, right? Like what is advertising? 00:01:50.969 --> 00:01:54.250 That's a question that I like to bandy about 00:01:54.250 --> 00:01:57.430 and look at different sources. And Sir Martin 00:01:57.430 --> 00:02:01.189 Sorrell's answer to it is it's a solution. So 00:02:01.189 --> 00:02:03.930 really a brief, the best brief and our brief 00:02:03.930 --> 00:02:07.930 is to get back to what is the problem that we're 00:02:07.930 --> 00:02:10.349 trying to solve, right? Or the opportunity that 00:02:10.349 --> 00:02:12.409 we're trying to seize and getting really clear 00:02:12.409 --> 00:02:17.930 about that. And I find that more succinct briefs 00:02:17.930 --> 00:02:21.629 are better. The podcast that I host, Ad Infinitum, 00:02:21.629 --> 00:02:25.430 that is focused on audio ads and critiquing audio 00:02:25.430 --> 00:02:28.629 ads and discussing them. The most recent guest 00:02:28.629 --> 00:02:31.949 is Mark Pollard, a strategist, an advertising 00:02:31.949 --> 00:02:36.430 strategist. And he talks about this a lot, this 00:02:36.430 --> 00:02:38.889 idea that you can have so much information and 00:02:38.889 --> 00:02:42.069 so much data and get a nine -page brief, but 00:02:42.069 --> 00:02:45.229 it's sort of like, So what? If I were to boil 00:02:45.229 --> 00:02:48.550 a brief down, it's like, how can I most succinctly 00:02:48.550 --> 00:02:50.750 answer what is the problem or the opportunity? 00:02:51.229 --> 00:02:54.270 So what? Why is that important? What do we know 00:02:54.270 --> 00:02:56.370 about our audience? What are the different market 00:02:56.370 --> 00:02:59.389 forces that are at work? What now? How then are 00:02:59.389 --> 00:03:03.069 we going to achieve that strategic objective? 00:03:03.879 --> 00:03:06.400 So there's lots of data out there about podcast 00:03:06.400 --> 00:03:10.159 ads and their effectiveness and data about pre 00:03:10.159 --> 00:03:12.000 -rolls and post -rolls and all of that kind of 00:03:12.000 --> 00:03:15.300 stuff. I don't see that much data about the actual 00:03:15.300 --> 00:03:19.030 creative. How important is the creative in this 00:03:19.030 --> 00:03:21.650 whole process? It's massive. There's been several 00:03:21.650 --> 00:03:24.250 different studies just about the importance of 00:03:24.250 --> 00:03:27.349 creative overall and how much impact that has 00:03:27.349 --> 00:03:29.669 on an advertising campaign. I think it's Cumulus 00:03:29.669 --> 00:03:32.009 that put out these different studies of like 00:03:32.009 --> 00:03:35.169 perception versus reality of what impact marketers 00:03:35.169 --> 00:03:38.330 think the creative has on an advertising campaign 00:03:38.330 --> 00:03:40.490 success and what impact it actually has. And 00:03:40.490 --> 00:03:43.569 I want to say the perception was... much lower 00:03:43.569 --> 00:03:45.469 than the reality. Like I want to say it was 10 00:03:45.469 --> 00:03:48.270 or 20%, something like that. And the reality 00:03:48.270 --> 00:03:50.430 that they discovered is the impact of the creative 00:03:50.430 --> 00:03:54.050 is number closer to like 47, 50%. You know, so 00:03:54.050 --> 00:03:57.789 it has a massive impact. I think it's just intimidating 00:03:57.789 --> 00:04:02.310 for folks on how to even approach that question. 00:04:02.629 --> 00:04:05.490 How are we going to measure that? And then particularly 00:04:05.490 --> 00:04:08.009 in podcast, you're relying so heavily on the 00:04:08.009 --> 00:04:11.280 hosts. customizing and putting their own spin 00:04:11.280 --> 00:04:14.259 on it that you go are we looking at a case -by 00:04:14.259 --> 00:04:16.420 -case basis of how individual hosts delivered 00:04:16.420 --> 00:04:19.040 the creative or can we actually look at the copy 00:04:19.040 --> 00:04:22.819 points that we handed over to them but in general 00:04:22.819 --> 00:04:25.819 the the impact of the creative on the campaign 00:04:25.819 --> 00:04:31.379 is massive How, I mean, does a good podcast ad 00:04:31.379 --> 00:04:34.100 need to be funny? I think that it definitely 00:04:34.100 --> 00:04:37.079 helps for podcast ads to be funny. I think what 00:04:37.079 --> 00:04:39.980 you get with humor, right, it's the same root 00:04:39.980 --> 00:04:43.980 word as humility, the same root word as humanity. 00:04:44.540 --> 00:04:46.800 Oh, interesting. I think it, yeah, it breaks 00:04:46.800 --> 00:04:50.160 down the wall. Yeah. Right? It makes a person 00:04:50.160 --> 00:04:53.779 feel, it's... It's an element or a dimension 00:04:53.779 --> 00:04:56.879 of the pratfall effect. Like this is a human 00:04:56.879 --> 00:04:59.839 and humor then makes me feel something. And then 00:04:59.839 --> 00:05:02.120 once I'm emotionally invested, once the heart 00:05:02.120 --> 00:05:05.180 decides, the head will follow. I guess I would 00:05:05.180 --> 00:05:07.899 back up one level. Like the takeaway from using 00:05:07.899 --> 00:05:10.819 humor to connect is really that you're connecting 00:05:10.819 --> 00:05:13.860 emotionally. So if we can connect emotionally, 00:05:14.060 --> 00:05:18.339 then we're able to get in the door and start. 00:05:19.129 --> 00:05:21.670 also connecting to the rational mind as well. 00:05:21.850 --> 00:05:24.769 Is there a difference between an ad that you'd 00:05:24.769 --> 00:05:28.230 make for the radio and an ad that you'd make 00:05:28.230 --> 00:05:30.810 for podcasting? I mean, it's just audio, right? 00:05:31.149 --> 00:05:34.230 Yes, it is just audio. They're both audio, but 00:05:34.230 --> 00:05:37.490 it's like, man, you know, the big screen is a 00:05:37.490 --> 00:05:39.670 screen. The little screen is a screen. There's 00:05:39.670 --> 00:05:42.569 vertical, there's horizontal. I think it's really 00:05:42.569 --> 00:05:45.769 important on your what, right? And then so what? 00:05:45.970 --> 00:05:49.879 And then what now is, Which type of audio are 00:05:49.879 --> 00:05:51.519 we doing here? Are we doing a smart speaker? 00:05:51.899 --> 00:05:55.120 Are we doing radio where we're going to be? This 00:05:55.120 --> 00:05:56.800 is a produced spot and we're going to be in breaks 00:05:56.800 --> 00:05:59.480 against a lot of other produced spots in podcasts. 00:05:59.560 --> 00:06:01.680 Are we going to be primarily doing host read? 00:06:01.720 --> 00:06:04.660 Or as I'm experiencing, I'm sure you are too. 00:06:05.500 --> 00:06:08.040 Their ad load is increasing. The number of breaks 00:06:08.040 --> 00:06:10.959 is increasing and more brand dollars are coming 00:06:10.959 --> 00:06:13.160 into podcasts. So you're hearing more spots that 00:06:13.160 --> 00:06:15.839 are like what's on the radio. I think it would 00:06:15.839 --> 00:06:18.759 be very easy to just port over what you're doing 00:06:18.759 --> 00:06:20.980 on the radio right over to podcasts, but it's 00:06:20.980 --> 00:06:23.579 a different animal. And I think they, to do it 00:06:23.579 --> 00:06:28.399 well, to do it the best requires a different 00:06:28.399 --> 00:06:32.370 approach. Again, depending on. how exactly is 00:06:32.370 --> 00:06:34.569 this audio going to be delivered to the listener? 00:06:34.769 --> 00:06:37.670 Yeah, I think it was Paul Rismandel from Signal 00:06:37.670 --> 00:06:40.069 Hill Insights who was pointing out on a Mastodon 00:06:40.069 --> 00:06:44.629 thread that radio ads, one of their primary focuses 00:06:44.629 --> 00:06:47.449 is to get you to listen because radio is typically 00:06:47.449 --> 00:06:50.689 on in the background, whereas for podcasts, you're 00:06:50.689 --> 00:06:53.310 already listening. So actually that part of the 00:06:53.310 --> 00:06:56.689 ad's job has already been done. What do you think 00:06:56.689 --> 00:06:59.199 of that? I think it's fantastic. I remember when 00:06:59.199 --> 00:07:02.660 he pointed that out and I agree. It's that like, 00:07:02.680 --> 00:07:06.579 how lean in is this audio, right? Am I on just 00:07:06.579 --> 00:07:10.480 a music station or am I on Sirius XM where it's 00:07:10.480 --> 00:07:12.480 in the background and I need to cut through or 00:07:12.480 --> 00:07:16.100 am I in something like. Pivot, you know, I like 00:07:16.100 --> 00:07:18.279 to listen to Pivot alongside with your show. 00:07:18.399 --> 00:07:21.920 Of course. Like almost every morning. Yeah. Pivot, 00:07:21.959 --> 00:07:23.959 I mean, your show basically every morning, you're 00:07:23.959 --> 00:07:26.480 walking my dog with me. And it's lean. It's very 00:07:26.480 --> 00:07:29.279 intentional. Like I am stacking up what I listen 00:07:29.279 --> 00:07:32.740 to in the mornings intentionally. So I'm invested 00:07:32.740 --> 00:07:35.779 and I'm leaned in. And that's very similar to 00:07:35.779 --> 00:07:38.439 a lot of podcast listeners. And so like Paul 00:07:38.439 --> 00:07:41.740 was pointing out. I need to keep their attention. 00:07:42.259 --> 00:07:45.300 So if I'm using interruptive tactics like I do 00:07:45.300 --> 00:07:47.279 in radio to try to garner their attention, I 00:07:47.279 --> 00:07:50.160 might be working against myself. But I'd also 00:07:50.160 --> 00:07:53.160 like to say that some stuff does apply across 00:07:53.160 --> 00:07:55.779 both. Like there was a recent study with Veritonic 00:07:55.779 --> 00:07:58.379 and Odyssey that found an improvement, double 00:07:58.379 --> 00:08:02.180 -digit improvement in ad recall and improvement 00:08:02.180 --> 00:08:05.629 in purchase intent as well. when sonic branding 00:08:05.629 --> 00:08:09.709 is used in radio and in podcast so there's so 00:08:09.709 --> 00:08:12.430 there are things that are similar but to your 00:08:12.430 --> 00:08:15.209 point it's like podcast is and has been so much 00:08:15.209 --> 00:08:18.189 more lean in where radio perhaps is something 00:08:18.189 --> 00:08:21.110 that's more in the background unless you're listening 00:08:21.110 --> 00:08:23.310 to talk radio a specific host or your drive time 00:08:23.310 --> 00:08:25.670 people that you listen to in the morning where 00:08:25.670 --> 00:08:27.850 i think the same kind of lean in stuff is at 00:08:27.850 --> 00:08:30.509 work and how long should the perfect ad be as 00:08:30.509 --> 00:08:33.500 long as it needs to be I'm glad you answered 00:08:33.500 --> 00:08:36.019 the question with that. How long should a person's 00:08:36.019 --> 00:08:38.080 legs be? Long enough to reach the ground. You 00:08:38.080 --> 00:08:41.259 know, I would say in podcast and, you know, there 00:08:41.259 --> 00:08:43.279 was just a study, I think it came out last week 00:08:43.279 --> 00:08:47.940 with Podscribe that found that longer ads work 00:08:47.940 --> 00:08:50.500 better. I think that's for a couple of different 00:08:50.500 --> 00:08:52.200 reasons. One, like we're talking about, people 00:08:52.200 --> 00:08:54.159 are leaned in. There's some cognitive biases 00:08:54.159 --> 00:08:56.879 at work. Human beings, the longer they're exposed 00:08:56.879 --> 00:08:59.820 to any stimulus, what's amazing is not only do 00:08:59.820 --> 00:09:02.279 you get acclimated towards it, right? So it's 00:09:02.279 --> 00:09:06.259 okay because we're surviving, right? Our brain's 00:09:06.259 --> 00:09:09.519 just trying to survive. We also begin to favor 00:09:09.519 --> 00:09:12.500 the thing. So the longer a person can keep your 00:09:12.500 --> 00:09:15.409 attention and talk to you, instinctually down 00:09:15.409 --> 00:09:19.009 deep you are going to begin to develop affinity 00:09:19.009 --> 00:09:21.909 and so that's at play with there's also a narrative 00:09:21.909 --> 00:09:25.690 bias humans favor stories over disjointed facts 00:09:25.690 --> 00:09:29.049 or even just a list of items you tend to get 00:09:29.049 --> 00:09:32.070 more storytelling in a longer ad because there's 00:09:32.070 --> 00:09:35.169 more opportunity for someone to weave a tale 00:09:35.169 --> 00:09:37.889 and so those are longer and they work but you 00:09:37.889 --> 00:09:40.909 know you've got to again you got to go back to 00:09:40.909 --> 00:09:43.070 your what? Like, who is this advertiser? How 00:09:43.070 --> 00:09:45.710 massive are they? How long have they been doing 00:09:45.710 --> 00:09:49.909 this? Do I perhaps need to, for instance, on 00:09:49.909 --> 00:09:53.389 SiriusXM, the right approach might be in certain 00:09:53.389 --> 00:09:56.429 cases, let's just try to pepper in a whole bunch 00:09:56.429 --> 00:09:59.070 of 15s and get a whole bunch of frequency because 00:09:59.070 --> 00:10:01.230 we know that people are already very aware of 00:10:01.230 --> 00:10:04.330 this or unaided awareness is high. And we just 00:10:04.330 --> 00:10:06.669 want to reinforce a particular message or particular 00:10:06.669 --> 00:10:09.389 call to action or something like that, or just 00:10:09.389 --> 00:10:12.470 increase their mental availability of our brand. 00:10:12.529 --> 00:10:14.350 You could accomplish that with Shorter Spots. 00:10:14.450 --> 00:10:17.929 But in the podcast platform, like I said, with 00:10:17.929 --> 00:10:21.250 that Podscribe study, it seems to hold out that, 00:10:21.250 --> 00:10:25.210 you know, the old advertising adage is the more 00:10:25.210 --> 00:10:28.009 you tell. the more you sell. Yeah, yeah. There's 00:10:28.009 --> 00:10:30.970 more reason to go and visit a website or do whatever 00:10:30.970 --> 00:10:33.710 it is that you want them to end up doing. You 00:10:33.710 --> 00:10:37.970 mentioned Ad Infinitum earlier, which is your 00:10:37.970 --> 00:10:40.830 podcast. It's back for a new season. What's that 00:10:40.830 --> 00:10:43.870 podcast all about? So Ad Infinitum is Oxford 00:10:43.870 --> 00:10:48.659 Road's audio creative... podcast where we listen 00:10:48.659 --> 00:10:51.399 to and break down current top spenders in audio 00:10:51.399 --> 00:10:56.220 on SiriusXM, on radio, on podcast, and we have 00:10:56.220 --> 00:10:59.639 different advertising experts on with me where 00:10:59.639 --> 00:11:02.279 we'll drill into in the first season the nine 00:11:02.279 --> 00:11:05.539 key components of audiolytics, which is our methodology 00:11:05.539 --> 00:11:09.379 that we use to both audit and construct a persuasive 00:11:09.379 --> 00:11:12.350 message in audio. And then in season two, we're 00:11:12.350 --> 00:11:14.110 going to be digging into different aspects of 00:11:14.110 --> 00:11:16.169 advertising. Like I said, the first episode of 00:11:16.169 --> 00:11:19.690 season two comes out this week. And the guest 00:11:19.690 --> 00:11:22.210 is Mark Pollard, where we're talking about strategy 00:11:22.210 --> 00:11:24.830 and how does that apply. And then we've had on 00:11:24.830 --> 00:11:27.429 folks like Dallas Taylor, the host of 20 ,000 00:11:27.429 --> 00:11:30.190 Hertz, fantastic podcast about the world's most 00:11:30.190 --> 00:11:34.490 interesting sounds. Richard Shotton, who's massive 00:11:34.490 --> 00:11:38.049 in the behavioral science space, author of The 00:11:38.049 --> 00:11:40.529 Choice Factory. And then like Amanda DeMarco. 00:11:40.519 --> 00:11:43.320 Marco from Veritonic, where we're able to talk 00:11:43.320 --> 00:11:45.539 about their platform. And when we're analyzing 00:11:45.539 --> 00:11:49.100 the ads in that episode, we're taking the scoring 00:11:49.100 --> 00:11:51.460 methodology. We use audiolytics and stacking 00:11:51.460 --> 00:11:54.940 that up against Veritonic's testing platform 00:11:54.940 --> 00:11:58.500 and the methodology that they use. So ad infinitum 00:11:58.500 --> 00:12:00.720 is wherever you get your podcasts. Where can 00:12:00.720 --> 00:12:03.059 we learn more about you and your work? LinkedIn 00:12:03.059 --> 00:12:05.820 is the best place to go. stew red wine the one 00:12:05.820 --> 00:12:08.220 and only unless like you said you if you google 00:12:08.220 --> 00:12:09.940 stew red wine all you're going to get is recipes 00:12:09.940 --> 00:12:14.799 uh stew it's been great to talk i learn so much 00:12:14.799 --> 00:12:16.980 every time i talk to you thank you so much you're 00:12:16.980 --> 00:12:17.840 very welcome thank you