In digital age, advertising should take print in its stride for good show

In a multi-channel, multi-format world, Indian brands make the best impression when they mix digital and print: Google Research

Even as brands’ reliance on digital as a marketing channel grows, the value of print is being driven home by a new set of studies and experiences. A recent study by Google and Kantar suggests that digital may bring in more bang for the buck, but without print, brands may end up making a weak impression. 

For brands looking at the wide variety of options in terms of media channels and opportunities in terms of the tools on offer, the big question being asked is whether one ought to wade deeper into the digital pool, or float between the two big advertising channels, print and online display. Google’s research team came up with a few answers with the help of a Kantar Crossmedia study.

The study found that print ads were four times more effective than display in driving impact with each impression based on gross rating points (GRP), but display ads were five times more efficient in driving incremental reach.

By looking at how heavily brands invested in print and display as well as the incremental brand impact of each touch point, they found that display ads drove approximately the same level of incremental brand impact — but with one-third the investment. Ultimately, the study revealed that print drives greater impact while display is more cost efficient. When marketers use both, they can deliver greater impact at a reasonable cost.

While the two formats aren’t the same, display (online) ads are often compared to print ads because of their visual similarities. But when it comes to sizing up the impact of the two, marketers have the benefit of established industry norms and guidelines for print ads. Things aren’t quite as clear when it comes to display ads, which raises some complex questions.

S Swaminathan, CEO and co-founder of Hansa Cequity cautions that it is important to consider the expected reach that a brand is looking for before deciding which way they want to go. For example, large ecommerce brands tend to advertise heavily in print whereas niche digital first brands like health and fitness enablers will have a larger digital presence. 

For marketers who use a combination to achieve these goals, pre-determining the combined spend can make planning easier. Vishal Chinchakar, chief digital officer at Madison Media, notes in the Google-Kantar study that, “Timing is key when thinking about combining print and display. Media planners must bring an integration mindset to planning meetings for the most effective campaigns rather than thinking about it at the execution stage.”

Across all campaigns that included print, the most efficient ones spent up to 20 per cent of the budget on print. Meanwhile, campaigns that included display spent a maximum of 10 per cent on display. The optimal spend for print and display combined is 30 per cent, the study said.  

“Traditional brands can often go for a primary print and TV presence while digital becomes a supporting campaign. It depends on the level of engagement the brands seek from the target audience. Print creates more recall but if brands are looking for immediate action/ engagement they are likely to go digital first,” said Swaminathan. The idea is to understand what you want from the audience first, before deciding how much you want to spend on either format.

Making the right impression:

Print ads are four times more effective than display in driving impact, but display ads are 5X more efficient in driving incremental reach

Display ads drove approximately the same level of incremental brand impact — but with one-third the investment

Print drives greater impact while display is more cost efficient. When marketers use both, they can deliver greater impact at a reasonable cost