寶馬-2018年品牌安全效果報告（英文）

1、,,,Executive Summary,,,,,,,CHEQ, Magna & IPG Media Lab set out to quantify the effects of unsafe ad exposure on consumer brand perceptions. These are the key findings:,,,Consumers are less willing to associate with

2、 the brand2.8X Decline,,When displayed next to generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,,Consumers’purchase intent is stifled2X Decline,,When displayed next to generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse

3、content,,,,,,,Consumers are less likely to feel the brand cares about them4.5X Decline,,When displayed next to generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,,Consumers are less likely to feel the brand is “in t

4、he know”3X Decline,,When displayed next to generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,,,,,,Consumers’ brand quality perception drops7X Decline,,When displayed alongside generally unsafe and brand / vertical

5、 averse content,,Consumers are less likely to recommend the brand0.5X Decline,,,,,,Many consumers view unsafe ad placement as an intentional endorsement of the negative content,,“It’s disturbing that they are generat

6、ing revenue through disaster”,,“Looks like they’re exploiting shock value”,,“They’re stating that they agree with the negative content”,,,With unsafe ad placement, consumers’ perception of the branddeclines signifi

7、cantly across key brand metrics,,,When displayed alongside generally unsafe and brand / vertical averse content,,2 /,In collaboration with,,,The digital landscape is filled with,content brands don’t want to,be near,,,,,

8、,,,Brands are increasingly concerned about where their ads are being displayed.Many advertisers have pulled ads over brand safety violations and are actively seeking solutions for safe ad placement both in-house and

9、 with 3rd parties.,,The scope of concern is growing as well, as more and more subjects become taboo, and as political and social sensitivities continue to grow. This means that if unsafe content was once simple to d

10、efine, we must now broaden our definitions to include new categories.,Unsafe Categoriesof Content,Violent,Offensive,Disgusting Disrespectful,Hateful,Tragic,,,,,,,Criminal Controversial,Fake or Misleading,Politically

11、Sensitive,Brand Averse,Vertical Averse,,,,,,,,,,,,,3 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,So we set out to answer the question on every brand’s mindHow does unsafe ad placement affect consumers’ perception of the brand?,,,,,4

12、 /,In collaboration with,,,,Researchmethodology,,,,,,,We used controlled online lab testing,,,ParticipantsParticipants recruited from nationally representative online panel across PC and Smartphone (n = 2,364),,Surve

13、yInitial survey with demographic and media consumption questions to ensure representativeness,,Ad ExposureParticipants randomized into test cells (safe/unsafe content) and selected a website to visit based on their

14、 preferences,MeasurementPost exposure survey to measure traditional brand metrics and qualitative feedback,,,,,,,5 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,,,,Researchmethodology,,,2 verticalsWe collaborated with BMW and Hulu t

15、o test the effect of unsafe content on brand perceptions in a controlled online environment,,,,,,,4 types of contentWe displayed 4 different types of content alongside the ads ranging from safe to generally unsafe,

16、 brand averse and vertical averse,,,,2 types of pre-roll adsWe displayed BMW and Hulu brand video ads to the test group, while the control group was shown various PSA ads,,,,,,,2 devicesWe displayed the content on b

17、oth desktop and mobile to make sure we captured and reflected consumers’ genuine ad viewing experience,,,,,,,,,,6 /,In collaboration with,Examples of 4 types of content,,,,,,,,Safe ContentTalk Show Segment,,Generally

18、 Unsafe ContentSchool Shooting,,Displayed in a “test” environmentBrand Averse ContentBMW Related Incident,Displayed in a “test” environment,,Displayed in a “test” environmentVertical Averse ContentDangers of Bin

19、ge Watching,Displayed in a “test” environment,we tested (for BMW & Hulu)All ads were displayed in a “test” environment,,,,,,,* Images are for illustration purposes only,,,,,,,7 /,In collaboration with,,,,The Key Fin

20、dingsBrand perception shows demonstrable decline,when brands’ ads are displayed alongside generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,,,,,,8 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Consumers areless willing to associate

21、 with the brandWhen displayed alongside generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,▲ = Statistically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% confidenceSafe n=818; Unsafe n=1,542,,,2.8X,De

22、cline,,Key Findings,,Consumer Feedback,,the brand in the future,“I will stay away from,,,,,,,,,,Safe ContentUnsafe Content,,Willingness to Associate,▲,▲,,9 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Key Findings,Consumers’purchase

23、 intent is stifledWhen displayed alongside generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,▲ = Statistically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% confidenceSafe n=818; Unsafe n=1,542,,,Decl

24、ine,,2X,,,Consumer Feedback,,like that, it’s hard to think about buying a new car,“After seeing a video,,,,,,,,,,Safe ContentUnsafe Content,,Purchase Intent,▲,,10 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Key Findings,▲ = Statist

25、ically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% confidenceSafe n=818; Unsafe n=1,542,,,4.5X,Decline,,,,Consumer Feedback,,“It’s disturbing that they don’t care,,,,,Consumers are less likelyto feel

26、 that the brand cares about themWhen displayed alongside generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,,,,,,Safe ContentUnsafe Content,,Brand CaresAbout Me,▲,,11 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Key Findings,Consum

27、ers are less likelyto feel that the brand is “In the Know”When displayed alongside generally unsafe or brand / vertical averse content,▲ = Statistically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% con

28、fidenceSafe n=818; Unsafe n=1,542,,,Decline,,3X,,,Consumer Feedback,,“Not smart to place your brand next to negative content,,,,,,,,,,Safe ContentUnsafe Content,,Brand is “In the Know”,▲,▲,,12 /,In collaboration wi

29、th,,We also measured theeffect of unsafe content when it,directly clashes with the brand or vertical,,,,,,13 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,,,Key Findings,Consumers’,brand quality perception dropsWhen displayed alongsid

30、e generally unsafe and brand / vertical averse content,▲ = Statistically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% confidence Generally Unsafe n=401; Unsafe + Brand / Vertical Averse n=365,Safe Conten

31、tUnsafe Content,7X,Decline,,,,,,,,,Deltas (Test- Control),Generally Unsafe Content,,,Unsafe + Brand / Vertical Averse,,Is a Quality Brand,,,-7%▲,-1%,,14 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,,,Key Findings,Consumers are less l

32、ikely,to recommend the brandWhen displayed alongside generally unsafe and brand / vertical averse content,▲ = Statistically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% confidence Generally Unsafe n=401

33、; Unsafe + Brand / Vertical Averse n=365,Safe ContentUnsafe Content,0.5X,Decline,,,,,,,,,Deltas (Test- Control),,Is a Brand I Would Recommend,Generally Unsafe Content,,,Unsafe + Brand / Vertical Averse,,,-6%-9%▲,,1

34、5 /,In collaboration with,Additional Findings,,,,,,16 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Additional Findings,Impact of Brand Averse Content by those who recognized connection between ad and content.▲ = Statistically significa

35、nt difference between test groups at >= 90% confidence Brand Averse: Ad Was Relevant n=150; Ad Was Not Relevant n=36,Content that clashes with the brand or vertical still causes damage even when that content is gene

36、rally safe,,,Is a Quality Brand,19%Decline,,,,Has a Good Reputation,19%Decline,,,,Cares About its Customers,18%Decline,,,,Brand is in The Know,21%Decline,,,,Is a Trustworthy Brand,22%Decline,,,,Willingness to

37、Associate,21%Decline,,,,,,,,,,,,17 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,,Additional Findings,,prefer a company that,doesn’t use that kind oftechnique,,““,Seems manipulative. I’dThey’re stating that they,agree with the negati

38、ve,content,,Looks like they’re,value,,“oitixpleng shock“,I think the brand is taking,advantage of people’s,emotions,,It’s disturbing that they are generating,“revenue through disaster,,Many consumers view the ad placem

39、ent asan intentional endorsement of the contentConsumer Feedback,,,,,18 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Additional Findings,▲ = Statistically significant difference between test and control at >= 90% confidence Most

40、Offensive n=178; Neutral n=459; Least Offensive n=1,169,Consumers’ aversion to associate with brandsIs driven by “offensive” content,Impact of Content Offensiveness on Willingness to Associate: Deltas (Test – Control),,

41、,,Most Offensive ContentWillingness to associate13%Decline,,Least Offensive ContentWillingness to associate0%Decline,,,,,,19 /,In collaboration with,,,,,Whatwe’ve learned,,,,,,,,This means that when they see a

42、ds next to unsafe content, they view the brand as “not smart” (at best) and “manipulative” (at worst),,01,,,,Consumers tend to assume each ad placement is intentional,,This means that by being near certain types of co

43、ntent, it’s seen (by the consumer) as taking a position,,02,,Consumers view the ad placement as an endorsement of the content,,Once the consumer has viewed ads alongside unsafe content, the damage to the brand is alre

44、ady done, and measuring becomes futile,,03,,Measuring unsafe ad exposure without preventing it could seriously hurt the brand,,Traditionally unsafe content like “crime” and “terrorism” does damage, but so does neutral

45、 content, if it clashes with the brand / vertical,,04,,Brands must go beyond “bad” content and avoid content which counters their brand,,,,,,,20 /,In collaboration with,,,,,,Thanks,For further questionsand information

46、, contact:Kara Manatt, SVP Intelligence, Solutions & Strategy Kara.manatt@magnaglobal.comDaniel Avital, Chief Strategy Officer Daniel@cheq.aiBen Ofer, Director of Business StrategyBen.o@cheq.ai,,,,,,,In coll