Run Your Own Paid Media Campaign, Day 2

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 17:15


The first day's results for my personal paid media campaign are in. My ad on John McCain went very well:



An explanation of these numbers, along with details on what I learned about these ad buys today, can be found in the extended entry.

Chris Bowers :: Run Your Own Paid Media Campaign, Day 2
The first row in the second picture shows the overall results for the ad. The second row shows the search engine results, and the third row shows the content network results. Overall, since I launched it about 27 hours ago, my "McCain is 95% Bush" ad scored 10,314 impressions (page views where it appeared), 25 click-thrus, and cost me $15.41.

Almost all of the click-thrus came in the search engine portion of the ad-buy. Despite having less than one-seventh of the impressions, it generated 18 click-thrus (compared to only 7 click-thrus on the content network). Further, 1,214 of the 1,241 impressions on the search engines came from only two search terms: "mccain" (858 impressions,11 click thrus) and "john mccain" (356 impressions, 6 click thrus). The other keywords that I used were not very effective and / or popular, though not completely so.

Clearly, the click-thru rate on the search engine portion of the buy is much higher--18 times higher, in fact. The people who click-thru are the people looking for information on John McCain (aka people who search for him on engines like Google). As such, I considered dropping the content network portion of the ad buy. However, given that it generated so many impressions, I decided to keep it. My belief--or at least my goal--is that the ad is damaging to McCain even if people do not click thru. After all, the ad repeats a frequent Obama and Democratic surrogate talking point: McCain votes with Bush 95% of the time. Just seeing it once again might be a good thing for us.

My results for my Palin ad were completely different:


This ad generated zero impressions overall. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. There could be a bunch of reasons for this, so I made several changes to the ad.

First, I rewrote the ad itself. Maybe Google didn't like the word "Liar." So, I made it a bit more bland:


Second, maybe people don't know how to spell her name. So, I added a few more keywords to try and catch some more impressions.

Third, I tripled the cost-per-click bid to $3. Maybe I am just being outbid.

Fourth, maybe no one is looking for information on Sarah Palin. This seems unlikely to me, but I can't figure out what else I am doing wrong. The McCain ad worked fine, and I actually based it on the same settings I used for the Sarah Palin ad. I can't figure it out. If you have any ideas on what might be happening, please post them in the comments.

If the Palin ad doesn't pick up in performance, I am just going to drop it in favor of two McCain ads. Commenter jeffbinnic suggested this in yesterday's thread:

For each ad campaign, always create at least two versions of your ad and have them run simultaneously to see which ad gets the most clicks. Every few days, drop off the least popular ad and create a new one to run against your most popular one to see if you can get more clicks. (In your campaign settings, under Scheduling and Serving, be sure to click on "Rotate".)

Sounds like a good idea. I'll give that a try soon.

Remember, you can run your own ad campaign like this. If you have already done so, how are your ad campaigns going? I am eager to see if anyone followed suit, and if they have any results yet. This is a process where we can learn collaboratively.  


Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
No one cares about Sarah Palin (0.00 / 0)
except those who absolutely love her and don't care what she does.  The right has their girl, and short of a media blast of a genuine scandal (I've already posted on why Troopergate isn't that scandal), they just aren't interested in hearing bad news about her.  Those clicking on that ad -if you get any, are likely already decided against her.

Keeping in mind that Sarah is the vp choice - and that the bar is very low for her success - the story has to be McCain's decision making.  That's what is gaining traction among independent minds.  If you're going to do Sarah Palin ads, the ad should be about how McCain chose Sarah Palin.  I just read a great line somewhere - that McCain vetted Palin just as much as he vetted the Iraq war.  

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net




Palin is the only thing the McCain campaign has (0.00 / 0)
going for it now. She the knight in shining armor who's going to save the fundies praying so hard. She's McCain's special guest star. They are going to play that opera until the fat lady sings.

[ Parent ]
sounds great (0.00 / 0)
This sounds like a great idea. I read through the explanation given and didn't understand anything. I am certainly more knowledgeable about technology and the internet than McCain, but I found that the explanation Bowers gives was full of jargon which I do not understand.

My results so far (18 hours) (4.00 / 5)
My ad which I bit off of Chris:

And here are the results so far.

Don't seem too bad.  I only used search results as I'm still getting the hang of the system.  I had the Budget Optimizer set the "click price limit" because I didn't really get this part of it either.  I'm going to do some research tonight into how it all works, which will help.

Search result wise, only 4 keywords registered any hits:

I'd definitely recomend anyone wanting to give this a try:
1. Go for it!
2. Stick with the "Starter Edition" at first.  I "graduated" to the Standard Edition this afternoon and I'm a bit lost ;-)

I'm creating another ad tonight as jeffbinnic suggested.
I'm definitely digging this.



some suggestions (4.00 / 1)
Your McCain ad is off to a good start. It's true that many of the impressions generated by content search are worthless, due to bogus websites and blogs that participate in Google AdSense in order to try to generate income. But for your purposes, it makes sense (no pun intended) unless all of a sudden you start to get lots of click-throughs. Content search click-throughs are usually not worth paying for and frequently fraudulent. If you want to increase impressions, add new keywords: mccain for president, mccain campaign in pennsylvania, mccain campaign headquarters, etc. Also, I would consider creating a second ad to run simultaneously with this ad. The only difference I would make is to rewrite the headline "Is McCain like Bush?" Often small differences like this generate big effects on ad performance. Rotate these ads simultaneously so they show the same percentage of time, roughly, over the next few days, then check to see which one is performing best.
For your Palin campaign, you need to add more general keywords such as presidential election, 2008 presidential campaign, etc. Although keep a close eye on your click-throughs so they don't get over your budget. Also, go with your second ad because your intuition that Google doesn't like "liar" is probably correct.

sarah palin lies (0.00 / 0)
maybe more OK for Google than liar?

[ Parent ]
depends on the landing page too (0.00 / 0)
If the word "liar" or "lies" doesn't appear on the landing page, it affects Google's Ad Quality ranking.  

[ Parent ]
The problem with the keyword "liar" (0.00 / 0)
is that it focusses on voters who have already made their mind up on Palin. "Beautyqueen" may be much more successful in reaching out to the undecideds.

[ Parent ]
Exactly (0.00 / 0)
Here's what I learned from running some ads for my own site a while back. Maybe someone with more advertising expertise can jump in to confirm...

When you have zero impressions the problem is either (a) you haven't bid enough or (b) your keywords, ad content, and page landing content do not align well enough.

For (a), you can go through the automated assistant and get a suggestion from Google on how much you need to bid. (Google will also suggest related key words to use, too, which helps with (b)).

For (b), keep experimenting. There's plenty of good suggestions already in this thread for other keywords. One of the hardest things (for me, at least), is remembering that other people search on very different keywords than I do.

They call me Clem, Clem Guttata. Come visit wild, wonderful West Virginia Blue


[ Parent ]
Small changes (0.00 / 0)
I might also try removing www from the URL on the first ad so it reads "FactCheck.org".  May or may not help, but it looks a bit cleaner to me.

[ Parent ]
Actually (0.00 / 0)
Google usually recommends including the "www" with the destination url. Cleanliness is not an issue.

[ Parent ]
"don't get over your budget" (0.00 / 0)
Sorry! Actually meant: so you don't go through your budget too quickly. You can't go "over your budget."

[ Parent ]
I just contributed $25 (4.00 / 4)
Please use it to do more of these ads.

Just an idea... (0.00 / 0)
let's think about voters who don't take politics as serious as us. Maybe it would be a good idea to try to get into the mindset of lazy thinking folks, who are interested in much more basic facts than us. For instance, many TV viewers may feel attracted by Palin's good looks and may want to see more of her, especially of the beautyqueen contest. So, firstly find a bikini picture of Palin's heydays. There have to be some somewhere, for instance it may be a good idea to ask the real Miss Alaska 1984 for some snapshots (she's African American, a fact that nobody seemed to be interested in when I posted it). Put this picture up at factcheck.org or some other place, and accomaony it with a short text attacking Palin for her inexperience in foreign policy, or lying about the bridge to nowhere. Make an orchestrated effort to link to this to bring the google picture search rating up, et voila! Another channel of brining important facts to the attention of undecided voters.

What do you think? Valuable idea, or did I get carried away by wishful thinking?


Suggestions for Palin keywords (0.00 / 0)
Imho the problem is that the existing keywords focus only on people seriously interested in informations. I suggest dropping the most ineffective ones, and adding some that will catch google users who don't actually want to be bothered by those pesky facts. Some ideas:

Sarah Palin Miss
Palin beauty queen
Palin Miss Alaska
Sarah Palin swimsuit
Sarah Palin nude

I know this is somewhat sexist, but then, it was Palin's decision to run for those beauty queen titles. And imho the effectiveness of those keywords can't be denied, just google "Sarah Palin Miss" and check what the number one hit site says about the interests of its readers:

Readers who viewed this page, also viewed:

   * Sarah Palin Swimsuit
   * Sarah Palin Hot Photos
   * Sarah Palin Nude
   * Sarah Palin Nude?!!!
   * Sarah Palin Vogue Magazine

http://www.jackbook.com/sexy-n...

Well, those sure are some simple minded folks doing these searches, but they are voters, too (except the pubertal kids using dads internet connection, of course). There sure are many among them who haven't yet made their mind up about the election, so there are votes to be gained from this. Maybe its worth a try.


How about... (0.00 / 0)
"exposed"?

[ Parent ]
check out Google trends (4.00 / 2)
http://www.google.com/trends/h...

for what is being search right now. And keep checking it out for search phrasing.

Re: Palin you can see:
* charlie gibson sarah palin interview
* sarah palin bush doctrine


Surprisingly popular: "Palin dinosaurs" (0.00 / 0)
http://www.google.com/trends/h...

Now, don't ask me what these people are thinking or what they are looking for! :D
Doesn't matter anyway. It's sufficient to know that this IS a popular search, and that it may pay off to put "dinosaur" into the keywords list.


[ Parent ]
Plus, why not use totally unrelated keywords? (0.00 / 0)
Remember, it's important to bring facts to undecided voters. What are the interests of those swing voters? What do they use google for? A look into Google trends shows that politics isn't one of the most popular search topics. And, remember, some people simply use google as a help for finding a certain website whose exact name they have forgotten. So, it may be a good idea to run piggypack on a popular website that is visited regularly by avertage folks, like GasBuddy.com.

Look at this impressive webtrend:
http://www.google.com/trends/h...

So, why not place a Google ad that's critical of the McCain/Palin energy policy and whose keyword list contains all things gasoline? Imho such "outside of the box" thinking is likely to reach voters who haven't made up their mind yet.


[ Parent ]
Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search