Procter & Gamble spends more than $300 million a year advertising its soaps and foods. If Facebook’s going to be an ad-supported business, it needs some of that money.
Too bad then, that Procter & Gamble’s GM for interactive marketing and innovation, Ted McConnell,” just told a conference: “I really don’t want to buy any more banner ads on Facebook.”
“I have a reaction to [Facebook] as a consumer advocate and an advertiser: What in heaven’s name made you think you could monetise the real estate in which somebody is breaking up with their girlfriend?”
McConnell says branded Facebook applications could work, but that mostly, he rejects the idea that Facebook is social “media”:
Who said this is media? Media is something you can buy and sell. Media contains inventory. Media contains blank spaces. Consumers weren’t trying to generate media. They were trying to talk to somebody. So it just seems a bit arrogant. … We hijack their own conversations, their own thoughts and feelings, and try to monetise it.
Facebook won’t be able to win over ad buyers like McConnell with its new “engagement ads.” Advertisers want to be seen as providing new functionality on the social network; they don’t want to pay extra for users to comment on their banners.
Here’s what Facebook should do instead. First, extend Facebook Connect to online retail stores. Second, analyse users’ spending behaviour and activity on Facebook, make that data anonymous and sell it to marketers. Third, turn on personal ads and charge more than the New York Times does — about $48/week.
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.