Clear Channel's recent announcement to examine the use of one second radio spots, or "blinks", in an effort to provide a means for brand extensions to a limited number of advertisers, clearly calls for a reality check.

Let's investigate a bit into the potential for these listener "blinks" (which, by the way, is more appropriately labeled for the visual experience provided by television or streaming video). There are a host of issues that surface at first blush.

Placement of these sound "bytes" must fit seamlessly into the radio genre of News, Talk or Music --- otherwise both stations and advertisers run the risk of adding clutter to an already cluttered environment.

It is unlikely that rating and pricing structures, given a limited number of potential clients, will generate any new and significant revenue streams for the stations. It is more likely that existing radio budgets will be cannibalized to fund these efforts. How many blinks equal a thirty; a fifteen; a five? Can we all recall when the standard unit for radio was a sixty?

Accountability and tracking of these units, through agency-wide enterprise financial systems, can turn into a nightmare. Agencies are already over-burdened with a deluge of paperwork and Sarbanes Oxley compliance issues.

Let's clear the air, blink three times and pretend this never happened.

1 comment:

richm29 said...

I agree with a media buyer who said she might take them as bonus but would never pay for it.

There may be some limited applications for this, but in general I'll bet it's more annoying than useful for everyone concerned -- listeners, advertisers, agencies and station reps.