Its significant that you had to point to the one positive result you posted about. The rest (Johnsohn and Johnson, P & G, Political Campaigns) that have negative results would all fall much more under brand advertising (of course, brand advertising to direct response marketing is a spectrum, but if you’re wanting more clarity on the distinction this article is decent: https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/importance-promotional-marketing-strategies-13197.html)
Its significant that you had to point to the one positive result you posted about.
Yes. Specifically, the significance is that I picked it to steelman your position, because it had both the biggest sample size & was the most positive result I knew of (in a body of negative results), and still didn’t support your claims.
So, where’s this literature on how effective and scalable advertising is at manipulating people?
ion, because it had both the biggest sample size & was the most positive result
And it was the only study (unless the other ones that you didn’t explicate had it) that focused on the type of marketing (direct response marketing) that I was referring to. You certainly could have strawmanned my position by picking a study that was referring to brand advertising, but I would hardly call it a steelman to select the one study that was relevant.
So, where’s this literature on how effective and scalable advertising is at manipulating people?
As I said, it’s in the robust history of effective A/B testing/campaigns with measurable effects on revenue in this space.
Its significant that you had to point to the one positive result you posted about. The rest (Johnsohn and Johnson, P & G, Political Campaigns) that have negative results would all fall much more under brand advertising (of course, brand advertising to direct response marketing is a spectrum, but if you’re wanting more clarity on the distinction this article is decent: https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/importance-promotional-marketing-strategies-13197.html)
Yes. Specifically, the significance is that I picked it to steelman your position, because it had both the biggest sample size & was the most positive result I knew of (in a body of negative results), and still didn’t support your claims.
So, where’s this literature on how effective and scalable advertising is at manipulating people?
And it was the only study (unless the other ones that you didn’t explicate had it) that focused on the type of marketing (direct response marketing) that I was referring to. You certainly could have strawmanned my position by picking a study that was referring to brand advertising, but I would hardly call it a steelman to select the one study that was relevant.
As I said, it’s in the robust history of effective A/B testing/campaigns with measurable effects on revenue in this space.
Which history is...? (I now ask for the third time.)
I don’t understand what you’re asking apparently. Do you want se books you can read that take you through the history of direct response marketing?