Adgadget: The Algorithm fails to find relevance

Ask.com's latest advertising campaign centered around the omniscient Algorithm is building buzz through billboards and TV, but is slow to be found in browser histories across the internet.

Over freeways and between programming, Ask's advertising can be sighted in smug tag lines and over-joyous dance numbers. The campaign originally kicked off with a variety of billboards in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. With lines like "The Algorithm Constantly Finds Jesus", "The Algorithm Is Banned In China", "The Algorithm Is From New Jersey", "The Algorithm Killed Jeeves", and "The Unabomber Hates The Algorithm", we may have to ponder the moral implications of agreeing with the Unabomber for once.

More recently, the Algorithm spread to television. Grinning in front of a gaggle of minimally-dressed girls, the first commercial to take stage showcased a man singing to the rooftops about finding "chicks with swords". The second spot proved equally as silly, as a woman got light-headed over search-engine-stalking Kato Kaelin. You know, the witness to that murder trial over a decade ago. Taking a quick quantum leap in the time machine, the "chicks with swords" and Kato Kaelin commercials somewhat mimic eBay's previous ads that featured similar dance numbers but were much more positively received.

Though Ask is trying to lightly tap into the fact that "pleasurable" pictures are among the most searched across all engines, the time warp in topics fails to find current resonance. The Algorithm campaign was created by Crispin Porter + Bogusky, an agency well known for creepy fast food commercials and its unpimping of rides. Seemingly parallel to much of their previous work, CPB aims to inject enough attention grabbing to gain reactions. While it may be an effective tactic to generate buzz, are billboards and TV commercials a convincing enough means in getting people to, as the Ask tagline states, "experience instant getification"?

Reading through some of the online buzz, a few are surprised to find themselves yearning for the old days of Ask Jeeves, when it was very clear that you used the search engine to answer questions. Ask moved swiftly to kill off the old brand, and as stated above, even made a billboard about it. Ask may have moved too quickly though, as it might have made more sense to assimilate the old boy into their "reasons to use Ask.com" advertising as opposed to the shoot Jeeves first, ask questions later method.

Outdated themes combined with traditional media fail to centralize any potential for community collaboration. Photos and videos of the campaign sightings are spread across Flickr and YouTube, and yet when you try searching for "The Algorithm" through Ask.com, there is absolutely no mention of it on the first page (as of today). Tabbing over to Google, there is one result in the top three for "The Algorithm". Described as the official home page of the math that powers Ask, the seemingly thrown-together site displays paragraphs of small text and little else.

So, why has so much weight been thrown into offline media? Undoubtedly, Ask is wanting to capitalize on the term Algorithm, not unlike Google's owning of the term Blogger. As Greg Ott, Ask.com's VP of Marketing, states, they want Algorithm to become a household term: "We just want them to know there's something in there--think Intel Inside, Verizon's Network, Dodge's Hemi..." Hm, how about the content in Google -- too implicit? Unfortunately for Ask, there may need to be more meat in the advertising before many of us get interested enough start sending our internet queries elsewhere.

---

Ariel Waldman is a Digital Insights Analyst for applied technologies at VML, an interactive agency. Her blog can be read at http://shakewellbeforeuse.com. Views expressed in Adgadget are her own.

[brassready @ Jul 6th 2007 4:58PM]

Soo.. Is this to point out theat ask.com is following in Apples marketing footsteps?

[Smudded @ Jul 6th 2007 6:50PM]

I believe that Apple is in a marketing league of their own. Sure they do the same thing every single marketing division does (which is lie profusely), but for some reason with Apple its just so much more blatant and obvious. That's the main reason I don't like their ads. They're just so extremely misleading and wrong. Comparable to the recent commercials for the drink Absolut. Like drinking alcohol will solicit massive pillow fights and non-violence... what?

One of the most honest campaigns I've seen recently is the Pepsi ad campaign. "A little more than half of everybody" describing the 56 percent of people that think Pepsi has more cola taste is a completely honest statement, yet it still gives the notion that Pepsi is better; without all of the lying.

Sorry I went off on a tangent there. But I am equally confused, what is the real point of this little analysis?

[guchdog @ Jul 6th 2007 7:30PM]

Only one big distinction, I doubt Ask.com will have fanboys far from the die hard ones.

[MasterCKO @ Jul 11th 2007 6:06AM]

The point is, simply put, that Ask.com's current advertising campaign sucks. She doesn't say it straight out like that, but it's very clearly the thrust of this post. It has nothing to do with being like Apple or any of that other stuff.

The title sums it up as well. It's also a clever reference to the very ad campaign that it is maligning (somewhat).

[LiQuiD_FuSioN @ Jul 6th 2007 5:09PM]

Whatever happened to good ol' Jeeves anyway?

..

Last I heard, he was convicted with a assault and weapons charge after waving a loaded gun during a Google expo.

[Alaska Miller @ Jul 6th 2007 5:11PM]

Do you really do this for a living? I read your post 3 times and I still don't get what your convoluted point is. You threw in some mentions of old commercials but, again, they serve no purpose. Are you trying to say they pilfer ideas much like Apple does?

Then your conclusion is "Ask The Algorithm" is suppose to be Google Blogger. What does that even mean? If anything, GOOGLE itself is the brand. You google information. You google somebody. You google your life. But somehow the ability for people to understand what blogger means (which was done by the work of Pyra Labs and other predecessors such as Xanga and Livejournal more so than Google) is what a 2 billion dollar company really wants?

No, honestly, do you really write analysis and insights for a living? If so, can I get a job?

[Dave @ Jul 6th 2007 5:46PM]

I think you obviously missed the point, Alaska, or it's just over your head. Hopefully the former. This was a little more of an in-depth marketing commentary rather than Engadget's typical techie-review posting. I found it interesting, though sad on Ask's marketing side. I feel like I'm reading the "Folio" announcement all over again. *shakes head*

[Alaska Miller @ Jul 6th 2007 6:05PM]

@Dave

Your brain capacity must be immensely fast if you read this and understand what point she was making. Just so I can feel better about myself I'll outline the points she makes by paragraphs:

1. "I looked on Google and it doesn't tell me what Algorithm means"

2. Ask.com spent a lot of money on printing cryptic sentences. A joke about the unabomber.

3. The commercials suck. Looks like an old eBay ad.

4. Name drop the firm. Talk about other random commercials that seem to suck.

5. Some cartoon character is important. Like Joe Camel.

6. Ask.com sucks.

7. Ask.com : Search :: Google.com : Blogger. What. The. F.


Actually, you know, Dave, after doing that outline it's only reaffirmed my belief that I'm not the stupid one. To be fair, I'll give you three guesses on who I think is though.

[MasterCKO @ Jul 10th 2007 3:15PM]

@Alaska:

I'm reminded of the saying "Better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."

The fact that you weren't actually able to understand the first paragraph -- which, by the way, can ACTUALLY be paraphrased as "no one is using Ask.com," not "I looked on Google and it doesn't tell me what Algorithm means" as you seem to think -- indicates to me that you don't have the critical reading skills necessary to understand this post.

Actually, most of your paraphrasing sentences miss the mark of the paragraph that they're supposed to represent, but that one was the most egregious.

To you and all those unable to understand it, put simply, this post was an analysis of the failings of Ask.com's "The Algorithm" ad campaign.

[MasterCKO @ Jul 11th 2007 6:17AM]

BTW, the conclusion of this post is absolutely NOT "'Ask The Algorithm' is suppose to be Google Blogger." Again, please work on your critical reading skills. It's fine that you don't understand it, but to imply that the author and people who do understand are somehow stupid the way you have is pretty ridiculous when you can't even grasp what the conclusion of the post actually is.

Also, there are indeed people who make a living writing analyses in various fields. In general, they're known as "analysts." A person who analyzes a company's marketing decisions and ad campaigns (or those of many companies in a field) would be called a "Marketing Analyst," for instance.

[Mr Angry @ Jul 6th 2007 5:32PM]

There is absolutely no point to this story. It's like reading a book with the last page ripped out. I used to write content like this, but that was when trying to boost the word count of my school papers.

[Craig @ Jul 6th 2007 5:38PM]

while i'll agree that the author fails to draw any conclusion...

i think she's saying that ask is trying to associate the common term algorithm with its search engine, much like google is with the common term blog (though blogger has little to do with the search engine, so it's a rather pointless observation).

[MasterCKO @ Jul 11th 2007 5:57AM]

I think that she does draw a conclusion. It's that Ask.com's new ad campaign is flawed and needs some serious work before it changes anyone's perceptions of who to go to for web searches. Read the post, then if you're left wanting a punchline that sums it all up, read the title. There ya go! 8^)

[yubastard @ Jul 6th 2007 6:13PM]

I agree with the author in the sense that, indeed, it ain't working... I don't see "The Algorithm" as a catchy phrase, not as catchy as Blogger, for sure.

Blogger is oh-so-obvious because it's someone doing an action, but The Algorithm won't stick that much...my father doesn't know what's an algorithm, and the commercials do not make much sense if you don't know what the hell is an algorithm... such a complicated word mainly used by the programming community.

[nathan @ Jul 6th 2007 6:18PM]

I already associate "The Algorithm" with Google. I'm not sure if anyone else makes that connection, but I was just thinking "what a bunch of marketing idiots" when I saw those ads.

It would be like Burger King changing their slogan to "We're also lovin' it!"

[joe @ Jul 6th 2007 7:50PM]

edit: @ Nathan

that wa funny as hell. lmao !! oh man, made my evening.

[MasterCKO @ Jul 10th 2007 3:04PM]

actually, my friend had the same exact misunderstanding. This whole "the Algorithm" thing is pretty stupid, IMHO.

[MegaZone @ Jul 6th 2007 6:28PM]

Ironically, if someone says "The Algorithm" to me the first thing I think of is the Google search algorithm. Even though I *know* about Ask and their ads. And the ads don't fill me with any desire to use Ask.com instead of Google.

[Timmay! @ Jul 6th 2007 6:43PM]

None of the TV ads they've done for Ask, or the rest of the stuff that CPB group has done, have really done anything for me.

Apparently I don't "get it", and I'm only 24.

[kuonji @ Jul 6th 2007 7:07PM]

Anyone happen to know why that first ad was changed from searching for 'chicks with swords' to 'babes with blades'? They completely changed the commercial.

Perhaps if one actually searched for 'chicks with swords' they got tranny porn or something?

[therpham @ Jul 6th 2007 7:32PM]

Making Unabomber references is sooooo 1995.

[joe @ Jul 6th 2007 7:49PM]

that wa funny as hell. lmao !! oh man, made my evening.

[Dom @ Jul 6th 2007 8:07PM]

Interesting how completely and utterly different these ads are from the current UK TV ad campaign (which is equally poor but concentrates on the ask.com UI)

[PK @ Jul 6th 2007 9:03PM]

Wow - I haven't even seen these ads yet and they already sound lame...

And is it me, or is the use of made-up words in ads getting to be old? "It's Comcastic" was clever the first time I heard it, but the use of "Cabinocity" in car ads and "Getification" in search engine ads is bordering on the overused.

[Sam @ Jul 7th 2007 1:49AM]

I think what confuses me most about the article, is how she attempts to use a journalistic tone yet still fills her paragraphs with opinion and what she thinks other people's opinion may be. Write as if it is factual or as if it is a blog. I am never one to complain about free entertainment, but this is well below engadget's usually high standards. Also, why would you allow someone with such a clear bias towards digital advertising (VML specializes in interactive marketing and digital advertising) to analyze a division of the marketing industry that is a competitor of their current employer? Disappointing to say the least..

[Galley @ Jul 7th 2007 7:39AM]

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I actually like Kato Kaelin. It's amazing how he has been able to milk being a house-guest into a career.

[bob dickelson @ Jul 7th 2007 2:55PM]

I'm not too jeeped about the campaign either, but strategically, Ask couldn't have chosen a better path. It's their search technology (used to be Teoma, right?) that makes the engine worth a crap.

And since the core audience for this campaign is power users (everyone else will follow suit), Crispin has distilled the message down to "let's talk about the algorithm."

Which apparently seems to be working.

[MasterCKO @ Jul 10th 2007 3:18PM]

It is? That's news to me.

[What?! @ Jul 7th 2007 11:46PM]

Craptastic

[ManekiNeko @ Jul 8th 2007 4:50AM]

What?! Ask.com killed Jeeves?! B-but they told me he had retired!

JR

[Todd Homan-Jones @ Jul 9th 2007 10:34AM]

Last time I used ask.com (back when it was askjeeves) I inquired about "how to punish a naughty nurse." I was thoroughly unimpressed at the responses. Tried again today; still unimpressed. WTB a better algorithm.