Book Summary: Reality In Advertising by Rosser Reeves

"I am downstairs in the saloon. I can tell you what advertising is. I know you don't know. If you wish to know, send the word 'yes' down by the bellboy." Signed, JOHN E. KENNEDY

When Rosser Reeves published the book Reality in Advertising, the world of advertising looked a lot different than it does now. It was 1961, and the era of radio, television, and print had arrived. It was Don Drapers and the Mad Men of Madison Avenue's era.

In fact, Rosser Reeves is largely regarded as Don Draper's inspiration. So, what can a 1961 book teach today's advertisers and marketers?

Quite a bit.

In reality, if you go past the examples and delve further into the concepts, you'll discover that the fundamentals of effective advertising haven't changed nearly as much as you may assume in the last half-century.

Want to learn about marketing from the best? What would it be like to take a class with Don Draper?

A definition of advertising

‍

It was difficult to come up with a description of what advertising was in the early 1960s. They required a new definition, which Reeves suggested, and here it is:

Advertising is the art of putting a unique selling offer into the minds of the vast majority of people for the least amount of money feasible.

Of course, Reeves couldn't have imagined a future in which people spent their days glued to their phones, to odd and beautiful social networks, ingesting content marketing by the gallon.

However, if you substitute "marketing" for "advertising," you get what is arguably the greatest explanation of what marketing is (or should be) today.

We'll spend the rest of this article unpacking that statement and figuring out how it applies to the world we live in today.

How do you judge effective marketing?

Until Reeves authored this book, advertising was assessed on one of two criteria: sales or "originality," which Reeves defined as advertising's most dangerous term.

Judging a campaign based on how innovative or creative it was is still an issue today, just as it was in 1960.

Every year, they hold massive awards presentations to honor the world's most "creative" ads, regardless of whether or not the agency was hired to deliver the desired economic outcome.

This is amplified even more now as businesses worldwide attempt to figure out how to create outstanding advertising for many social networks that keep appearing.

While assessing a campaign based on the direction of sales statistics isn't as terrible as judging it based on its uniqueness, it lacks the complexity needed to evaluate whether or not marketing had any influence at all.

Despite the bad promotion, items may sell well in good economic times. Alternatively, a sales downturn might occur that would have been considerably worse if not for excellent promotion.

The ability to assess the exact effect of advertising using two new measures called Penetration and Usage Pull was the breakthrough that Reeves and his agency produced at the time.

Penetration was defined as the proportion of individuals who remembered your current advertising. And Usage Pull was expressed as the percentage of people who were "pulled over" to your product by the advertising.

(Theory and reality: some individuals will utilize your product even if they haven't seen it advertised).

Of course, we now have far more sophisticated tools for determining which marketing initiatives are effective and which aren't. There's no excuse for not finding out where to spend your marketing dollars and effort in a world when nearly anything can be A/B tested, and budgets can be monitored down to the cent.

This, however, is still an issue today. It's great to experiment with new channels and technologies, but it's not okay to do it on faith alone, as Reeves would tell us if he were still alive today.

Whatever form your advertising and promotion take must have a clear line of sight back to a measurable business goal.

The USP

‍

I'd be surprised if you didn't hear of the term Unique Selling Proposition before reading this. In reality, it was a word that had virtually lost its meaning even in 1961.

Years before he published the book, Reeves invented the term, and it had become a buzzword in the advertising industry. To the point where a copywriter who read the initial draft of Reality in Advertising told Reeves:

"My God, every campaign has a USP," says the narrator.

Reeves' response was as follows:

"Do they, in fact, do so now? Let's see what happens."

He offers several instances of initiatives that lacked a real USP and, as a result, failed to create any measurable business results in the book.

In three sections, Reeves defines the Unique Selling Proposition:

1. Every advertising must offer a consumer proposition. It's not simply words, product puffery, or storefront promotion. "Buy this product, and you will receive this precise benefit," each advertising must state to each reader.
2. The offering must be something that the competitor can't or won't provide. It must be unique—the brand's distinctiveness or a claim not made in that particular advertising field.
3. The concept must be so compelling that it can entice millions of new clients to try your product.

(As a side point, keep in mind that in the 1960s, mass media was only affordable to extremely large businesses. I propose that we replace "mass millions" with "your target audience" today.)

The invention of the USP was a magnificent example of a USP in and of itself.

For a long time, Ted Bates & Company (where Reeves worked) was the only advertising firm that specialized in developing advertising based on a unique selling proposition (very meta, I know).

They not only produced spectacular outcomes for their clients, but they also produced stunning results for themselves. Their annual billings increased from $4 million to $150 million. In today's money, that's roughly $1.2 billion.

It didn't take long for other agencies to notice. Before long, every campaign had a unique selling proposition (or so they thought).

Of course, the USP is only effective if used appropriately, so let's look at that now.

3 ways to create a USP that works

There are three approaches to develop a successful USP, or as Reeves refers to them, "The Three Big Roads to Rome."

The easiest and most obvious method is to look for the USP in the product itself. You're well on your way if you've done your product development right and identified a unique need that your product or service can solve.

The second option is to alter your product and construct it around a USP you know will be successful if you don't already have one baked in.

However, the first two alternatives take time, and we often want immediate results.

So, suppose you find yourself in a scenario where your product or service is identical to your rivals. In that case, the third alternative is to inform potential prospects of anything new about the product.

As Reeves points out, this isn't about the product's originality; rather, it implies uniqueness and uses it as a claim.

Perhaps the most famous example of this is Don Draper's catchphrase "It's Toasted" for Lucky Strike cigarettes, made famous in a memorable Mad Men scene. As it turns out, this is a genuine Lucky Strike slogan.

However, keep in mind the following immutable rule of marketing: in the long run, the superior product, marketed equally, will prevail.

Also, bear in mind that the consumer must notice the difference you claim in the goods. Making the argument that the product lacks anything just enhances the frequency with which the customer sees its absence.

You've got a USP - now what? Consistency

‍

Along with the USP, Reeves pioneered some additional innovative ideas based on his data while working with the firm.

Although the times have changed, the people have not.

Changing campaigns too frequently in 1960 resulted in a significant reduction in penetration and, as a result, commercial performance. This was dubbed the "multi-million dollar mistake" by Reeves.

Let us consider this in terms of social media marketing today.

Gary Vaynerchuk is one of today's social media marketing experts. I believe Reeves and Vaynerchuk would have gotten along swimmingly.

Vaynerchuk grew his family's booze company into one of America's largest and most profitable wine merchants, increasing revenue from $3 million to $60 million.

How did he pull it off? He achieved this in part by establishing a cult following through a daily wine video blog that he created more than a thousand times over a few years.

He left that company to start a digital marketing firm with 650 employees and is on course to earn $100 million in sales.

How did he pull this off? In part, he did this by starting a new video blog called #AskGaryVee, where he answers questions from his Twitter followers. He has created 208 episodes as of the writing of this overview.

What's the point? What works in marketing now, as it did in 1960, is hammering home the same message day after day, year after year. You may become tired of saying it, but your clients and prospects will never tire of hearing it.

Here, Reeves emphasizes a few key aspects.

1. First, altering a story has the same impact as halting the money in terms of penetration. Changing the story, or, in today's terminology, breaking the focus, has the same effect (which is what, in reality, advertising is attempting to buy).
2. As a result, if you run a fantastic campaign every year but alter it every year, your opponent can pass you with a less-than-excellent campaign—assuming he doesn't change his copy. In today's words, a good content marketing plan done consistently over time will always win out over a genius content marketing approach implemented inconsistently.
3. Finally, a brilliant campaign will not wear out unless the product becomes obsolete. In fact, it will only get stronger with time, especially in today's environment.

Conclusion

It's easy to believe that a book from 1961 can't possibly teach you anything about marketing. However, keep returning to the concepts of the USP (Reeve's version). You'll discover that your marketing and business outcomes will improve.

‍