CI
Oh, pre-judged opinions, whoop-dee-doo!
More closed minds, that can't be bothered to listen to experience, and you know, someone that actually is involved in marketing in both traditional and new media. Why am I not surprised?
Sometimes you don't need to spend time reading the posts to know where your Kudos should go.
I did read them anyway but I shouldn't have bothered, as debate with some is futile.
I did read them anyway but I shouldn't have bothered, as debate with some is futile.
Oh, pre-judged opinions, whoop-dee-doo!
More closed minds, that can't be bothered to listen to experience, and you know, someone that actually is involved in marketing in both traditional and new media. Why am I not surprised?
JO
Oh, pre-judged opinions, whoop-dee-doo!
More closed minds, that can't be bothered to listen to experience, and you know, someone that actually is involved in marketing in both traditional and new media. Why am I not surprised?
My opinion wasn't pre-judged.
Sometimes you don't need to spend time reading the posts to know where your Kudos should go.
I did read them anyway but I shouldn't have bothered, as debate with some is futile.
I did read them anyway but I shouldn't have bothered, as debate with some is futile.
Oh, pre-judged opinions, whoop-dee-doo!
More closed minds, that can't be bothered to listen to experience, and you know, someone that actually is involved in marketing in both traditional and new media. Why am I not surprised?
My opinion wasn't pre-judged.
GM
So? It obviously didn't have much of an impact with me if I couldn't remember it. Furthermore, I fully expect that if you asked 100 random people to name a comedian who'd appeared on a BBC election programme, most people wouldn't be able to name one.
But, as I previously said, this is way beyond politics as usual.
I'll give you one right now, Ian Hislop appeared on ITV's US Election coverage...
*shrugs shoulders* don't recall it at all. You can prove it happened, but ultimately, if it didn't resonate with me at the time, I wouldn't recall it.
I don't think people watch an election programme for comedy, other than interviews with known political jokes, such as Nigel Farage, Dennis Skinner and George Galloway...
I don't need to prove it happened, I saw it with my own eyes by watching it, surprise surprise, on TV!! Even Paul Merton ripped him a new one on HIGNFY for appearing on it...
Rory Bremner in 1992: http://youtu.be/ARifiLUKwxA?t=3m30s
So? It obviously didn't have much of an impact with me if I couldn't remember it. Furthermore, I fully expect that if you asked 100 random people to name a comedian who'd appeared on a BBC election programme, most people wouldn't be able to name one.
But, as I previously said, this is way beyond politics as usual.
I'll give you one right now, Ian Hislop appeared on ITV's US Election coverage...
*shrugs shoulders* don't recall it at all. You can prove it happened, but ultimately, if it didn't resonate with me at the time, I wouldn't recall it.
I don't think people watch an election programme for comedy, other than interviews with known political jokes, such as Nigel Farage, Dennis Skinner and George Galloway...
I don't need to prove it happened, I saw it with my own eyes by watching it, surprise surprise, on TV!! Even Paul Merton ripped him a new one on HIGNFY for appearing on it...
LL
You can't leave that aside, because it's not a fallacy. Around 2006, lots of businesses, including media ones, started to believe that social media was going to revolutionise marketing, and change the game beyond all recognition.
It hasn't changed the game beyond all recognition and it won't. It just adds another angle. Going viral is still regarded though as the holy grail of social media marketing, and everybody's trying to get that next viral video. Marketing works best, when it's a long campaign over months and even years. Viral videos may boost awareness overall, but it's not enough on its own.
First of all, define better. Do you mean more customers, more revenue, more profits?
Second, local radio delivers far better results, far more often. Clients get more visitors, more customers, and more revenue from advertising on local radio, than they do from social media and internet advertising, which is mostly ignored,despite what you may think. As someone who looks after a social media account for a broadcaster, interaction with social media posts, which by the way, for those who don't know, includes likes, clicks on links, comments and shares, comes in no higher than 5%. So if a post reaches 1000 people, a maximum of 50 will interact with it in some way or form. But then, you still have to turn that into a sale, and even then, you'll still need at least 1000 interactions to get maybe 1 sale. So we're talking about reaching at least 20,000 people to make one sale. I don't think social media marketing and internet marketing are all that good at turning awareness into sales.
Radio does better in that department, especially because as sound is the only medium, it is more difficult to ignore, so you end up hearing all the adverts. I have heard of some organisations choosing radio advertising as the only way to promote an event, and the event selling out in a matter of days. That's not something that social media advertising or internet advertising can claim.
Social media advertising and internet advertising is a useful string to add to the bow, but it does have its limitations in terms of effectiveness. It works better when used alongside traditioal media advertsing.
Clearly going by your passion for radio that you have a connection to it, so you're going to biased towards the medium.
However, radio is left on in the background, while a viral you can't miss. When was the last time Joe Public got excited about a radio advert for a double glazing company or a sofa outlet? You'll hear people complain about advertising on radio when all they want to hear is music, yet the same can't be said for a viral. You've seen it once and don't have to look or listen again, with radio, there's no choice.
London Lite
Founding member
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how social media advertising works. Leaving aside the fallacy that anyone believed social media advertising would replace, rather than complement, traditional advertising techniques,
You can't leave that aside, because it's not a fallacy. Around 2006, lots of businesses, including media ones, started to believe that social media was going to revolutionise marketing, and change the game beyond all recognition.
It hasn't changed the game beyond all recognition and it won't. It just adds another angle. Going viral is still regarded though as the holy grail of social media marketing, and everybody's trying to get that next viral video. Marketing works best, when it's a long campaign over months and even years. Viral videos may boost awareness overall, but it's not enough on its own.
Quote:
As someone who has been involved in social media marketing, I know that, for small businesses certainly, it can give much better results than local radio and local print advertising; your post makes you seem like a Luddite - something that seems to pervade your earlier posts.
First of all, define better. Do you mean more customers, more revenue, more profits?
Second, local radio delivers far better results, far more often. Clients get more visitors, more customers, and more revenue from advertising on local radio, than they do from social media and internet advertising, which is mostly ignored,despite what you may think. As someone who looks after a social media account for a broadcaster, interaction with social media posts, which by the way, for those who don't know, includes likes, clicks on links, comments and shares, comes in no higher than 5%. So if a post reaches 1000 people, a maximum of 50 will interact with it in some way or form. But then, you still have to turn that into a sale, and even then, you'll still need at least 1000 interactions to get maybe 1 sale. So we're talking about reaching at least 20,000 people to make one sale. I don't think social media marketing and internet marketing are all that good at turning awareness into sales.
Radio does better in that department, especially because as sound is the only medium, it is more difficult to ignore, so you end up hearing all the adverts. I have heard of some organisations choosing radio advertising as the only way to promote an event, and the event selling out in a matter of days. That's not something that social media advertising or internet advertising can claim.
Social media advertising and internet advertising is a useful string to add to the bow, but it does have its limitations in terms of effectiveness. It works better when used alongside traditioal media advertsing.
Clearly going by your passion for radio that you have a connection to it, so you're going to biased towards the medium.
However, radio is left on in the background, while a viral you can't miss. When was the last time Joe Public got excited about a radio advert for a double glazing company or a sofa outlet? You'll hear people complain about advertising on radio when all they want to hear is music, yet the same can't be said for a viral. You've seen it once and don't have to look or listen again, with radio, there's no choice.
BA
You can't leave that aside, because it's not a fallacy. Around 2006, lots of businesses, including media ones, started to believe that social media was going to revolutionise marketing, and change the game beyond all recognition.
It hasn't changed the game beyond all recognition and it won't. It just adds another angle. Going viral is still regarded though as the holy grail of social media marketing, and everybody's trying to get that next viral video. Marketing works best, when it's a long campaign over months and even years. Viral videos may boost awareness overall, but it's not enough on its own.
It has definitely changed marketing a lot more than you suggest. It allows far more targeting than you can get traditionally, for one. I could set up an advert in five minutes that would target solely 18-24 year old males in Wetwang, something you can't do with traditional advertising media.
First of all, define better. Do you mean more customers, more revenue, more profits?
All three. During the length of the campaigns, only one customer was gained as a result of the two media. The rest of the customers were aware of the business via Facebook.
Those numbers are utter nonsense. You can't apply one set of figures to every situation, and the figures are clearly absurd from just looking at them. 20,000 people to make one sale? Don't talk tommyrot.
Radio does better in that department, especially because as sound is the only medium, it is more difficult to ignore, so you end up hearing all the adverts. I have heard of some organisations choosing radio advertising as the only way to promote an event, and the event selling out in a matter of days. That's not something that social media advertising or internet advertising can claim.
Social media advertising and internet advertising is a useful string to add to the bow, but it does have its limitations in terms of effectiveness. It works better when used alongside traditioal media advertsing.
Internet advertising can claim to have created popular products from nothing, through sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, not to mention things like the OnePlus phone.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how social media advertising works. Leaving aside the fallacy that anyone believed social media advertising would replace, rather than complement, traditional advertising techniques,
You can't leave that aside, because it's not a fallacy. Around 2006, lots of businesses, including media ones, started to believe that social media was going to revolutionise marketing, and change the game beyond all recognition.
It hasn't changed the game beyond all recognition and it won't. It just adds another angle. Going viral is still regarded though as the holy grail of social media marketing, and everybody's trying to get that next viral video. Marketing works best, when it's a long campaign over months and even years. Viral videos may boost awareness overall, but it's not enough on its own.
It has definitely changed marketing a lot more than you suggest. It allows far more targeting than you can get traditionally, for one. I could set up an advert in five minutes that would target solely 18-24 year old males in Wetwang, something you can't do with traditional advertising media.
Quote:
As someone who has been involved in social media marketing, I know that, for small businesses certainly, it can give much better results than local radio and local print advertising; your post makes you seem like a Luddite - something that seems to pervade your earlier posts.
First of all, define better. Do you mean more customers, more revenue, more profits?
All three. During the length of the campaigns, only one customer was gained as a result of the two media. The rest of the customers were aware of the business via Facebook.
Second, local radio delivers far better results, far more often. Clients get more visitors, more customers, and more revenue from advertising on local radio, than they do from social media and internet advertising, which is mostly ignored,despite what you may think. As someone who looks after a social media account for a broadcaster, interaction with social media posts, which by the way, for those who don't know, includes likes, clicks on links, comments and shares, comes in no higher than 5%. So if a post reaches 1000 people, a maximum of 50 will interact with it in some way or form. But then, you still have to turn that into a sale, and even then, you'll still need at least 1000 interactions to get maybe 1 sale. So we're talking about reaching at least 20,000 people to make one sale. I don't think social media marketing and internet marketing are all that good at turning awareness into sales.
Those numbers are utter nonsense. You can't apply one set of figures to every situation, and the figures are clearly absurd from just looking at them. 20,000 people to make one sale? Don't talk tommyrot.
Radio does better in that department, especially because as sound is the only medium, it is more difficult to ignore, so you end up hearing all the adverts. I have heard of some organisations choosing radio advertising as the only way to promote an event, and the event selling out in a matter of days. That's not something that social media advertising or internet advertising can claim.
Social media advertising and internet advertising is a useful string to add to the bow, but it does have its limitations in terms of effectiveness. It works better when used alongside traditioal media advertsing.
Internet advertising can claim to have created popular products from nothing, through sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, not to mention things like the OnePlus phone.
CI
You can't leave that aside, because it's not a fallacy. Around 2006, lots of businesses, including media ones, started to believe that social media was going to revolutionise marketing, and change the game beyond all recognition.
It hasn't changed the game beyond all recognition and it won't. It just adds another angle. Going viral is still regarded though as the holy grail of social media marketing, and everybody's trying to get that next viral video. Marketing works best, when it's a long campaign over months and even years. Viral videos may boost awareness overall, but it's not enough on its own.
First of all, define better. Do you mean more customers, more revenue, more profits?
Second, local radio delivers far better results, far more often. Clients get more visitors, more customers, and more revenue from advertising on local radio, than they do from social media and internet advertising, which is mostly ignored,despite what you may think. As someone who looks after a social media account for a broadcaster, interaction with social media posts, which by the way, for those who don't know, includes likes, clicks on links, comments and shares, comes in no higher than 5%. So if a post reaches 1000 people, a maximum of 50 will interact with it in some way or form. But then, you still have to turn that into a sale, and even then, you'll still need at least 1000 interactions to get maybe 1 sale. So we're talking about reaching at least 20,000 people to make one sale. I don't think social media marketing and internet marketing are all that good at turning awareness into sales.
Radio does better in that department, especially because as sound is the only medium, it is more difficult to ignore, so you end up hearing all the adverts. I have heard of some organisations choosing radio advertising as the only way to promote an event, and the event selling out in a matter of days. That's not something that social media advertising or internet advertising can claim.
Social media advertising and internet advertising is a useful string to add to the bow, but it does have its limitations in terms of effectiveness. It works better when used alongside traditioal media advertsing.
Clearly going by your passion for radio that you have a connection to it, so you're going to biased towards the medium.
However, radio is left on in the background, while a viral you can't miss. When was the last time Joe Public got excited about a radio advert for a double glazing company or a sofa outlet? You'll hear people complain about advertising on radio when all they want to hear is music, yet the same can't be said for a viral. You've seen it once and don't have to look or listen again, with radio, there's no choice.
The stuff that joe public tends to get excited about, the stuff that goes truly viral, is often cute, usually funny, and always real. Most commercial attempts at creating viral videos, seem to forget that last part far too often.
And actually, what you seem to think is a negative for radio, is actually something that is a huge positive and what makes radio advertising work. Most radio campaigns that work, work in part through repetition. Most ads that do well, will air at least 5 times a day. You see a viral video once and you don't have to look or listen again, and you'll have forgotten about it before too long. But you hear an ad repeating through the day, with a catchy phrase such as "Don't be dopey, call Opie!", and it sticks in your mind.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how social media advertising works. Leaving aside the fallacy that anyone believed social media advertising would replace, rather than complement, traditional advertising techniques,
You can't leave that aside, because it's not a fallacy. Around 2006, lots of businesses, including media ones, started to believe that social media was going to revolutionise marketing, and change the game beyond all recognition.
It hasn't changed the game beyond all recognition and it won't. It just adds another angle. Going viral is still regarded though as the holy grail of social media marketing, and everybody's trying to get that next viral video. Marketing works best, when it's a long campaign over months and even years. Viral videos may boost awareness overall, but it's not enough on its own.
Quote:
As someone who has been involved in social media marketing, I know that, for small businesses certainly, it can give much better results than local radio and local print advertising; your post makes you seem like a Luddite - something that seems to pervade your earlier posts.
First of all, define better. Do you mean more customers, more revenue, more profits?
Second, local radio delivers far better results, far more often. Clients get more visitors, more customers, and more revenue from advertising on local radio, than they do from social media and internet advertising, which is mostly ignored,despite what you may think. As someone who looks after a social media account for a broadcaster, interaction with social media posts, which by the way, for those who don't know, includes likes, clicks on links, comments and shares, comes in no higher than 5%. So if a post reaches 1000 people, a maximum of 50 will interact with it in some way or form. But then, you still have to turn that into a sale, and even then, you'll still need at least 1000 interactions to get maybe 1 sale. So we're talking about reaching at least 20,000 people to make one sale. I don't think social media marketing and internet marketing are all that good at turning awareness into sales.
Radio does better in that department, especially because as sound is the only medium, it is more difficult to ignore, so you end up hearing all the adverts. I have heard of some organisations choosing radio advertising as the only way to promote an event, and the event selling out in a matter of days. That's not something that social media advertising or internet advertising can claim.
Social media advertising and internet advertising is a useful string to add to the bow, but it does have its limitations in terms of effectiveness. It works better when used alongside traditioal media advertsing.
Clearly going by your passion for radio that you have a connection to it, so you're going to biased towards the medium.
However, radio is left on in the background, while a viral you can't miss. When was the last time Joe Public got excited about a radio advert for a double glazing company or a sofa outlet? You'll hear people complain about advertising on radio when all they want to hear is music, yet the same can't be said for a viral. You've seen it once and don't have to look or listen again, with radio, there's no choice.
The stuff that joe public tends to get excited about, the stuff that goes truly viral, is often cute, usually funny, and always real. Most commercial attempts at creating viral videos, seem to forget that last part far too often.
And actually, what you seem to think is a negative for radio, is actually something that is a huge positive and what makes radio advertising work. Most radio campaigns that work, work in part through repetition. Most ads that do well, will air at least 5 times a day. You see a viral video once and you don't have to look or listen again, and you'll have forgotten about it before too long. But you hear an ad repeating through the day, with a catchy phrase such as "Don't be dopey, call Opie!", and it sticks in your mind.
CI
But being too specific in your targetting doesn't always help either. Around 20% of sales for most brands, are from customers that are outside your primary demographic. That's £1 in every £5. That's a not insignificant number.
Hmm, I suspect that your radio advert was not well done. Far too often, when you examine why people say 'radio advertising didn't work for me', it turns out they were using a poorly scripted, or poorly produced radio advert, that didn't stick to the same principles most commercial radio DJs use in links. One thought, one call to action. Trying to cram too much into a radio ad, is a common failing, although it is by no means the only one.
Those numbers come from my internet and social media experience. Click-throughs are notoriously inefficient at garnering sales, and only the most viral of posts on social media gets much above a 5% interaction rate. Your mileage may vary.
Who? What? Never heard of the OnePlus phone. Also, don't know of any products that have come through Kickstarter. Crowdfunding is still a form of funding that the British public isn't totally used to yet, and if you're way into that sort of stuff, then you're bound to over-estimate the imapct of it.
It has definitely changed marketing a lot more than you suggest. It allows far more targeting than you can get traditionally, for one. I could set up an advert in five minutes that would target solely 18-24 year old males in Wetwang, something you can't do with traditional advertising media.
But being too specific in your targetting doesn't always help either. Around 20% of sales for most brands, are from customers that are outside your primary demographic. That's £1 in every £5. That's a not insignificant number.
Quote:
All three. During the length of the campaigns, only one customer was gained as a result of the two media. The rest of the customers were aware of the business via Facebook.
Hmm, I suspect that your radio advert was not well done. Far too often, when you examine why people say 'radio advertising didn't work for me', it turns out they were using a poorly scripted, or poorly produced radio advert, that didn't stick to the same principles most commercial radio DJs use in links. One thought, one call to action. Trying to cram too much into a radio ad, is a common failing, although it is by no means the only one.
Quote:
Those numbers are utter nonsense. You can't apply one set of figures to every situation, and the figures are clearly absurd from just looking at them.
Those numbers come from my internet and social media experience. Click-throughs are notoriously inefficient at garnering sales, and only the most viral of posts on social media gets much above a 5% interaction rate. Your mileage may vary.
Quote:
Internet advertising can claim to have created popular products from nothing, through sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, not to mention things like the OnePlus phone.
Who? What? Never heard of the OnePlus phone. Also, don't know of any products that have come through Kickstarter. Crowdfunding is still a form of funding that the British public isn't totally used to yet, and if you're way into that sort of stuff, then you're bound to over-estimate the imapct of it.
BA
But being too specific in your targetting doesn't always help either. Around 20% of sales for most brands, are from customers that are outside your primary demographic. That's £1 in every £5. That's a not insignificant number.
You can therefore target outside your core demographic. You can produce different campaigns for different groups.
Hmm, I suspect that your radio advert was not well done. Far too often, when you examine why people say 'radio advertising didn't work for me', it turns out they were using a poorly scripted, or poorly produced radio advert, that didn't stick to the same principles most commercial radio DJs use in links. One thought, one call to action. Trying to cram too much into a radio ad, is a common failing, although it is by no means the only one.
I strongly suspect it was down to the fact that the adverts could not be targeted, considering the market sector of the business.
Who? What? Never heard of the OnePlus phone. Also, don't know of any products that have come through Kickstarter. Crowdfunding is still a form of funding that the British public isn't totally used to yet, and if you're way into that sort of stuff, then you're bound to over-estimate the imapct of it.
I'm not "way into that sort of stuff" at all (one product that immediately springs to mind is the Ouya, and another is the Pebble Smart Watch). I was just saying giving you an example of what can be claimed, not something that happens every day.
It has definitely changed marketing a lot more than you suggest. It allows far more targeting than you can get traditionally, for one. I could set up an advert in five minutes that would target solely 18-24 year old males in Wetwang, something you can't do with traditional advertising media.
But being too specific in your targetting doesn't always help either. Around 20% of sales for most brands, are from customers that are outside your primary demographic. That's £1 in every £5. That's a not insignificant number.
You can therefore target outside your core demographic. You can produce different campaigns for different groups.
Quote:
All three. During the length of the campaigns, only one customer was gained as a result of the two media. The rest of the customers were aware of the business via Facebook.
Hmm, I suspect that your radio advert was not well done. Far too often, when you examine why people say 'radio advertising didn't work for me', it turns out they were using a poorly scripted, or poorly produced radio advert, that didn't stick to the same principles most commercial radio DJs use in links. One thought, one call to action. Trying to cram too much into a radio ad, is a common failing, although it is by no means the only one.
I strongly suspect it was down to the fact that the adverts could not be targeted, considering the market sector of the business.
Quote:
Internet advertising can claim to have created popular products from nothing, through sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, not to mention things like the OnePlus phone.
Who? What? Never heard of the OnePlus phone. Also, don't know of any products that have come through Kickstarter. Crowdfunding is still a form of funding that the British public isn't totally used to yet, and if you're way into that sort of stuff, then you're bound to over-estimate the imapct of it.
I'm not "way into that sort of stuff" at all (one product that immediately springs to mind is the Ouya, and another is the Pebble Smart Watch). I was just saying giving you an example of what can be claimed, not something that happens every day.
LL
London Lite
Founding member
With the increase use of ad blockers, using a viral advert is one way of getting through to your potential customer.
Moving back to radio advertising, you'd think community radio would be the effective way of getting your company heard on a much smaller scale, yet these tend to be small 25W transmitters with a limited range. As most of these outfits are charity/volunteer led, they don't have the budget to promote their own station before even getting advertising revenue and when you eventually get the advert on-air, the quality isn't going to be as good as if you use an ad agency or a respected larger station owned by Global or Bauer.
Social media, you have to work hard to make it work, but when you can, it's a bargain in comparison to using a linear platform and targets your potential audience on a more local level for which people are actually going to see than finding your local low powered community radio station.
Moving back to radio advertising, you'd think community radio would be the effective way of getting your company heard on a much smaller scale, yet these tend to be small 25W transmitters with a limited range. As most of these outfits are charity/volunteer led, they don't have the budget to promote their own station before even getting advertising revenue and when you eventually get the advert on-air, the quality isn't going to be as good as if you use an ad agency or a respected larger station owned by Global or Bauer.
Social media, you have to work hard to make it work, but when you can, it's a bargain in comparison to using a linear platform and targets your potential audience on a more local level for which people are actually going to see than finding your local low powered community radio station.
DO
Amongst my friends, it doesn't matter how good a radio advert is compared to a social media based one - they'll only see the viral one - none of them, including myself listen to commercial radio. Why would you when you can listen to the likes of Spotify, without the annoying shouty interruptions every few minutes?
And going back to cityprod's sell out events, well I've worked far more events which have sold out thousands of tickets per event that have only been advertised on social media than have even been advertised on radio. Radio advertising is a dinosaur of marketing. It's not targeted, and it's not relevant to an increasingly large proportion of the population.
And going back to cityprod's sell out events, well I've worked far more events which have sold out thousands of tickets per event that have only been advertised on social media than have even been advertised on radio. Radio advertising is a dinosaur of marketing. It's not targeted, and it's not relevant to an increasingly large proportion of the population.
CI
And now, you're getting into very expensive territory. Multiple campaigns for different specific demographics takes up a lot more time and effort, than it does to produce one campaign, that targets a broader demographic, and still allows you to get the kind of results you're looking for. This is why I say going too specific actually doesn't work for most businesses.
Oh what a load of rubbish that is. Are you trying to tell me that radio can't target? That Capital doesn't target 15-34 year olds with their advertising? Or that Heart doesn't target 25-44 year olds with theirs? I don't know who fed you that line, but they are so wrong, that I find it difficult to believe that some one in radio sales told you that.
You can therefore target outside your core demographic. You can produce different campaigns for different groups.
And now, you're getting into very expensive territory. Multiple campaigns for different specific demographics takes up a lot more time and effort, than it does to produce one campaign, that targets a broader demographic, and still allows you to get the kind of results you're looking for. This is why I say going too specific actually doesn't work for most businesses.
Quote:
I strongly suspect it was down to the fact that the adverts could not be targeted, considering the market sector of the business.
Oh what a load of rubbish that is. Are you trying to tell me that radio can't target? That Capital doesn't target 15-34 year olds with their advertising? Or that Heart doesn't target 25-44 year olds with theirs? I don't know who fed you that line, but they are so wrong, that I find it difficult to believe that some one in radio sales told you that.