data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9c03b/9c03b27fde9e9e01f586f880b53b29a91edd1c0a" alt=""
NOTE: TNS data focuses on "measured" media, which includes network TV, cable TV, Sunday supplements, newspapers, free-standing inserts, radio, and Internet. It does not include search engine marketing, however.
Bucking this trend was Johnson and Johnson, which cut its ad spending by 19.8%!
Advertising Age suggests that J&J shifted $250 million from TV to the Internet -- presumably search marketing (TNS says J&J increased measured Internet ad spending by 31% to $32.1 million; that means only $7.6 million of the $250 was shifted to measured -- ie, non-search -- Internet ad spending):
"Overall, J&J reported global ad spending fell around 10% to $1.9 billion last year, even as sales rose 6% to $53.2 billion. But J&J's measured-media spending in the U.S. fell more than twice that fast, suggesting a big chunk of its marketing budget went to unmeasured media, such as search and other direct marketing, rather than away" (see "J&J Jolts 'Old' Media With $250 Million Ad Spend Shift").
We also know that at least one J&J company -- Centocor -- is proud it has spent less on producing the documentary film Innerstate than on a "full-blown" TV DTC campaign (see upcoming March issue of Pharma Marketing News).
AdAge is lauding J&J as the Elvis of marketing: "Staid Johnson & Johnson is proving to be marketing's Elvis Presley: While rivals talk up nontraditional marketing without changing measured-media spending habits much, J&J's adopting the King's refrain: 'A little less conversation, a little more action.'"
But who's to say that J&J hasn't just pocketed a portion or all of that $250 million it has "shifted"? J&J declined to comment on changes in its media spending for competitive reasons, a spokesman said.
It could be that J&J may be more like Scrooge McDuck than Elvis Presley. What do you think? Please participate in my poll: