The reach versus frequency debate

Do you try to reach everyone in the market with your television advertising message, or as many people as you can, or do you try to reach a narrower audience, but one that hears and sees your message with consistency?

It might depend on the campaign goals: short-term sales to drive customers through the doors, versus a longer branding campaign that promotes image and becomes a consistent reminder, "We're here when you need us," type of message. Sometimes, you're hoping for a combination of the two: increase sales at peak times, while maintaining frequency.

Reach versus frequency or reach AND frequency, often becomes a source of confusion or conflict, especially when bugets are taken into consideration. Television is widely known as a reach medium. Thousands of people in your target audience will see your message on highly viewed programs, such as Grey's Anatomy or American Idol. Those primetime programs are also expensive. You may only be able to fit a smattering of them into your budget. Then it becomes an issue, "OK, a lot of people saw the ad, but they only saw it 1, 2, or 3 times." Does that help your marketing cause?

Combine frequency-building programs: morning news and late afternoons are good examples. The audience isn't as large, but through buying these consistently, you are reaching more people over time. Combined with the popular, action packed and "water cooler" conversation generators like the season finales, the "Superbowl" (that's another blog forthcoming), the dramas, and you have a good mix.

Some might say, "Ah, but TV is too expensive in general." Local stations are aware of this battle and they've come to the table with alternatives to "spots and dots." Look for branding packages, often priced by the month. Check into "owning" one night as a sponsor. Logo and 30-sec. spot, consistently and with frequency over the course of weeks.