authors - rachelracicot.weebly.comrelations campaigns that include research, copywriting, graphic...

brought to you by:

Taylor Ann Markus

Rachel Racicot

Tim Carter

Michael Sessions

Authors:

Company Information.......................................................................................................................2Abstract................................................................................................................................................2Introduction/Background................................................................................................................2Methods...............................................................................................................................................4- Finding 1: Students look to their email first for information on activities on campus....5- Finding 2: Students rarely or never notice the Campus Video Network (CVN).......6- Finding 3: Students are more likely to see walking signs than hanging posters...........6- Finding 4: Students learn about unfamiliar events through posters and emails...........7- Finding 5: Few students find it di!cult to get information for on campus events.........7

Conclusion/Recommendations.....................................................................................................8Bibliography........................................................................................................................................9Appendix 1 – Text of Email Sent to Students.........................................................................10Appendix 2 – Survey Questions...................................................................................................11Appendix 3 – Survey Data..........................................................................................................15

Table of Contents

Campus Advertising: Page 1

BYU-Idaho Campus Advertising

in association with:

Company Information Soapbox Agency is a student run advertising and public relations agency here on campus. !e agency focuses on creating professional level services from the entirely student lead sta". !ey work with real clients ranging from on-campus departments, to o"-campus businesses looking to gain a larger in#uence in the public space. Soapbox o"ers full advertising and public relations campaigns that include research, copywriting, graphic design, video, event planning, and social media plans. !e backbone to any advertising is the research of the target audience. From that target, they can develop a plan to reach out and in#uence the targeted consumer.

Abstract !roughout the BYU-Idaho campus, there are many forms of advertising for on-campus organizations and their respective events. Such advertising platforms may include: posters, videos, #yers, and or by word of mouth. Research conducted for this project focuses on which speci$c medium of advertising is most e"ective to reach the students of BYU-Idaho. !is research was surveyed in behalf and for the bene$t of Soapbox Agency. !e research gathered was obtained through a Qualtrics survey written speci$cally for this project. !e survey was sent out via email to BYU-Idaho students in random. A%er receiving the raw data, the information was evaluated and $ve main $ndings were observed. !e observations in the report suggest that information presented through the school-sanctioned email is the most e"ective way to advertise on campus. !is research is intended to help Soapbox Agency better understand how to reach potential clients and consumers, the college students at BYU-Idaho.

Introduction/Background Before starting the study, additional research was done on the subject of advertising. !is research included subjects that related to di"erent facets of advertising, college students, and their view of advertising. In the study “Does Web Advertising Work? Memory For Print Vs. Online Media” by Sundar and Narayan, we found that students remembered the advertisement better if it was in print version as opposed to an online version. !ey had 48 undergraduate students taking communications classes participating. !e study was done by having the subjects exposed to the front page of a fake newspaper that had one advertisement and two stories. Half of these were shown the print version while the other half were shown an online version. A%er they read the page, they were tested on their memory and ability to recall the news stories as well as the advertisement. !ey did this by giving the subjects a questionnaire that they would write their responses on. All of the questions were based on factual evidence from the newspaper from both the stories as the advertisement. !e responses were given number values. For every question that was right they assigned it a one and everything that was wrong was given a zero. !e $ndings said that those who were exposed to print media tend to recognize signi$cantly more of the ad content. Of the $ve questions that related to advertising, on average almost four correct answers were given from those who had studied the print version. On the other hand, those that were given the online form only answered less than three answers correctly on average. !e study, “!e In#uence of Media Type on Attitude Toward Mobile Advertisements Over Time” by Sung, J., & Cho, K., was conducted to observe the relationship between consumers and mobile advertisements on attitude change over time. !ere were two main experiments performed to research both immediate and delayed e"ects of di"erent media types on attitudes toward mobile advertisements. !e $rst experiment included three types of advertisements




relating to three media types: text, still pictures, and motion pictures. !e $ndings showed that motion pictures on mobile phones highly persuaded consumers’ initial attitude towards advertisements. !e second experiment, which focused on delayed e"ects, was performed four weeks a%er the $rst experiment. !e $ndings showed that attitude decreased towards motion pictures, while attitude towards text and still pictures increased. !is means that while motion pictures are generally more pleasing and enjoyable to view, text is more e"ective for providing information and promoting learning. Still pictures were also found to portray information and promote learning rather than motion pictures.

!e study, “Zoom Media - Leger Marketing Pan-Canadian Student Survey - 79% of students say ‘yes to advertising’” introduced a survey was conducted polling nearly 900 students on their opinion of on-campus advertising. According to the results, nearly 80 percent of students are in favor of on-campus advertising, so long as part of the revenue is redistributed to students. !e questions were posed to re#ect their opinion of advertising in general, not on the content of the advertisements. !e survey also concluded that 70 percent were in favor of advertising in student newspapers, 47 percent were in favor of advertising on vending machines, 84 percent were in favor of corporate sponsorship at student events, and 68 percent were in favor of corporate sponsorship of equipment or premises. !e research was conducted to invalidate what some student newspapers were writing about the on-campus advertising. !eir claim was that students disapproved of the advertising placed by Zoom Media.

In this study, “College Student Attitudes Toward Advertising’s Ethical, Economic, and Social Consequences,” by Beard, he researched to see if the attitudes of college students towards advertising has change since a study previously preformed in the 70’s. He speci$cally focused on their attitudes

about the ethical consequences and characteristics of advertising, the economic consequences of advertising, social consequences of advertising, and regulatory issues of advertising. He concluded that “negative attitudes toward the believability of advertising could work against its e"ectiveness as a business strategy” for college students and that they “seriously question the truthfulness of advertising.” He found that they agree that there is a need for advertising but that “it should be more tasteful, more realistic, on a more adult level” for it to be an e"ective model for advertisers.

In the article, “Colleges in Maryland aim to protect students from on-campus advertising” by Miller, the college administration talked about what advertising to allow on the campuses of universities in Maryland. Administration focused on making sure that they don’t have too much for the students. !ey wanted to make sure that they could make their campuses feel like a home to their students so they limited the advertising and put it in places that wouldn’t be overbearing or intrusive on their environments. Other times, when they allowed advertising, it was for social activities that would bene$t the students as a service to them provided by the company and not just a product being sold to the student.In an article by Warg, “Five Common On-Campus Advertising Mistakes,” Warg gave $ve mistakes that should not be made when advertising on a campus. First is to not waste time and money on an advertisement that doesn’t reach your audience. Second, take the time to research what is best for your campus, and what the students around you will get the most out of an advertisement. !ird, don’t leave student confused about the ad. !ey don’t have time to $gure it out. Students will respond best to an advertisement if they don’t have to take more time to $gure out what it is that they need to do to get to the event. Fourth, don’t target speci$c groups. Campuses are so diverse today, everyone is equal and should have a chance to go to all of the events, participate and build stronger relationships with their peers. Make sure to




call students to action, this gives them the motive to come and to be active. !e last tip is to not leave out any good stu" that will catch the eyes of the students, make them more interested to come. !e last article, “Where to Advertise on Campus,” Luicer gives a rundown of di"erent advertising venues on a college camps. She also gives a summary of each and the possible type of campus for each, whither your campus is a small or large. !e $rst avenue she talks about is the biggest and in today’s media has the biggest audience, this is social media. Never underestimate the power of social media, most of the students on your campus will have Facebook and Twitter, and you can give them updates about the planning of the event, constant and new reminders for the students to come to your event. Word of mouth is the next biggest way of advertising, make sure the students planning the event go tell professors, roommates, classmates and friends about the event they are planning and invite them to come. !e next is to use the campus TV station, use this for advertising your event. Radio station is great for smaller campus and you want to invite the local community. Advertise to the people standing still, this is when they aren’t running around like bees and this is when you’ll catch their eye. For example when they are eating in the cafeteria, the quad, or bus stops. In this article she also mentions that chalk is a great avenue for advertising on campus, and to make it really artistic to catch the eye of walking by students. !e biggest part of advertising is being creative, being new and always reaching new heights for your audience to enjoy is what will get them to participate in your event.



Methods!e campus media survey that was conducted is the basis of this study; all information observed in this report was taken from that survey. !e survey was dispensed via email using the Qualtrics survey program. Institutional Research Director, Scott Bergstrom, received submitted surveys and then passed on the data for this study.Twelve survey questions were posed consisting mostly of likert scales, i.e. always, most of the time, sometimes, rarely, and never. Some questions were asked were regarding personal information such as: gender, year level of student, and marital status.!e survey was open for duration of two weeks and was sent out to 600 random BYU-Idaho students. !ree days a%er the initial email, the survey was sent out again to the same students. A total of 87 students responded.To view the text of the emails that were sent to students, see Appendix 1. To see the questions from this survey, please refer to Appendix 2 at the end of this report.




Finding 1: Students look to their email first for information on activities on campus.

One question asked on the survey addressed how students get their information $rst about events and activities on campus. Each student was asked to place each medium in the order that they use it to $nd more information, 1 being $rst and 13 being last. In turn, the medium with the lowest number would be $rst, while the ones with the highest number would be used last. Email had the lowest numbers. !is means that most college students use email as their $rst source of information.

news CVN

Stud

ent E

-Mai

l

Post

ers

Wal

king

Pos

ters

Wor

d of

Mou

th

Onl

ine

at B

YU-I

Boot

hs

Cam

pus C

alen

dar

Face

book

Tabl

e To

pper

s

Cam

pus V

ideo

Net

wor

k

Flye

rs

Scro

ll

First used Least used




Finding 2: Students rarely or never notice the Campus Video Network (CVN)

In another question, students used a likert scale from 1 – 10 in order to $nd out whether or not they notice the CVN on campus. 1 represented always, while 10 represented never. Seventy two percent of participants answered 7 and above. Only 11 percent answered 3 or lower, indicating that they use it o%en. !e CVN is, however, relatively new. !e $ndings were not unexpected. Unfortunately, we cannot tell whether students don’t know about the CVN or if they just don’t notice it.

Finding 3: Students are more likely to see walking signs than hanging posters.

!e survey gave students a likert scale that allowed them to choose from 1 -10 (1 being always and 10 being never). !ey then determined how o%en they notice hanging posters as well as walking signs. Seventeen percent noticed walking signs more o%en than hanging posters. One possibility for this, could be that hanging posters are o%en crowded with other posters and therefore do not stand out. As opposed to walking signs, that stand out much more in their surroundings.

54%hanging

71%walking

Nev

er

Som

etim

es

Mos

t of t

ime

11%17%

72%




Finding 4: Students learn about un-familiar events through mainly posters and emails.

In the survey, there were two speci$c event questions. One addressed a widely know campus event (Guitar’s Unplugged), while the other represented a little known campus event (Résumé Café). !e survey $rst asked if the student knew about the event. !en, if they marked ‘yes’, they were lead to the second question, “Where did you hear about it $rst?” From the answers received, most students were led to the bigger event through word of mouth, while information about the lesser known event was mainly supplied by posters, both walking and hanging posters, and email.

Student E-Mail

Posters

Walking Posters

Word of Mouth

Online at BYU-I

BoothsCampus Calendar

Facebook

Table Toppers

Flyers

Finding 5: Very few students find it di!cult to get information for on campus events.

Only six percent of students sampled, found it di&cult or even semi-di&cult to $nd information about campus events. Ninety-four percent answered that $nding information about campus events was easy or neutral. !is is a good sign for Soapbox. As long as the information is in a place that is accessible for students, they will $nd it, and won’t have much trouble doing so.

6%

52%

42%




Conclusion/Recommendations Soapbox Agency should focus $rst on their email campaigns. Students have responded most positively to this type of advertising medium, as the survey showed that most students check their email $rst for information about on campus events. !e CVN is new and therefore, most students do not know about it or they don’t pay attention to it. !is is not a good avenue to do advertising, yet. Perhaps wait until the CVN is more widely publicized and then do more testing to see if it is a good advertising outlet or if it continues to be a poor choice. Posters hanging in hallways have the potential to get over crowded and be less noticeable. Walking posters are a better alternative to these. !ey stand out more and students proved that they notice walking posters better than they do hanging ones. If there are events or activities that are new or are not well known, the best place to advertise them is in emails or in posters (hanging and walking). !ese mediums were ranked much higher than any of the other sources listed for where students heard about little known event $rst. As long as the information is easy to $nd, the students will $nd it. !e information that students are getting has been easily accessible. Congratulations and good luck.




BibliographyHenke, L. L. (1985). Perceptions and Use of News Media by College Students. Journal OfBroadcasting & Electronic Media, 29(4), 431-436.

Sundar, S., & Narayan, S. (1998). DOES WEB ADVERTISING WORK? MEMORY FORPRINT VS. ONLINE MEDIA. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 822-835.

Kinnucan, H. W. and Miao, Y. (1999), Media-speci$c returns to generic advertising:!e case of cat$sh. Agribusiness, 15: 81–99. doi:10.1002/(SICI)15206297(199924)15:1<81::AID-AGR6>3.0.CO;2-D.

Zoom media - leger marketing pan-canadian student survey - 79% of studentssay “yes to advertising”. (2000, Dec 11). Canada NewsWire. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/455888165?accountid=9817.

Beard, F. K. (2003). College student attitudes toward advertising’s ethical, economic,and social consequences. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(3), 217-228. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/198027057?accountid=9817.

Xiaoge, H., Xigen, L., & Nelson, R. (2005). !e World Wide Web as a Vehicle forAdvertising Movies to College Students: An Exploratory Study. Journal Of WebsitePromotion, 1(3), 115-122. doi:10.1300/J238v01n0309.

Warg, M. (2007). Five Common On-Campus Advertising Mistakes. Beyond, 1.Miller, M. (2011, Oct 10). Colleges in maryland aim to protect students from on-campusadvertising. !e Daily Record. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/898483785?accountid=9817.

Sung, J., & Cho, K. (2012). !e In#uence of Media Type on Attitude Toward MobileAdvertisements Over Time. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 15(1), 31-36. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0061.

Lucier, K. L. (2013). Where to Advertise an Event on Campus. About.com Guide, 2.




Appendix 1 – Text of Email Sent to Students

First Email:Dear Student, We would like to $nd out how you get information about campus events. Will you take a few minutes to com-plete our survey? It should take about 5 minutes to complete and your answers will be anonymous. !is is the link to the survey: https://byui.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5pVrNw1br1JlExL !ank you, Comm280 Research Group

Second Email:Dear Student, If you’ve already completed this survey, you can ignore this email. We are interested in where you get informa-tion about campus events and what is most useful. Would you take our survey? !is should only take you 5 min-utes to complete and the answers will be anonymous. !is survey will help us make sure you get the information you want in the way you want. We would really appreciate your response! !is is the link to the survey: https://byui.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5pVrNw1br1JlExL!ank you, !e Comm280 Research Team


https://byui.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5pVrNw1br1JlExL

https://byui.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5pVrNw1br1JlExL

Appendix 2 – Survey Questions


Appendix 3 – Survey Data


brought to you by:

Taylor Ann Markus

Rachel Racicot

Tim Carter

Michael Sessions

Authors:

Thank You!

authors - rachelracicot.weebly.comrelations campaigns that include research, copywriting, graphic...

Documents