Which work best – text or images? Updated May 2018 Which work best – text or images?

Key findings: Which work best – text or images? Using the RAMetrics database, we investigated which measures were most responsive to the three different types of print ad: ads that are mostly image; ads that are mostly text; and ads that are balanced between both image and text. When it comes to memorability, image-based ads perform better – 68% of readers recall seeing ads that are predominantly visual, compared with 58% of readers for text-based ads. However, the highest average impact score (71%) is for ads that have the best of both, text and image. Image-based ads outperform their text-based counterparts across all metrics, they are deemed substantially more interesting than text heavy ads, but those which utilise both components come out on top (30% vs 22% vs% 32% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Visual ads provoke more of an emotional reaction (34% vs 26% vs 37% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads) and readers tend to find them more likeable (like ad: 28% vs 20% vs 31% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads). They are more likely to persuade readers into taking action, encourage visits to the advertiser (15% vs 9% vs% 13% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads) and influence actual purchasing (have bought/will buy: 14% vs 11% vs% 12% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Contrary to expectation, ads that are mainly text are less effective at delivering new information (34% vs 26% vs 37% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads), however when it comes to getting engaged readers to take action, text based ads are second to none (engagement to action: 48% vs 48% vs% 44% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Does that mean that it is all over for the long copy ad? We believe not! It’s not really about the amount of text and image that matter, it’s the strength of the creative. The best copy rich ads can easily compete with image-led executions Back in 2014, in an article about the demise of the long copy ad, Campaign quoted veteran UK copywriter Neil French, who famously noted: “How many times have you been in a client meeting, and he’s announced ‘People don’t read copy anymore?’ This coming from a man with a newspaper poking out of his briefcase. And if you point this out, he says, ‘Well, I do, of course. But the public doesn’t.’” It is often said that we are becoming a more visually biased society. Content with strong visuals is most likely to be shared on social media: Facebook posts with images see 2.3 times more engagement than those without images (Buzzsumo, 2015). Behavioural scientists have shown that when we’re making a snap judgement about a fact, the mere presence of an accompanying photograph makes us more likely to think it’s true, even when the photo doesn’t provide any evidence one way or the other (Newman EJ, Garry M, Bernstein DM, Kantner J, and Lindsay DS 2012). Ads with a strong visual idea are far more likely to be lauded at Cannes and similar awards events than a long copy ad – or perhaps there just aren’t many ads with copy entered? Yet eye-tracking technology also shows that a powerful headline or piece of copy can attract as much, if not more attention, than a powerful image. Using the RAMetrics database, we investigated which measures were most responsive to the three different types of print ad: ads that are mostly image; ads that are mostly text; and ads that are balanced between both image and text. When it comes to memorability, image-based ads perform better – 68% of readers recall seeing ads that are predominantly visual, compared with 58% of readers for text-based ads. However, the highest average impact score (71%) is for ads that have the best of both, text and image. In fact, image-based ads outperform their text-based counterparts across all metrics – readers are more likely to find image-based ads more engaging, they draw more of the reader’s attention and they’re even more likely to encourage them to take action. It’s not surprising then that visual ads are deemed substantially more interesting than text heavy ads, but those which utilise both components come out on top (30% vs 22% vs% 32% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Similarly, they provoke more of an emotional reaction (34% vs 26% vs 37% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads) and readers tend to find them more likeable (like ad: 28% vs 20% vs 31% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads). Ads containing both visuals and copy generally tends to achieve a more balanced performance and are best for activation, however there are some brand metrics which favour image-based ads. Readers find it easier to recognise brands via image-based ads (sender identification: 33% vs 26% vs 30%) and even find them more familiar (previous knowledge: 46% vs 36% vs% 40% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Interestingly, visual ads are more likely to persuade readers into taking action, they encourage visits to the advertiser (15% vs 9% vs% 13% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads) and even influence actual purchasing (have bought/will buy: 14% vs 11% vs% 12% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Contrary to expectations, long copy ads are less effective at delivering new information. We might expect readers to garner more information from text heavy ads, but in practice, readers prefer ads which contain a bit of both, (new information: 34% vs 26% vs 37% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads). However when it comes to getting engaged readers to take action, text based ads are second to none (engagement to action: 48% vs 48% vs% 44% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads), which can translate to more website visits, more conversation around the brand and even encourage readers to look for more information. Does that mean that it is all over for the long copy ad? We believe not! It’s not really about the amount of text and image that matter, it’s the strength of the creative. The category of advertiser will also have a bearing. Among the text based ads in the RAMetrics database are several for a funeral directors. We can hazard a guess that it’s not very easy to seduce the reader on this subject! The best copy rich ads can easily compete with image-led executions. One thing that we can be certain of is that there will be an increased need for storytelling in the future. The need for quality, creative communications – whether we call them content or advertising – will only increase. This may be done entirely through visual means, pictures and videos, with maybe a bit of text to show the way. It would be a brave advertiser who would turn their back on the power of the written word. People are reading books, more newsbrands, and they are reading more words than ever online. There should still be a role for beautifully crafted, engaging copy. Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Mon – Wed: 100 ads, 18/08/2016 – 30/04/2018, Thu – Sat: 100 ads, 14/01/2017 – 30/04/2018, Sun: 100 ads, 10/08/2012 – 30/04/2018. Score base: Read the newspaper.

Text or images - Ad recall Ad recall: Do you recall seeing the ad? % saying yes Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Both text/image: 100 ads, 12/05/2017 - 22/05/2018, Mostly image: 100 ads, 30/10/2014 - 22/05/2018, Mostly text: 100 ads, 16/12/2011 – 22/05/2018. Score base: Read the newspaper.

Text or images ad comparison brand measures attention + recognition engagement action Both text/image Mostly image Mostly text Attention: How closely did you read/look at the ad? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Branding: How difficult or easy was it to understand the source/sender of the ad? % scoring above 9 on 10 pt scale Familiarity: How well did you previously know the advertiser? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Like ad: How did you like the ad? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Easy to understand: The ad is easy to understand. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale New Information: The ad contains news or new information. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Positive: The ad makes me feel positive towards the advertiser. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Appeals to me: Ad appeals to you. % Yes Benefit: Have you benefited or will you benefit from something in the ad? % Yes Interesting: The ad is interesting. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Fresh approach: The ad has an original design. % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale Emotional Reaction: Did you react to the advertisement emotionally? % Yes Look for more information: Have you looked for or will you look for more information as a result of seeing the ad? % Yes Visit a website: Have you visited or will you visit the website as a result of the ad? % Yes Visit advertiser: Have you visited or will you visit this advertiser as a result of seeing this ad? % Yes Have bought/will buy: Have you bought or will you buy something as a result of seeing this ad? % Yes Recommend: Have you recommended or will you recommend the company / product due to the advertising? % scoring above 7 on 10 pt scale (Added in April 2016) Discuss: Have you been talking about / discussing the company, offer or product as a result of seeing the advertising? % Yes (Added in April 2016) Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Both text/image: 100 ads, 12/05/2017 - 22/05/2018, Mostly image: 100 ads, 30/10/2014 - 22/05/2018, Mostly text: 100 ads, 16/12/2011 – 22/05/2018. Score base: Read the newspaper.

xxx Both text/image Mostly image Mostly text 49% 91% 44% 59% 78% 48% Ad recall 71% Brand recognition 35% Engagement 32% Action 14% 59% 78% 48% Ad recall 68% Brand recognition 40% Engagement 31% Action 15% 53% 74% 48% Ad recall 58% Brand recognition 31% Engagement 23% Action 11% Back in 2014, in an article about the demise of the long copy ad, Campaign quoted veteran UK copywriter Neil French, who famously noted: “How many times have you been in a client meeting, and he’s announced ‘People don’t read copy anymore?’ This coming from a man with a newspaper poking out of his briefcase. And if you point this out, he says, ‘Well, I do, of course. But the public doesn’t.’” It is often said that we are becoming a more visually biased society. Content with strong visuals is most likely to be shared on social media: Facebook posts with images see 2.3 times more engagement than those without images (Buzzsumo, 2015). Behavioural scientists have shown that when we’re making a snap judgement about a fact, the mere presence of an accompanying photograph makes us more likely to think it’s true, even when the photo doesn’t provide any evidence one way or the other (Newman EJ, Garry M, Bernstein DM, Kantner J, and Lindsay DS 2012). Ads with a strong visual idea are far more likely to be lauded at Cannes and similar awards events than a long copy ad – or perhaps there just aren’t many ads with copy entered? Yet eye-tracking technology also shows that a powerful headline or piece of copy can attract as much, if not more attention, than a powerful image. Using the RAMetrics database, we investigated which measures were most responsive to the three different types of print ad: ads that are mostly image; ads that are mostly text; and ads that are balanced between both image and text. When it comes to memorability, image-based ads perform better – 68% of readers recall seeing ads that are predominantly visual, compared with 58% of readers for text-based ads. However, the highest average impact score (71%) is for ads that have the best of both, text and image. In fact, image-based ads outperform their text-based counterparts across all metrics – readers are more likely to find image-based ads more engaging, they draw more of the reader’s attention and they’re even more likely to encourage them to take action. It’s not surprising then that visual ads are deemed substantially more interesting than text heavy ads, but those which utilise both components come out on top (30% vs 22% vs% 32% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Similarly, they provoke more of an emotional reaction (34% vs 26% vs 37% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads) and readers tend to find them more likeable (like ad: 28% vs 20% vs 31% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads). Ads containing both visuals and copy generally tends to achieve a more balanced performance and are best for activation, however there are some brand metrics which favour image-based ads. Readers find it easier to recognise brands via image-based ads (sender identification: 33% vs 26% vs 30%) and even find them more familiar (previous knowledge: 46% vs 36% vs% 40% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Interestingly, visual ads are more likely to persuade readers into taking action, they encourage visits to the advertiser (15% vs 9% vs% 13% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads) and even influence actual purchasing (have bought/will buy: 14% vs 11% vs% 12% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads). Contrary to expectations, long copy ads are less effective at delivering new information. We might expect readers to garner more information from text heavy ads, but in practice, readers prefer ads which contain a bit of both, (new information: 34% vs 26% vs 37% for image-based ads vs text-based ads vs both text/image ads). However when it comes to getting engaged readers to take action, text based ads are second to none (engagement to action: 48% vs 48% vs% 44% for image-based ads vs text based ads vs both text/image ads), which can translate to more website visits, more conversation around the brand and even encourage readers to look for more information. Does that mean that it is all over for the long copy ad? We believe not! It’s not really about the amount of text and image that matter, it’s the strength of the creative. The category of advertiser will also have a bearing. Among the text based ads in the RAMetrics database are several for a funeral directors. We can hazard a guess that it’s not very easy to seduce the reader on this subject! The best copy rich ads can easily compete with image-led executions. One thing that we can be certain of is that there will be an increased need for storytelling in the future. The need for quality, creative communications – whether we call them content or advertising – will only increase. This may be done entirely through visual means, pictures and videos, with maybe a bit of text to show the way. It would be a brave advertiser who would turn their back on the power of the written word. People are reading books, more newsbrands, and they are reading more words than ever online. There should still be a role for beautifully crafted, engaging copy. Both text/image Mostly image Mostly text Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Both text/image: 100 ads, 12/05/2017 - 22/05/2018, Mostly image: 100 ads, 30/10/2014 - 22/05/2018, Mostly text: 100 ads, 16/12/2011 – 22/05/2018. Score base: Read the newspaper.

Image & text vs mostly image vs mostly text - Ad recall Highest scoring ad Lowest scoring ad Ad recall: Do you recall seeing the ad? % saying yes Both text/image Mostly image Mostly text Source: RAMetrics. Countries: England/Scotland. Image & text – 30 ads from 27/12/2016 to 03/04/2017, mostly image – 30 ads from 29/11/2015 to 03/04/2017, mostly text – 31 ads from 17/03/2015 to 03/04/2017. Score base: read the newspaper.