This article was originally published in Dutch in 2011 and has been translated and updated in October 2026.
Mass advertising has been an important way for companies and brands to reach their audiences in both the US and Europe for around 100 years. For almost as long, scientists and researchers have been trying to work out how mass advertising works and what its effects are. They have used all kinds of models to map out how effective advertising really is. A study published in 2011 took a fresh look at several hundred of these studies and analyses, covering the period from 1960 to 2008.
The analyses it re-examined covered a wide range of brands, products, industries and countries. In some respects the results are fairly obvious, while in others they are genuinely surprising. These were the main findings:
1. Only half of all advertising turns out to be effective
That is a large share. Far larger than many people tend to assume. The reasons for this ineffectiveness are varied. Some campaigns run for far too long, so their impact wears off. Other campaigns are not tested properly, or weak campaigns are launched anyway, because of deadlines or a lack of extra budget, for example. Sadly, in some cases a lack of knowledge on the part of those responsible also plays a role.
2. The average effect of advertising is only 50% of what was always assumed
The study shows that increasing the advertising budget by 1% leads to a rise in sales or market share of just 0.1%. That is striking, because a study from 1984 had suggested that a 10% increase in advertising budget would lead to a 2% increase in sales. The newer figures therefore show that the increase is only 1%. That is half of what had been assumed until then.
3. Long-term effects are twice as large as short-term effects
This finding suggests, at the very least, that advertisers need staying power and have to wait until all their messages have fully landed with their audience. On the other hand, if a campaign has no effect at all in the short term, it will not be effective in the long term either. So there is no reason not to stop campaigns that are not working early on and try something new.
4. The effect of advertising has declined over time
One reason is the rise of new media. These have changed consumers and the buying process considerably, and in doing so have reduced the influence of advertising.
5. Advertising works better in bad times than in good times
The reason for this could be that advertising is less ‘noisy’ during a recession. That means adverts stand out more and more people respond to them than in economically better times. So it is worth experimenting with countercyclical budgeting: advertising more when times are bad and less when times are good.
6. TV is more effective than print
Television makes more of an impact than print and is better at conveying a feeling to the audience. This is because TV can appeal to more of the senses than print can.
7. The impact of advertising differs by type of product
The effectiveness of advertising turns out to vary from product to product. Advertising works better for durables than for non-durables, better for pharmaceutical products than for other products, and better for new products than for existing ones.
8. Advertising is generally more effective in Europe than in the US
This may have to do with ‘over-advertising’ in the US. There is more advertising in the US, and more is not always better, of course. Besides advertising being more effective in Europe than in the US, effectiveness also appears to increase the less developed a country or market is. At the time, this meant that a better response could be expected in countries such as India and China than in Europe, for example.
Advertising remains fascinating
Over the past 100 years we have seen many successful advertising campaigns come and go. Many of them have been (partly) responsible for successful product launches and for the rise and growth of legendary brands. Think, for example, of the legendary Apple commercial from 1984.
New media complement traditional media
However, a lot of rubbish has been produced as well. Those commercials are uninteresting and have contributed nothing. This study even shows that only half of all advertising campaigns have been worthwhile. But that does not change the fact that, even in today’s age of interactive and social media, there is still a place for traditional advertising. These new media are not a replacement for old media but a complement to them. It is therefore up to advertisers and marketers to research, test and figure out how different forms of media can be used so that they complement and reinforce one another.