Campaign update on our MAX ad
July 6th, 2009 by Justin KistnerLast Friday we launched an ad campaign on the MAX posing the question “Should cyclists pay a road tax?” We tracked a significant amount of conversation in a short period of time. In fact, it was much more conversation than we had anticipated and agreed with Thom Schoenborn it would be better to get results out sooner. So, in addition to our October rewrap of the MAX, we would also like to provide an update now.
Clarifications
Before we get too far, we’d like to clarify a few points:
- We do not promote the idea that cyclists do not already pay taxes. Our question is “Should cyclists pay a road tax?”, which is not about whether or not cyclists do currently.
- We do not support a dichotomy between bikes and cars. From the beginning we identified multiple stakeholders in this conversation and think narrowing the conversation to bikes and cars is unproductive.
- The volume of conversation around this topic reinforces the fact that it’s an important discussion for the Portland community. As we are cyclists, drivers, and riders we care about the outcome of the discussion and feel that the insights we can provide with our tools will help drive consensus.
The conversation space
Using Webtrends Social Measurement we were able to track this conversation’s 918 comments across 13 sources. As our first update, we wanted to share the list of sources where the conversations have taken place so far:
Sources (sorted by comment volume)
- KATU, Bike ad plastered on MAX train causes a stir (407 comments)
- BikePortland, Editorial: Marketing campaign asks the wrong question (147 comments)
- Twitter (123 tweets)
- OregonLive, New full-train MAX ad asks: Should cyclists pay road tax? (118 comments)
- BikePortland, A look at TriMet’s role in MAX ad campaign flap (53 comments)
- OregonLive, (34 comments)
- TransitSleuth, Should Bicyclists Pay a Road Tax? Measured and Tallied (20 comments)
- Zero Times Any Number, Portland Webtrends and their need for attention (6 comments)
- Portlandize, Should “cyclists” pay road tax? (5 comments)
- PopArt, Portland Bike and Marketing Freak Out (4 comments)
- Blogtown, MAX Stunt Collides with Cycling Community (1 comment)
- BTA, Bicyclists pay taxes too (0 comments)
- I’m in your water, Portland Local Media Roundup! (0 comments)
Reporting
Starting today, we will continue to share updates on this blog. Our final report will contain the following:
- Summary – This will be a roll up of all conversation providing a high-level briefing.
- Timeline – This will show the conversation sources as they unfolded over time.
- Sources – Each source of the conversation will have a unique summary of their contributions. For each source we’re going to provide a tag cloud of that source’s conversation, the talking points from that source listed by volume, number of comments, number of unique commenters, and sentiment of that source.
Tomorrow we will publish an overview of the comments broken out into the following sentiment: those who support the amount of taxes paid now, those who want less, and those who want more.
Tags: ad, bike, MAX, portland, social media
Follow us on Twitter
July 6th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
Thanks for this update! As a cyclist, I really appreciate the clarifications there. I wonder if you folks would consider updating this landing page with similar information:
https://www.webtrends.com/LP/Events/Max.aspx
peace,
isaac
July 7th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Isaac, that ticket is already in! We expect to see the landing page updates go live later today.
July 7th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
You guys are short-sighted, bias-mongering, road-rage-inducing dorks. Your sloppy, exploitative depiction means things just got a little more dangerous on the streets this summer for many of your potential customers–and you don’t care, do you?
What’s a “cyclist”?
There are only *people* on bikes. They’re the same people who are sometimes in cars, and sometimes on buses or trains or planes. They’re also the same people who pay property tax, payroll tax and (in some states) sales tax–including fuel taxes for the cars they sometimes drive.
At least ask the question fairly and without bias: “Should people have to pay extra to ride bikes?”
Dorks.
July 7th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Justin – great conversation starter. I’m daily commuter cyclist and hadn’t even seen these ads – don’t know how I missed them, or the controversy around them. Looking forward to more updates on how you guys track this stuff!
July 7th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
WTF are you talking about here?
“We do not promote the idea that cyclists do not already pay taxes. Our question is “Should cyclists pay a road tax?”, which is not about whether or not cyclists do currently.”
you are full of it.
July 8th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Your decision to frame or ask a question in the way you have shows a bias that you may not intend. If you intended the wording the way you did to provoke responses, you have succeeded. However, this is by no means a public service.
If multiple stakeholders are part of your thinking, then why limit the question or frame it as a bicyclist’s issue?
If you’ve read the commentary, clearly you have learned that bicyclists already pay for roads as does everyone else who pays taxes here. You’re ad and it’s wording is clearly designed to use a hot button issue framed disingenuously to gather as much traffic as possible. And, now, what will you do with this information? Help the community understand that bicyclists, pedestrians and automobile owners all pay for public roads in Oregon?
July 8th, 2009 at 11:24 am
We’re working on releasing results from the conversation so far (hopefully later today) and it will be sorted into: those who think the amount of taxes paid now are fine, those who want more, those who want less, and indistinguishable.
July 8th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Justin, you don’t seem to get it. Your data is junk because you asked the question provocatively and disingenuously rather than accurately and honestly.
First you need to publicly apologize to the people of this town for attempting to exploit them Limbaugh-style. Then let’s see if anything can be salvaged from your junk data.
The last thing I need is a crew of propeller-headed dorks inflaming road tensions and making the commute more dangerous for me and my colleagues. If I was in charge of such things here at my company (~12,000 employees), we would be out of WebTrends and into Google Analytics in a heartbeat.
Dorks.
July 8th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Quick update: We are on target to have the results ready late today will release them in the morning.
July 8th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
@Isaac we posted our clarifications to our landing page.
July 8th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Wow… asking a simple question is provocative and disingenuous? Framed with bias?
As an outsider to the region, it appears to be quite a simple question that is neither biased, disingenuous or provocative. The answer to the question is one that obviously strikes incredibly deep at the readers’ passions. The anger and criticism on this page tell me that it was a perfect question.
Asking a question to observe and report on the response with your own product required a question that ignited a firestorm… otherwise the numbers would probably low enough that you aren’t able to correlate them accurately.
Well done Webtrends team! There aren’t too many companies brave enough to put themselves out in front of the public for this kind of abuse (unnecessary abuse I might add). Looking forward to the results of the experiment… don’t let the anonymous commenters impact your decision to move forward with this campaign.
Observing from Indianapolis (where the bike paths just got put in).
July 9th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Forget the outrage, let’s look at the metrics.
I’d be curious on how you weight sentiment in lieu of the number of comments, as well as the source. How are you incorporating in your metrics the fact that some of these sources have audiences that are bicyclists versus a much broader audience like KATU? What are your controls for the measurement that you are implementing?
Of course you’re going to get a negative sentiment from BikePortland, look at the audience. But it’s a niche audience, and the number of comments is not going to compare to a broader, larger audience like KATU. Taken in raw number of comments or +/- sentiments, what if you find that a majority is for a bicycle tax? Does that make the argument against it less valid? Are you weighing commments from BikePortland a higher sentiment “value” because they have more vested interest in the topic, or are all comments equal value?
Let’s take a sample of how you’re going to break it down and some numbers to illustrate:
Those who support the amount of taxes paid now – 30%
Those who want less taxes – 10%
Those who want more taxes – 60%
The number of respondents or participants in this “sea of conversation” have a majority who support taxes. But how does that percentage compare to the actual population of Portland (who are the stakeholders)? What’s the statistical significance in the number of comments?
Are you really going to wrap those trains saying “Yes, 60% of folks out there say they should pay tax” or “Bicyclists are not paying enough taxes”. People have already made up their mind, do you really think it would sway them? I have a hard time believing that it would affect public policy, and I fail to see what insights you have provided and how this will drive consensus.
One fact that will come out is that one group (pro/anti bike tax) is more vocal than the other online. Not everyone uses Twitter, comments or posts on blogs. Maybe the bicyclists are too busy enjoying the great outdoors to be in front of a computer or type in their Blackberries/iPhone
July 9th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Pfffft. My thoughts.
http://maxisnow.com/2009/07/should-cyclists-pay-a-road-tax-oh-webtrends/
July 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Justin,
I have to say that delivering the payoff, in terms of the analytics report, will provide so much value for everyone involved. When everyone sees what the sentiment and quality of the conversation actually looks like, it will change the debate, no question, and you’ll have made your [real] point.
Beyond that, this is a brilliant way for WebTrends to both deliver value back to local communities and promote its analytics…I look forward to forthcoming questions in LA and other cities. Potential topics for discussion might be:
“Should X city increase spending on recycling?”
“Should people that wear Ed Hardy trucker hats be fined $50 on the spot?”
July 10th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Ah, I just read up on some of the previous discussion, especially that from Mr. Schoenborn, which makes the same points I did.
All that said, from a strategic point of view, I think this is the best marketing campaign I’ve seen in a while. Of course, that’s a conversation to take back to the echo chamber…
Best,
Ethan
September 8th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
[...] Campaign update on our MAX ad – This was the first post with an update, which came a week after news broke. It has a round up of coverage that was up to date at the time. More stories have come in and we’ll have those in our final report. [...]