ArticleWhat’s Hot in 2025 Marketing Pt. 2
We’ve officially survived the shortest month of 2025 – and while it isn’t officially Spring (in the northern hemisphere) yet, things are looking up if you like warm weather, golf & more sunshine.
Speaking of things looking up – after the incredible response to last week’s issue, we’re back with Part 2 of the “2025 Hot or Not: Marketing Edition.” If you didn’t get a chance to read last week’s edition on the stuff that is NOT working, I’d highly recommend checking it out.
But, for this week, we’re springing forward with the 10 things – platforms, strategies, and tactics – that are working right now and have outsized potential to pay dividends long-term.
TV Advertising (Esp. Programmatic TV):
For the last ~10 years, TV budgets have fallen as a percentage of total media spend. But, if Hegel has taught us anything, it’s that the pendulum always swings back (even if the return path looks a little different).
That’s exactly what I’m seeing happen with TV. Phones may be the most used screen, and computers may provide the most productive screen – but TVs are still the biggest screen in the house. The value of ads on the big screen may have changed, but it hasn’t gone to zero.
There are three things driving the shift back to TV:
- Increased Access – historically, there have been two major barriers to accessing TV ads for many brands (especially SMBs): (1) lack of TV ad content and (2) exceedinglyexpensive ad inventory. The combination of (ironically) 4k cameras on every phone, AI-powered video editing and the gig-based economy has made (1) a thing of the past – any brand with an iPhone, a Premiere Pro license and a halfway decent freelance editor can create a solid (if unspectacular) TV commercial in less than 4 hours (I’m not saying you’ll win awards for said commercial, but it’ll work). (2) has likewise been ameliorated through a combination of market forces (more TV/cable ad slots and fewer buyers = lower prices) and technology – where once you had to make friends with TV reps (and stay on their good side), now inventory is offered via programmatic platforms (examples include Tatari, WideOrbit, Vibe and Charter). Buying linear TV slots will soon be as easy as placing display (or YouTube) ads.
If this still is a bit out of your budget, consider shopping around for remnant inventory (these are often premium ad slots that go unsold, resulting in the network offering them at a (sometimes) steep discount). Due to their nature, remnant slots are oftenlast-minute opportunities for brands willing to move quickly – but at the prices I’m seeing for these slots, it is difficult to find a more cost-effective investment. You will need to make friends with some brokers or network ad reps, but it’s worth it. This is especially true for social-heavy brands that are getting squeezed due to rising CPMs on Meta – there’s no better hedge for increased social ad prices than TV.
- Targeting – The second major challenge with TV (at least, historically) has been targeting. It was not that long ago when creating a TV ad buy required sourcing availability from each network, pulling third-party, channel-specific data on each individual show/placement included in a proposed buy, comparing the network-reported figures to the 3P data, trying to normalize everything in the report based on your target audience, then making a decision on which spots you wanted, which ones you didn’t, and which ones needed to be negotiated. If that sounds complex, it was – and it was frustrating as anything. The worst part: at the end of this process, you were still gambling that the audience you wanted to reach was going to be watching at the slots you were buying.
Well, times have changed. Now, instead of having to crunch Nielsen reports for weeks on end, you can build a target audience profile in a programmatic TV platform (like those mentioned above) and get a real-time breakdown on which channels, time slots and shows have the highest (or lowest) probability of reaching that audience. This is all powered by platform + networks overlaying 0P, 1P, 2P & 3P data onto their existing data (essentially a version of what Meta did way back when).
- Measurement – The final challenge with TV (again, historically) has been measurement. The best most TV advertisers got for much of the last century was a confirmation that the ad ran at the designated time and a panel viewership read. From there, it was up to the brand to figure out impact – either via a Marketing Mix Model (MMM), surveys, correlation data, lead/intake/customer success insight, etc.
Like the two preceding items, this too has (gratefully) been relegated to the annals of history. The combination of on-site pixel data (yes, TV can do that now), low-cost automated MMMs (aMMM) that provide exponentially more data that the usual estimated impressions and viewership and the ability to connect TV ads to business outcomes (think: it’s now trivial to measure the lift in calls or sales following a TV commercial airing – if you have enough data points, you can start to identify the underlying value of TV in ways that were never possible before).
This is one of those trends that has been taking shape for years (I wrote about it way back in2023), but is finally coming to the forefront. TV will have itself quite the renaissance as the combination of market forces, increased accessibility and improved measurement (finally) allows advertisers to properly value TV relative to social.
PR & LLM Engine Optimization
Speaking of things making a comeback (albeit for VERY different reasons), PR is poised to have a moment. While it is categorically true that trust in media is at all-time lows, that newspaper readership is cratering and that traditional journalists wield far less power than they did even a few years ago – it’s also true that PR’s obsession with mainstream media was always myopic.
The successful PR practitioners tomorrow will think far bigger than getting stories and quotes in notable legacy outlets. Those things are vanity. Always has been. The true value of PR is twofold:
- The ability to reach, engage + secure new media in a systematic way – like it or not, new media is here to stay. Joe Rogan and Alex Cooper are more influential than theNew York Times or the Washington Post, and it isn’t particularly close. More people listen to Scott Galloway’s podcast than read Paul Krugman’s articles. The Operators Newsletter is more influential among the eCommerce elite than a story in Forbes or Fortune. A review from Marques Brownlee is more valuable than an inclusion in a dozen legacy media gift guides (pick whichever ones you want, it’s still true). Getting your product in the hands of Jynxzi is more valuable to most brands than a rave review from the View (or any other TV show, for that matter).
For most people in PR, everything I just wrote is an existential threat because it means their primary currency – relationships with media outlets – is collapsing while a new order emerges. To quote the late (and not-so-great) Lord Baelish: “Chaos is a ladder.”
But amongst the chaos is an opportunity for the individuals + agencies that see it: rebuild the model from pitching reporters to partnering with new media. Find ways to identify sources of influence (hello, Sparktoro), determine the right angle of approach, and get them interested in talking to you (or about you/your product/whatever).
The internet has always been about network centrality (either writ large or writ niche), and for all of its history, legacy media outlets have occupied positions near the center. So, while that’s bad news for a lot of legacy publications, it’s wonderful news for smart, ambitious, audacious PR people (and the brands that are willing to take a chance on them) – because (like it or not) the name of the game is still being mentioned.
- The ability to influence the output of tomorrow’s information experiences (i.e. SERPs + LLM results) – there’s another (less obvious) benefit to getting mentioned by credible, influential organizations: that’s what powers information + discovery experience across both search (SERP features) and LLMs (i.e. ChatGPT or Claude responses).
This is a fantastically complex topic (and one I’ll be doing a future issue on), but the Cliffnotes (remember those?) is this: both information retrieval systems (Google Search) and content generation systems (i.e. Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude) are influenced by conceptual proximity and network centrality. That’s a really fancy way of saying: the more your brand/product/whatever is mentioned proximate to other relevant core concepts (i.e. mentioned as a top agency in [region] or one of the best at X or a specialist in Y, etc.), the higher the probability that an LLM will generate a response about that concept which includes a reference to your brand/product/whatever. Remember: LLMs are pattern recognition + probabilistic prediction machines.
This is also true for search engine rich results pages – just like LLMs, Google looks for conceptual centrality AND network centrality (links still matter, they just matter a lot less). The more credible people/organizations talk about your product/brand/whatever in a context that’s highly relevant, the more likely it is that your brand/content will be included among rich results on SERPs. That comes with the added benefit of some of those results potentially being used by LLMs searching the web to provide updated/real-time information about a given query. Put another way: if your brand/product/whatever is already considered “relevant” by the LLM before searching, and a search results in even more mentions of your brand alongside the relevant concept, your brand is that much more likely to be included in the LLM-generated response.
Regardless of your views on AI for information retrieval, the undeniable reality is that these new information discovery experiences are here to stay, and will only continue to become both more robust and more popular. This is one of those cases where being first really is all that matters, and (quite candidly) new-age PR is the way to get there. The brands that invest now will be reaping the spoils of that investment for the next decade-plus.
Email & SMS
Email isn’t going anywhere. For most successful brands, email/SMS will continue to represent 20%-30% of your revenue (or lead volume) for the foreseeable future.
To put this as simply as I can: the value of direct, un-intermediated connection with your audience is unmatched. That’s exactly what email and SMS offer: the ability to reach your audience at any time, for any reason, with any message (within reason), and virtually no cost.
What’s more exciting is that email – for the first time in nearly three decades – is getting an update. AI/LLMs are enabling personalization at a scale that was never feasible until now (a simple example: an email can be fully personalized to each subscriber, then sent to him/her at the time most likely to result in a response); automated segmentation and targeting leverages the treasure trove of customer data most brands are ignoring to find the subtle patterns in user behavior to create refined audience segments; dynamic content adaption can instantly generate alternative content versions based on real-time data, allowing emails to adapt their messaging, content, offer, visuals + more based on current conditions (inventory, weather, events, availability, etc.).
If that wasn’t exciting enough, the combination of Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) and advanced HTML has allowed email designers/developers to create legitimately interactive experiences within emails. This includes everything from click-able carousels (just like social ads) to in-email forms, media, and quizzes. It’s a brave new world for email creative – and one that most brands have yet to truly explore.
Couple all of these technical advances with an increasingly unpredictable and fractured information environment, and you have a recipe for the re-emergence of email as a primary marketing channel.
Landing Page Testing & Optimization
I’ve always found it patently insane that the vast majority of brands will invest thousands – sometimes millions – in ad creative, but balk at spending a fraction of that on landing page design + testing.
Part of this is attributable to the step vs. ramp theory of website management. The overwhelming majority of brands view websites similarly to how most homeowners view updating their primary residence: renovations are big projects, and are done only when push comes to shove. But the majority of the blame is a fundamental devaluation of user and landing page experience, and a misunderstanding of the role of the landing page in the customer/client journey. Put another way: most brands operate under the delusion thattheir ads alone are sufficient to convince someone to buy.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The primary role of the ad is to move the audience from wherever it appears to your landing page. It’s the equivalent of the appetizer at a nice meal, or the trailer for an upcoming film: it’s just here to set up what is yet to come.
And what is yet to come is the landing page experience. Imagine going to an upscale, trendy restaurant, being served an incredible appetizer, and waiting with excitement for what you imagine will be an even-better main. But when it arrives, it’s something you’d regret ordering at the Cheesecake Factory. You’d likely (and rightfully) feel disappointed. That’s the experience your users have when you invest a fortune in ad creative, only to send people to a generic lander.
We could go even further – under-investing in landers is not just a poor user experience, but it’s likely actively costing your brand sales/leads AND money.
1. According to our data, exceptional landers convert at up to 3x higher rates than the site average (the internet-wide conversion rate average is around 2%, so an exceptional lander might convert at 6%). If you imagine your ad campaigns are driving 1,000 people to your site each day, at a cost/visit of $1.00 (for simple math), and you’re selling a $100 product/service (we’re making the math easy), then at a 2% conversion rate, you’re spending $1,000 in ads (1,000*$1) to earn $2,000 in revenue (1,000*0.02*$100). If, on the other hand, you actively tested + improved your landers, such that they achieved a 6% conversion rate, you’d still spend that same $1,000 (1,000*$1), but you’d now earn $6,000 in revenue (1,000*0.06*$100). Even with low profit margins (say, 10% after ads), the incremental cost to create the better lander would be recovered in less than a week.
2. What (1) above doesn’t take into account is the hidden cost of a poor landing page experience. Both Google (especially lately) and Meta incorporate landing page experience as part of their Quality Score (Google) or Total Ad Value (Meta). Higher Quality Scores (or Ad Values) result in lower bids required to win auctions. Here’s a simplified example for Google:
This is an oversimplification of the Google Ad Rank system, but the impact on Quality Score of Poor vs. Above Average LPs does align closely with data from ad accounts. The net-net of this is that the advertiser with the “Good” Lander will end up paying 24% less on a per-click basis than the advertiser with the “Bad” lander.
3. The final aspect of this is that these two components (higher performance and lower costs) are not independent of one another – they stack. So, using the data from the above two points:
Again, while this is a simplification for the purposes of illustration, the fundamental principle is true and valid.
Bottom line: landing page testing is critical and it’s only getting more important. Google has been very transparent about rolling out changes to how landing page experience impacts overall quality score:
“While landing page content has always been a key aspect we look at, this update emphasizes the importance of relevant content and easy-to-navigate landing pages. These changes will improve your Search experience by making it easier for you to find the information you’re looking for — and help drive long-term value to advertisers.
If you are an advertiser, and your landing pages are not currently navigable, we recommend improving navigation on your site to enable people to get where they want to go.
As Search continues to evolve, we will continue to make changes to our ads quality systems to improve the Google Search ads experience.” -Shashi Thakur, VP/GM Search Ads on Google Experiences (Feb. 2025)
When Big G says something like this, you should listen.
Podcast Advertising
The 2024 election was a wake-up call to many marketers about just how impactful podcasts are/can be for brands. The challenge – at least for much of the last ~5 years – has been buying the ads. Most podcasts only take a select number of sponsors and don’t havereps who are actively updating potential sponsors on new availability,
Fortunately, there are some new products, both inside of legacy DSPs like Basis & The Trade Desk, and in podcast-specific platforms like Spotify + Apple Ads to simplify this process. Spotify has introduced AI-driven ad targeting for podcasts (potentially very cool), while Apple has improved both audience insights + ad targeting.
All that being said, there’s still an advantage to working directly with a podcast host (or their team) – host-read ads still out-perform pre-recorded or “generic” spots by a decent margin (depending on the show). That makes sense, given that podcasts are undeniably driven by the personal brand of the host(s) – so having your brand talked about in a natural manner by those individuals conveys more trust + authenticity than a generic spot playing amidst their show.
Finally, and most importantly, there’s a real appetite among podcasters to engage in performance-based deals vs. pay-for-placement – something that can help upstart/challenger brands effectively compete with larger competitors, without having to front the cost of doing so.
In-House Influencers (Execs, Founders, Employees as Brand Builders)
For much of the last ~20 years (and for a variety of reasons), most founders + executives have shied away from being front-and-center in the marketing of their organization. That tide is turning. The reality is that there is no one better to advocate for yourcompany/organization than the individual(s) building/leading/running it.
There’s not much more to say about this than what I included in this article – if you haven’t given it a read, I’d highly recommend doing so.
Put simply: the organizations that develop the capacity to develop influencers, and the leaders who embrace their role as a spokesperson/champion for their brands, will have a disproportionate advantage going forward. It’s really, truly that simple.
Get your C-Suite on board, or get left behind.
X Ads (Twitter Ads)
Let’s cut to the chase on this one: Elon Musk & Donald Trump are two of the most powerful and influential people in the world. Since the 2024 election, X (formerly Twitter) has re-emerged as a platform where news breaks first (and where just about anyone can engage with Elon). If you’re not on the platform, you’re likely behind – which is resulting in a return of not just users, but opinion-shaping users.
Simultaneously, Grok has quickly become one of the more impressive LLMs around – due in no small part to its access to billions of real-time data points (in the form of X content). Having access to a unique and proprietary set of data is a huge advantage for Grok; Grok becoming one of the most robust LLMs will (likely) draw even more people + brands back to X.
X has the potential to win the advertising triple crown: (1) low ad costs; (2) uniquely high value audience and (3) robust ability to connect content to audience. Since Musk took over then-Twitter, the exodus of advertisers has been well-documented; X is not immune to market forces. Fewer advertisers = lower ad costs. That trend has slowly started to reverse, but enterprise budgets (AKA the ones that can move ad markets) move slowly. Where things really get interesting is the quality of the audience on X – there’s no other public platform where Mark Cuban, Elon Musk & Bill Ackerman (again, put aside your politics) are debating the right way to structure medicare reimbursements. That’s (admittedly) an extreme example, but I’m continually blown away by the number of wildly influential/successful people who are hanging out on X. If you’re an advertiser, the audience is exceptional. Rounding out the trifecta is X’s unique targeting options – ranging from event-based targeting to follower lookalikes, robust interest/in-market segments and even premium subscribers.
The simple reality is that any brand that wants to reach people who care about what’s happening right now (and that includes most business decision-makers) should consider investing in X ads. The price point is stupidly attractive, the ad product is decent (and improving), the platform upside is massive and the audience is expanding. I firmly believe that this is one of those things that – in hindsight – will seem so obvious in 2-3 years.
YouTube Ads
Last, (though certainly not least) is YouTube Ads. I wrote before that YouTube is the most undervalued impression on the web. In the time since that issue dropped, YouTube has only become more popular, with Shorts exploding, more podcasters/streamers publishing their content to the platform, and more than 500 hours of content uploaded every minute as of February 1, 2025.
It isn’t just that YouTube is the largest video platform in the world (it is), or that no other platform offers the diversity of content (from educational, edu-tainment and how-tos/demonstrations to streams, pure entertainment, podcasts and more); it’s that YouTube has managed to do all of that while avoiding alienating any major group. People of all persuasions, ages and identities rely on YouTube.
Then there’s the cold, hard math of YouTube Ads: the average user on YouTube spends about 45 minutes on the platform per day; that’s 75% of the total time spent by those users in the Meta Social Ecosystem (IG + FB). Yet total ad spending on YouTube is about 26% of Meta (30.1% vs. 8.2%). Outcome: YouTube impressions are staggeringly cheap while being stupidly valuable.
What’s driving that value?
A combination of unique targeting options (behavioral audiences, specific placements and audiences built from searches on Google-owned properties (via the Custom Audiences)), placements (Shorts, In-Feed, YouTube TV & Skippable In-Stream Ads) and data (YouTube is still part of Google’s ever-expanding ecosystem, which gives the platform access to more user/audience data). Tack on that YouTube operates inside of Google Ads (i.e. little-to-no incremental effort to go from advertising on Google Search to advertising on Google Search +YouTube), dirt-cheap CPMs on incredibly valuable, signal-rich content (where else can you target ads to run in front of specific videos, or on specific channels?), robust creative formats & voila! You have a recipe for one of the most exciting advertising platforms in the world.
If you’re not thinking about YouTube for 2025, I’d highly recommend re-thinking those plans. The brands that learn how to maximize YouTube now are the ones that will have a durable, long-term advantage as other brands come to the realization that YT is the best full-funnel video platform out there, and no-one else is even close.
That’s it for this week! I hope some of these ideas are helpful as you’re thinking about how to take your marketing (and your business) to the next level in 2025!
Until next week, Cheers!
Sam
