3 Easy Ways to Create Instagram Ads


#1: Promote an Instagram Post With the Instagram App

If you have an Instagram business account, you can create promotions with the Instagram app to boost the visibility of a post on your profile.

Follow the steps shown here-


#2: Create Instagram Ads for the Facebook News Feed in Facebook Ads Manager

Facebook has updated Ads Manager to include some of the best features of Power Editor so everyone can get the most out of their Facebook and Instagram ads. To create an Instagram ad in Ads Manager, use this link to choose or create ad accounts outside Business Manager, and this link to view or create ad accounts inside Business Manager.

Examples here-


#3: Create Instagram Stories Ads in Facebook Ads Manager

The steps for creating an ad for Instagram Stories in Facebook Ads Manager are similar to those above, with the following exceptions.

Choose an Objective

You can choose from the following objectives for the placement of Instagram ads in Stories:

  • Brand Awareness – Reach people more likely to pay attention to your ads and increase awareness of your brand.
  • Reach – Show your ad to the maximum number of people.
  • Traffic – Send more people to a destination on or off of Facebook such as a website, app, or Messenger conversation.
  • App Installs – Send people to the store where they can purchase your app.
  • Video Views – Promote videos that show behind-the-scenes footage, product launches, or customer stories to raise awareness about your brand.
  • Lead Generation – Collect lead information from people interested in your business.
  • Conversions – Get people to take valuable actions on your website or app, such as adding payment info or making a purchase. Use the Facebook pixel or app events to track and measure conversions.

This is a good explanatory article with clear examples-

Read the entire piece here-






From https://stratechery.com by


To say that the Internet has changed the media business is so obvious it barely bears writing; the media business, though, is massive in scope, ranging from this site to The Walt Disney Company, with a multitude of formats, categories, and business models in between. And, it turns out that the impact of the Internet — and the outlook for the future — differs considerably depending on what part of the media industry you look at.


Nearly all media in the pre-Internet era functioned under the same general model:


Note that there are two parts in this model when it comes to making money — distribution and then integration — and the order matters. Distribution required massive up-front investment, whether that be printing presses, radio airplay and physical media, or broadcast licenses and cable wires; the payoff was that those that owned distribution could create money-making integrations:

Print: Newspapers and magazines primarily made money by integrating editorial and advertisements into a single publication:


Music: Record labels primarily made money by integrating back catalogs with new acts (which over time became part of the back catalog in their own right):


TV: Broadcast TV functioned similarly to print; control of distribution (via broadcast licenses) made it possible to integrate programming and advertising:


Cable TV combined the broadcast TV model with bundling, a particular form of integration:



It is important to understand the economics of bundling; Chris Dixon has written the definitive piece on the topic:

Under assumptions that apply to most information-based businesses, bundling benefits buyers and sellers. Consider the following simple model for the willingness-to-pay of two cable buyers, the “sports lover” and the “history lover”:


What price should the cable companies charge to maximize revenues? Note that optimal prices are always somewhere below the buyers’ willingness-to-pay. Otherwise the buyer wouldn’t benefit from the purchase. For simplicity, assume prices are set 10% lower than willingness-to-pay. If ESPN and the History Channel were sold individually, the revenue maximizing price would be $9 ($10 with a 10% discount). Sports lovers would buy ESPN and history lovers would buy the History Channel. The cable company would get $18 in revenue.

By bundling channels, the cable company can charge each customer $11.70 ($13 discounted 10%) for the bundle, yielding combined revenue of $23.40. The consumer surplus would be $2 in the non-bundle and $2.60 in the bundle. Thus both buyers and sellers benefit from bundling.

Dixon’s article is worth reading in full; what is critical to understand, though, is that while control of distribution created the conditions for the creation of the cable bundle, there is an underlying economic logic that is independent of distribution: if customers like more than one thing, then both distributors and customers gain from a bundle.


A consistent theme on Stratechery is that perhaps the most important consequence of the Internet, at least from a business perspective, was the reduction of the cost of distribution to effectively zero.

The most obvious casualty has been text-based publications, and the reason should be clear: once newspapers and magazines lost their distribution-based monopoly on customer attention the integration of editorial and advertising fell apart. Advertisers could go directly to end users, first via ad networks and increasingly via Google and Facebook exclusively, while end users could avail themselves of any publication on the planet.


For Google and Facebook, the new integration is users and advertisers, and the new lock-in is attention; it is editorial that has nowhere else to go.

The music industry, meanwhile, has, at least relative to newspapers, come out of the shift to the Internet in relatively good shape; while piracy drove the music labels into the arms of Apple, which unbundled the album into the song, streaming has rewarded the integration of back catalogs and new music with bundle economics: more and more users are willing to pay $10/month for access to everything, significantly increasing the average revenue per customer. The result is an industry that looks remarkably similar to the pre-Internet era:


Notice how little power Spotify and Apple Music have; neither has a sufficient user base to attract suppliers (artists) based on pure economics, in part because they don’t have access to back catalogs. Unlike newspapers, music labels built an integration that transcends distribution.

That leaves the ever-fascinating TV industry, which has resisted the effects of the Internet for a few different reasons:

  • First, and most obviously, until the past few years the Internet did not mean zero cost distribution: streaming video takes considerable bandwidth that most people lacked. And, on the flipside, producing compelling content is difficult and expensive, in stark contrast to text in particular but also music. This meant less competition.
  • Second, advertisers — and brand advertisers, in particular — choose TV not because it is the only option (like newspapers were), but because it delivers a superior return-on-investment. A television commercial is not only more compelling than a print advertisement, but it can reach a massive number of potential customers for a relatively low price and relatively low investment of resources (more on this in a moment).
  • Third, as noted above, the cable bundle, like streaming, has its own economic rationale for not just programmers and cable providers but also customers.

This first factor, particularly the lack of sufficient bandwidth, has certainly decreased in importance the last few years; what is interesting about TV, though, is that it is no more a unitary industry than is media: figuring out what will happen next requires unpacking TV into its different components.

read more here…

How Digital Marketers Can Join the Authenticity Movement.

It seems the trick to more effective marketing is just telling the truth.

CREDIT: Getty Images
 So in case you haven’t noticed…advertising as we knew it has gone the way of the dodo. And much of the shift has boiled down to our ever-growing need for authenticity.

Yes, you’ll find numerous studies on how the millennial consumer values authenticity, but even with all that information, effectively advertising to them (and to the rest of the population) has gotten a bit muddled.

First, let’s take a look at the way we’ve created ads over the years. With the invention of the television came the invention of commercials, which where unmistakably ads (using attractive, aspirational people to sell a product that would inevitably make you as cool as them). Open a newspaper or magazine: ads telling you what you should buy and where you should buy it at the cheapest price (also probably using attractive spokes models). Online ads? Same thing. Seemingly very transparent: here’s a product, you need it, buy it.

As advertising developed, advertisers got increasingly more creative – commercials, for example, became mini-stories, giving the successful brand a certain “cool” factor for being hilarious or hip. Again, these ads traditionally had attractive actors or models selling the product and the subtext was: this is what you COULD be if you bought our product. Then we started to get wise.

In the early 2000s, Dove released its Campaign for Real Beauty, shedding light on the fact that the advertising industry had held people to unrealistic beauty standards to sell their products. This sparked years of stories, which revealed the Photoshop aspect to advertising and how none of it is real. People were tired of comparing themselves to the Photoshopped ads and began hungering for more authenticity in a variety of aspects.

This need for authenticity is one of the key drivers of today’s advertising, which is one of the reasons social influencer marketing is so popular. People, particularly millennials, want to be engaged in a real way…but they want their privacy at the same time. This is a complication for digital advertising.

In the digital advertising realm, there is a lot of competition, which creates a lot of noise, so standing out is hard. Also, since the current political happenings, the popularity of “fake news” has introduced the troubling fact that clickbait content, regardless of accuracy, can be literally more valuable than thoughtful content produced by well-meaning publishers.

This doesn’t match up with our audience’s want for authenticity.

If you couple the crowded space and the fake news epidemic with digital advertising fraud, which was projected to have cost advertisers $7.2 billion in 2016, you’ll infer a tumultuous state for publishers. The traditional model of producing free-to-the-consumer content funded by advertisers is threatened. And that’s not even accounting for the adoption of ad blocking software that threatens to turn the publishing industry completely on its head by eliminating this revenue stream, altogether. If it sounds like a total mess, that’s because it is.

But back to authenticity.

We see a lot of media sites today that are full of entertaining news stories, with a bunch of disguised ads peppered in (that look like regular articles). While there are disclaimers somewhere on these sites, some marketing savvy folks are aware that it’s paid advertising – but much of the general public does not know. Yet.

In the midst of this push for straight-shooting, Gadget Flow’s tactic was to create a product discovery platform. It’s essentially a gallery-style platform, populated with ads. So basically, when visitors go to their site, they’re under no illusions: they are coming to look at advertisements.

A website full of ads might not seem very profitable right away, but it supports ten thousand products to date and the company has grown to $2 million in revenue. Here are some of the insights about content production that the founders have learned in their journey:

Keep it Real

Over the past few years, as advertisers scramble to appeal to the elusive Millennial population (which slated to spend $200 billion this year), but as I mentioned, the term “authenticity” has pervaded the marketing landscape.

“Millennials are smart,” says Gadget Flow Co-Founder and CCO, Cassie Ousta. “They look for the angle and follow the dollar to understand who’s benefiting from advertisements and why. They don’t mind being advertised to, so long as it feels straightforward and genuine.”

So the notion of adopting a more straightforward, authentic, advertising model is appealing to millennials, who understand what they’re getting into when they visit a website.

Facilitate Word of Mouth

As with authenticity, marketers are poised to increase spending on word of mouth-inspired strategies, like influencer marketing. Gadget Flow built word of mouth into their platform by featuring social share options prominently underneath product entries.


read more here…

What does Medium.com’s profit model pivot say about the future of online advertising?

One of the most prominent startups in the online publishing space pivoted from its current ad model, saying publishing is ‘a broken system.’ Is this a genius move? Or is it misplaced hope? Contributor Megan Hannay takes a look at what it means for marketers and online publications.

medium-com-logo2-1920Online advertising, and especially its bulky older brother, “programmatic,” are darlings of the digital marketing world. Even folks who typically focus on the content and SEO side are dipping into the implications of bot-driven ads.

The ability to deliver highly targeted display ads and sponsored content to key consumer segments, with (literally) super-human speed and precision sounds like the data-driven answer businesses have been waiting for since the dawn of “personas.”

But what if there’s something wrong? Not with programmatic, but with the system itself: the vehicle on which ads arrive on consumers’ desktops and phone screens?

For many niche and local publications, plans for profitability already feel tenuous; if a startup with $132 million in the bank and a network of incredible talent can’t foresee sustainability in digital ads, what do the next few years look like for the little guys?

The Medium move

Earlier this month, Ev Williams, the founder and CEO of Medium.com, announced the platform’s pivot from ads and sponsored posts to an as-of-yet-undisclosed (perhaps even undetermined) revenue generation model. Williams titled the post “Renewing Medium’s Focus,” and after announcing a layoff of about a third of Medium’s staff, he went on to explain his company’s shift:

 Upon further reflection, it’s clear that the broken system is ad-driven media on the internet. It simply doesn’t serve people. In fact, it’s not designed to. The vast majority of articles, videos, and other “content” we all consume on a daily basis is paid for — directly or indirectly — by corporations who are funding it in order to advance their goals. And it is measured, amplified, and rewarded based on its ability to do that. Period. As a result, we get… well, what we get. And it’s getting worse.

By “what we get,” it’s not clear whether Williams meant clickbait, fake news or thinly written content with shameless product plugs, but it’s likely he was referring to all of the above.

So what happened? How did the internet, which has the power to reach a few billion more people than any individual print publication can, result in an unsustainable profit model for content publishers?

How digital ads ‘broke’ publishing

Advertising is always a little gimmicky. We know the hamburger in the ad isn’t the same hamburger you’ll get via the drive-thru window. But banner ads and, specifically, the page view numbers that determine their rates have brought the gimmicks to the content these ads share screen space with.

As academic journalist Frederic Filloux commented in his “Monday Note” column written after the Medium announcement, “In reality, there is absolutely no correlation between editorial quality and the revenue it brings…” Filloux explained that a 500-word local news piece is given the same rate as a many-thousand-word in-depth investigation into a foreign war.

This shift has encouraged outlets to embrace clickbait, meaning visitors to traditional media sites are confronted with the types of sensationalistic headlines that were once left for entertainment news publications: fear-provoking video clips, alligators, an irresponsible truck driver, weight loss tips and CEO “freakouts.”

Screenshot of weather.com, taken January 16, 2017

Screenshot of CNN.com on

Display ads have cornered publishers into appealing to readers’ most base interests, at best, to generate more clicks. At worst, it’s also contributed to the rise of fake news.

What’s next for online publications?

1. We’ll all wait for programmatic to get better

Maybe the problem is that the technology isn’t quite there yet. We’re only just starting to get systems that can follow anonymized users from desktop to mobile device. A few years down the road, or more, we could potentially get to the point of complete synchronicity between consumer and advertiser.

Imagine ads that predicted your wants and needs to the point that they were mostly useful, instead of pretty much always annoying. While browsing a news article: “Oh yeah, I did mean to order more toothpaste, and this brand’s offering a BOGO deal.” Click. Toothpaste order sent. While streaming a video: “I do still need to book a hotel for my summer trip, and that Airbnb looks amazing.” Click. Home added to Airbnb wishlist. 

If we can eliminate ads users don’t want and streamline programmatic to the point that almost every ad is seen as an assistant, rather than as an intruder, then, at the very least, ad blocking could potentially decrease, and the friction between a publication in need of funds and its readers would be relaxed, potentially encouraging more outlets to increase their ad services.

2. Some publications will resort to clickbait for the greater good

Consider the Jekyll and Hyde that is BuzzFeed. Celebrity gossip mag? President-elect challenger? Or investigative news outlet? While primarily funded by more viral fare, the site uses some of its revenue to fund investigative hard news pieces.

BuzzFeed has also branded itself as a viral native advertising outlet for its customers. You can’t go programmatic with BuzzFeed (at least until native orders go automated), but you can pay their team to develop a branded listicle and place it on their site.

This model is still being tested, but if BuzzFeed continues to dominate in terms of traffic and popularity, it’s likely that more publications will continue to mimic its style.

3. Publishers will find other ways to make money

Via data

In a recent digital media exec “confession” piece, a Digiday interviewee complained, “Every publisher is trying to be an ad agency and every ad agency is trying to be a data company.” The executive’s point was that agencies are not highly profitable, and they shouldn’t be business goals for failing publications. But the advice also can be seen as encouragement for publications to skip the middle step and head straight to data.


read the rest of the column here…


Some opinions expressed in this article may be those of a guest author and not necessarily Marketing Land. Staff authors are listed here.

Beat Your 2016 Revenue Target by Giving Your Sales Force This One Tool

Beat Your 2016 Revenue Target by Giving Your Sales Force This One Tool
By Aaron Bartels, September 6, 2015 at 6:00 AM
What Is Strategic Alignment and Why Is It The Key to Making Your 2016 Number?

In the 2015 SBI Annual Research Report, the focus was on functional strategies. What we discovered in the 2016 Report, however, takes that one huge step further.

Last year we reported that successful companies were moving back to functional strategies. These strategies brought together initiatives into cohesive plans.

Now, however, it’s clear that strategies designed in isolation will not work for 2016. The Internet has fueled sweeping changes in customer behavior and the buyer’s journey. Functional strategies must be aligned to achieve revenue goals.

This alignment between revenue-facing functions is called Strategic Alignment. It’s the only way to systematize revenue growth. And it’s the one thing that the top 10% of teams say they are doing differently.

Companies that pull together individual initiatives into strategic alignment are realizing outstanding performance. To hit your 2016 number, product, marketing, sales and talent strategies must connect.

This is strategic alignment in a nutshell. Functional strategies that are aligned to the other functional strategies – with corporate strategy leading.