Pretty well, actually.
And looking at where the lists align and where they diverge is instructive of what makes an ad talkworthy and what doesn't. The results suggest that the pre-game PR program is a significant variable in predicting post-game discussion. (Peter Kim has an interesting post today on using brand monitoring as a predictive tool). But also, while driving word of mouth (WOM) is a great result, highly effective ads don't have to spur WOM, raising the question of whether WOM should be used as a predictive tool in ad effectiveness.
My colleague reported the results of the TNS Commercial Performance Index study listing the following as the most effective ads, (and I'm adding the next few to his list):
- Budweiser Clydesdales
- Coca-Cola Parade Balloons
- Bridgestone Tires: Screaming Animals
- NFL: Living a Dream
- Bud Light: Wine & Cheese
- Tide-to-Go: Talking Stain
- Bud LIght: Fire
- E*Trade: Baby & Clown
Here are the most-discussed brands in social media (through Monday):
- Anheuser-Busch (FYI, many posts simply say things like "Loved those Bud ads" without a specific ad reference)
- Audi (which scored a respectable CPI of 188)
- Pepsi (the Justin Timberlake ad scored a solid 216 CPI)
- Coca-Cola
- Go-Daddy
- Bridgestone
- E*Trade
GoDaddy is easily explainable: CEO Bob Parsons has pursued a "get-people-talking" Super Bowl ad strategy for years, and clearly cares more for the word of mouth value than the quality of the ad.
The presence of Audi and Pepsi shows that what an ad lacks in effectiveness can be made up with good PR program ahead of the game to draw attention to the brand. Pepsi was the most-talked about brand during January while Audi was sixth in pre-game discussion. (Bud, Coke, Bridgestone, and Doritos rounded out the most-discussed brands before the game -- see a pattern?)
The absence of the NFL from social media discussion shows that an ad doesn't have to spur WOM to be effective. While the ad told a nice story, there was nothing talk worthy about it, so its absence is understandable.
The absence of Tide is a bit more puzzling to me. It was a unique enough idea, and was backed up with the right online elements: a good microsite and viral "create your own talking stain" function. Would be interested in your thoughts on why it didn't get the level of talk it could have.
During the summer, I’ll look back at some of the best stories and stats from the coverage of the last game. 
