Under the Influence with Terry O'Reilly - Pants on Fire: When Customers Lie to Marketers

Episode Date: April 13, 2024

Customers often lie to companies in surveys, polls and focus groups. Yet advertisers rely on that flawed and false feedback to market brands and create advertising campaigns. So what are advertisers to do? One solution is Google. What we type into the Google search window is like a truth serum. We all pour our most intimate, honest questions into that search box. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hi, it's Terry O'Reilly. As you may know, we've been producing a lot of bonus episodes while under the influences on hiatus. They're called the Beatleology Interviews, where I talk to people who knew the Beatles, work with them, love them, and the authors who write about them. Well, the Beatleology Interviews have become a hit, so we are spinning it out to be a standalone podcast series. You've already heard conversations with people like actors Mark Hamill, Malcolm McDowell, and Beatles confidant Astrid Kershaw. But coming up, I talk to May Pang, who dated John Lennon in the mid-70s. I talk to double fantasy guitarist Earl Slick, Apple Records creative director John Kosh. I'll be talking to Jan Hayworth,

who designed the Sgt. Pepper album cover. Very cool. And I'll talk to singer Dion, who is one of only five people still alive who were on the Sgt. Pepper cover. And two of those people were Beatles. The stories they tell are amazing. So thank you for making this series such a success. And please, do me a favor, follow the Beatleology interviews on your podcast app. You don't even have to be a huge Beatles fan, you just have to love storytelling. Subscribe now and don't miss a single beat. This is an apostrophe podcast production. You're so king in it.

The decor is of it in an instant. Your teeth look whiter than noon. No, no, no. Your teeth look whiter than no nose. You're not you when you're hungry. You're a good hand with all teeth. You're under the influence with Terry O'Reilly. He was born in the backwoods of Kentucky in the early 1800s. His family was dirt poor. His mother died when he was nine,

and he had a difficult relationship with his father. He went to school now and then, and it's said his entire schooling amounted to less than one year's attendance. As a result, he was mostly self-educated and loved to read. Neighbors said he would walk for miles just to borrow a book. Reading became a great pastime for him.

He wasn't able to find many books, but fully absorbed every one he could get his hands on. By the time he turned 21, he stood 6'4". He was lanky, but muscular and powerful. He was noted for the skill and strength with which he could wield an axe. He was a rough-and-tumble frontier man. He moved to Illinois and became a rail splitter, allowing him to earn some money clearing land and building farm fences. About that time, he settled in a town called New Salem.

There he got a job as a storekeeper. On the side, this strapping young man liked to wrestle. And he was good at it. He would wrestle in county fairs and look for matches wherever the opportunity arose. By some accounts, he wrestled for a dozen years, from his early 20s to his early 30s, and only lost one single match. But maybe his most famous match happened as the result of a bet. His boss boasted that his young employee

was not only the smartest guy in town, but also the toughest. That comment riled a gang of toughs called the Clary's Grove Boys. His boss bet another man that his employee could beat the toughest member of that gang, a man named Jack Armstrong.

Armstrong was the roughest and most feared member of the Clary's Grove boys. So, a date was set, and on the day, the entire town gathered to watch the wrestling match. The two men stripped to the waist,

and the wrestling began. The two were stripped to the waist, and the wrestling began. The two were well matched, and the fight went on and on, and got rougher and rougher. Then, well into the fight, Armstrong used a painful, illegal move. That infuriated his young opponent, who then picked Armstrong up and threw him to the ground, knocking him out. That wrestler, the powerful fighter who beat Jack Armstrong that day, was Abraham Lincoln. That's why Abraham Lincoln is in the Wrestling Hall of Fame.

Question. Is that story true, or is it a lie? That story is true. A huge mural of that fight hangs on the wall inside the Wrestling Hall of Fame. These days, it's getting more and more difficult to tell the truth from a lie.

Over the decades, advertisers have often been accused of lying. But there is another side to that particular coin. In focus groups, in surveys, and in polls, customers lie to marketers. Advertisers use that research to make important marketing decisions. So what happens if the information advertisers use to produce products and create advertising campaigns is false? You're under the influence. One of the trickiest surveys researchers undertake is when they try to determine how often people lie.

The problem, of course, is that people lie about how much they lie, even on anonymous surveys. A recent study on this very subject, done by the University of Wisconsin, followed 632 people around for 91 days. Those 632 people told 116,366 lies during that period. The study concluded that most people lie a maximum of twice a day, which doesn't seem like much until you realize it adds up to nearly 60 lies a month. 90% of those are what we call little white lies. More like fibs, like telling someone a meal was delicious when it wasn't. But another 11 percent were categorized as big lies. The top one percent of the participants were prolific liars, telling over 17 lies per day. The demographic that lies the most? Millennials. Everybody fibs now and then. We often tell tiny lies to avoid hurting people's feelings. But this preponderance to lie has other ramifications, especially to marketers.

The advertising industry is constantly researching people to try and understand their behavior, to get a sense of how they make their purchasing decisions, to try and figure out how a brand makes them feel, or whether they like a potential advertising campaign the company is about to spend millions on. The marketing industry relies on this feedback. According to research, there are many reasons why people don't tell the truth.

They lie on surveys 33% of the time, on social media 75% of the time, on resumes 70% of the time, to their doctors 47% of the time, on resumes 70% of the time, to their doctors 47% of the time, and to their therapists 93% of the time. One of the most basic reasons for lying is the desire to be socially acceptable. When people are asked if they donate to charities, for example, most would say yes, although most do not.

Answering yes to that question is the most socially acceptable answer. Sensitive questions about sex, religion, or politics rarely elicit truthful answers. People will often inflate self-worth in surveys, especially in anonymous surveys where no one is pressing them. So, questions about how much money you make, how often you exercise, or how much you weigh usually results in a lot of fibbing. Either people lie to inflate their salaries for vanity reasons, or they lie to minimize their revenue for fear of tax reasons. Politeness often gets in the way. When people are asked about a new product or potential advertising campaign, they will often give an answer they believe will please the

interviewer. Then there is intentional sabotage. Some people will purposely lie and mislead for a variety of reasons. Maybe they don't like the company. Maybe they relish the role of contrarian. Or maybe they just want to shock the interviewer. Marketers rely heavily on focus groups. This is where a group of six to eight regular people are invited into a room and a moderator asks them questions about a product or an ad campaign. And the advertising agency observes the group behind a one-way mirror. In my experience, a mini social hierarchy often forms in those rooms. An outspoken leader will emerge and will often sway others in the group to agree with him or her. There will be

a few who will answer honestly, a few who won't, and others who feel being negative makes them appear intelligent. Advertisers have to rely on very good moderators to pry truthful answers from focus groups. It often means trying to read between the lines. I read a fascinating book recently titled Everybody Lies by Seth Stevens Davidovitz. The core theme of the book is that people rarely tell the truth, even in anonymous surveys. For example, the book quotes heterosexual women in the U.S. saying they have sex 55 times a year,

using a condom 16% of the time. That adds up to 1.1 billion condoms a year. Heterosexual men say they use 1.6 billion condoms a year. Heterosexual men say they use 1.6 billion condoms a year. Now, by definition, those two numbers should be the same. But according to Nielsen, fewer than 600 million condoms are sold every year. Therefore, everyone is lying. The only difference is by how much. But Davidovich says there is one place everybody tells the truth.

One place where lies don't occur. And that place is Google. The author maintains that the Google search box is a kind of confessional. When the author looked at Google searches for jokes, for example, he found that those searches are lowest on Mondays, when people report they are most unhappy. Joke searches are lowest on cloudy and rainy days, and they plummet after a major tragedy. The takeaway? People are more likely to seek jokes when things are going well in life, not when they're feeling sad. People lie to friends, lovers, doctors, and even to themselves.

But on Google, they reveal their most intimate, honest feelings. They share their most embarrassing information in that Google search box about their sexless marriages, their mental health issues, their insecurities, and their animosity toward other races. People who regret having children admit this to no one, except Google. The number one Google search for the question, is my husband dot dot dot, the word gay is ten times more likely than is my husband cheating, and eight times more likely than

is my husband alcoholic, or ten times more likely than is my husband depressed. Searches questioning a husband's sexuality are more prevalent in the least tolerant regions of the country, which suggests many men are still in the closet. Men Google about their penises more than any other body part. They conduct more searches on how to make it bigger

than how to tune a guitar, make an omelet, or change a tire. Women search about vaginal odor. Here's the interesting thing about that. Men make roughly the same number of searches about a partner's vagina as women do about their partner's genital size, which is to say, almost never. There's clearly a lot of worrying for no reason. And when it comes to body image, the subject definitely skews female, but it's not as lopsided as you may think. According to an analysis of Google AdWords, interest in beauty and fitness is

42% male, weight loss is 33% male, and cosmetic surgery searches are 39% male. Parents are twice as likely to search, is my two-year-old son gifted, than to ask the same question about their daughters. Yet, there are far more girls in gifted classes than boys. Parents more often search, is my daughter overweight, than they would about their sons. Yet, more boys are overweight than girls. Netflix once offered an option to let people list the movies they most wanted to see and would remind them when those movies became available. But Netflix discovered that when it reminded people about those movies, they didn't watch them.

It turns out people listed highbrow movies they had no intention of watching. The list just made them look good. So Netflix instead made recommendations based on what people were actually watching. Activity on Netflix jumped. Because algorithms know the real you. Data also reveals that the words you use on a loan application determine whether you'll default or not. Polling data can be very challenging.

In the book A Field Guide to Lies by Daniel J. Levitin, the author shows an election graphic from Fox News. It was a pie chart that showed the GOP candidates and the support they were getting for the upcoming 2012 election. It said, 70%

back Sarah Palin, 60% back Mitt Romney, and 63% back Mike Huckabee. Can't be. As author Levitin points out, the first rule of pie charts is that the percentages have to add up to 100. Researchers also found when it comes to voting, search boxes reveal a lot. Seemingly neutral searches contained information voting polls missed. When people searched Clinton-Trump debate or Obama-Romney election, the order of the candidates' names was significant. The candidate's name that appeared first in the most searches

was predictive of which way a particular state would go. The results were accurate, but it defied the pollsters. Clearly, the voters were lying in exit polls, possibly too uncomfortable to reveal how they really voted. That may also explain why pollsters were so wrong about the Trump election in 2016. Looking back, Seth Stevens-Davidowitz found there were more searches for Trump-Clinton than Clinton-Trump in key Midwest states that Clinton was expected to win. Trump owed his election to the fact that he sharply outperformed his polls there. During his first election, Barack Obama's team did extensive testing to determine marketing strategies. For example, they tested Obama's homepage by posting three different designs

in three different cities. One had a photo of a serious Obama face and the words sign up. Another showed his family with the words learn more. And a third showed a smiling Obama with the words join us now. Which one do you think generated the most response? Answer. The family design won by a landslide. It was estimated it attracted 40% more people to sign up, netting the campaign about $60 million in additional funding. Would a survey have picked the family design? Probably not. All people who borrow money from banks and other financial institutions promise to pay it back. Yet, 13% default. Here's a list of eight words and phrases researchers found that are commonly used when applying for a loan.

God, promise, debt-free, minimum payment, lower interest rate, will pay, thank you, after tax. Of those phrases, here are the ones used by people most likely to pay the debt back. Lower interest rate, debt-free, after-tax, minimum payment. And here are the words most used by people most likely to default. God, promise, will pay, thank you. Phrases like lower interest rate and after tax indicated a certain level of financial sophistication. Phrases used on a loan application like promise and will pay and thank you are the least likely to pay back.

People mentioning God were 2.2 times more likely to default. The word God was among the highest indicators of a likely default. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention releases flu data one week after it has received it, even though doctors and hospitals would benefit from having it much sooner. But Google searches for flu symptoms show up right away, which could give hospitals much earlier indications of how fast the flu is spreading. Walmart learned something very interesting using online searches.

When a hurricane is approaching, Walmart noticed that people search and stock up on strawberry Pop-Tarts. Who knew? It might be because Pop-Tarts don't need refrigeration. Why strawberry? Nobody knows. But when a hurricane is coming, Walmart sends truckloads of strawberry Pop-Tarts

to those locations. So if people lie in surveys, they fib in focus groups, they lie about what they really like and dislike, and they're afraid to reveal their true feelings in polls, what is a marketer to do? Well, some resort to hypnotism, but not the type of hypnotism you're probably thinking about right now. Marketers don't hypnotize people to buy their products. They hypnotize them to understand how they truly feel about their products. In most focus groups, the answers tend to be rational. But under hypnosis, the answers are almost always emotional. Research firms that specialize in hypnosis can do one-on-one sessions with customers or can actually hypnotize a group of six to eight people together. The goal is to access

the subconscious, remove the filter from people's thoughts, and free them from taboos. Once hypnotized, the moderator will begin asking questions to uncover things hidden in memory banks or to tease out information that a person wouldn't reveal in a wake state for fear of looking uneducated or for fear of peer pressure from others in the focus group. In one hypnotized group, for example, people were asked to remember the very first time they ever watched television. Respondents not only remembered what show it was, howdy doody, but what clothes they were wearing, what they smelled in the room, and precisely which episode they were watching.

Suffice it to say, most people could not recall that much detail from their childhood under normal circumstances. So in that deep, relaxed state, a moderator might ask when you first experienced the brand, what impression it made on you, how it made you feel, or what features you look at in a car dealership, or what was your most powerful experience with the brand. Because people lie or exaggerate in focus groups, research firms believe

hypnosis can reveal the truth. For example, a scotch brand looking to attract younger customers asked them why they drink scotch.

They answered because they liked the taste. But under hypnosis, they said drinking scotch made them feel cool. So the scotch brand created an advertising campaign around looking cool. Starbucks used hypnotism to figure out why people in their 20s were so negative towards

the brand, calling it corporate coffee and destroying mom-and-pop shops. But under hypnosis, respondents were asked to imagine walking into a Starbucks and to describe the other customers in there. They described guys in suits in their 40s. The moderator asked if there was anybody that looked like them in the Starbucks. Respondents said no, only the guy behind the counter. That was a big insight for Starbucks. It clearly had to change the tone in its advertising and stop playing Kenny G music in the shops. Hypnosis revealed the problem, which was, I don't belong here. When Procter & Gamble did hypnosis focus groups, they asked the respondents to describe Tide

without using the words laundry detergent. The respondents said mom. That told Tide nostalgia was important. Shell discovered through hypnosis that people are loyal to the gasoline brand they saw their parents use when they were children. Research firms maintain nobody is harmed through hypnosis, nobody can be made to do or say something that goes against their true wishes,

and nobody is transformed into a clucking chicken. But not all advertisers like the idea. Plumbing the minds of customers in a hypnotized state just doesn't sit well with many brands. They say it feels unethical and intrusive. In spite of the fact respondents agree to be hypnotized. So those brands choose not to use it, even if it might uncover some treasures and some truth. Famous adman David Ogilvie once said,

Customers don't know what they feel, don't say what they know, and don't do what they say. It's an interesting conundrum. Marketers rely on research to predict behavior, but so much of that customer feedback may be untrue. It could be one of the main reasons why so much advertising doesn't resonate with people. That's why the Google search window is so powerful. People type in their most honest, personal feelings

in the quiet of their own homes. They're not trying to impress anyone. They're revealing their innermost truth without fear or filter or shame. Google then sells that information to political entities, governments, and advertisers because data collection is Google's greatest product. And if we're to believe Seth Stevens-Davidowitz's extensive research, that search box is a truth serum.

Because it reveals the intimate subjects we're all wrestling with when you're under the influence. I'm Terry O'Reilly. This episode was recorded in the Terrastream Airstream mobile recording studio. Producer, Debbie O'Reilly. Sound engineer, Jeff Devine.

Under the influence theme by Ari Posner and Ian Lefevre. Tunes provided by APM Music. Follow me on social at Terry O'Influence. This podcast is powered by ACAST. And if you'd like to read next week's fun fact, just go to apostrophepodcasts.ca and follow the

prompts. See you next week. Hi, this is Jesse O'Donoghue from St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. Fun fact! Believe it or not, the sales of Pop-Tarts have been on the rise for 32 straight years. Hmm.