Author: Evan Raftes

  • What Makes Ads Memorable in Marketing (Real Examples That Work)

    What Makes Ads Memorable in Marketing (Real Examples That Work)

    Why Some Ads Stay With You (Even When You Don’t Remember the Brand)

    I was watching a YouTube video the other day, and right at the moment something good was about to happen, an ad played. It’s one of the most frustrating parts of the platform because the timing always feels intentional. But every once in a while, something different happens. Instead of skipping the ad, I find myself watching it all the way through. Not because I have to, but because it actually pulls me in.

    That’s what made me start thinking about some of the most memorable ads I’ve seen and what actually made them work, and it ties into a bigger idea around how attention doesn’t always lead to action.

    We See Ads Constantly, But Remember Almost None

    We’re surrounded by ads every single day. There are stats that say we see thousands of them daily, and while that number might be exaggerated, the reality is still the same. We’re constantly exposed to marketing, but very little of it actually sticks. If an ad is still in your mind years later, something about it clearly worked.

    The interesting part is that the ads we remember are not always the ones that explain the product the best. They’re usually the ones that feel different. They break away from what we expect and create a moment that stands out enough to cut through everything else competing for our attention.

    The J.G. Wentworth Jingle and the Power of Being Memorable

    One of the easiest examples of this is the J.G. Wentworth commercial. You probably remember the jingle immediately, even if you haven’t heard it in years. “I have a structured settlement and I need cash now…” is one of those lines that sticks whether you want it to or not. What’s funny is that for a long time, I didn’t even know what the company actually did.

    That’s what makes it interesting. The ad didn’t win because it clearly explained a financial service. It worked because it was memorable. The opera-style delivery, the repetition, and the humor made it feel completely different from what you would expect from a company in that space. It became something people talked about, joked about, and even sang in completely unrelated settings. That level of recall is something most ads never reach

    The Volvo “Epic Split” and Creating a Moment

    Another example that always stands out is the Jean-Claude Van Damme Volvo commercial. Two trucks moving backward in perfect sync while he balances between them in a full split is something that immediately makes you stop and pay attention. It doesn’t feel like a typical ad because there’s no overload of information or messaging. It’s just one moment that feels almost impossible.

    What makes it work is not just the stunt itself, but how it’s presented. You’re not thinking about features or specifications while watching it. You’re focused on what you’re seeing and trying to process how it’s even real. That creates curiosity, and curiosity naturally leads to sharing. It becomes something you send to someone else or bring up in conversation. At that point, it’s no longer just an ad. It’s something people experience and talk about. Shoutout to Enya for the amazing song.

    Volkswagen’s “The Force” and Emotional Connection

    Volkswagen’s “The Force” commercial works in a completely different way, but it’s just as effective. It shows a kid dressed as Darth Vader going around his house trying to use the Force. Nothing happens until the car suddenly responds, and that moment lands in a way that feels familiar.

    The reason it works is because it taps into something almost everyone has experienced. At some point, you’ve probably tried to use the Force as a kid, even if it was just moving something across a table or pretending to have that kind of control. The ad doesn’t need to explain much because the connection is already there. It brings you back to a memory, and that emotional link makes the moment stronger than any direct message about the product.

    Why the Best Ads Don’t Feel Like Ads

    Looking at all of these, there’s a clear pattern. The ads that stay with you don’t feel like they’re trying to sell something in a direct or obvious way. They don’t rely on pushing information or overwhelming you with details. Instead, they focus on creating something that feels natural to watch.

    They create a moment that people actually enjoy. They give you something to think about, something to talk about, or something that connects to a memory you already have. That’s what separates them from the majority of ads that get ignored.

    What Actually Makes an Ad Work

    It’s easy to assume that great ads come down to creativity alone, but it’s more specific than that. The ones that work tend to break expectations in some way. They create an emotional reaction, whether that’s humor, curiosity, or nostalgia. They feel different from everything around them, and they connect to something that people already understand or recognize.

    men sitting with flags of canada
    Photo by Vitaly Gariev on Pexels.com

    At the core of it, it’s less about the product and more about the person watching. The ad works because it understands how people think, what they notice, and what actually makes them care.

    A Final Thought

    Most ads are forgettable because they feel predictable or too similar to everything else. The ones that last are the ones that take a different approach and focus on creating something meaningful instead of just delivering a message.

    It’s the same idea behind the way I think about titles too, which is why I built a blog post title generator to help turn ideas into something people actually want to click.

  • Does Posting More on Social Media Actually Work?

    Does Posting More on Social Media Actually Work?

    Does Posting More on Social Media Actually Help—or Hurt?

    I’ve heard this idea come up a lot, and it’s one of those things people just repeat without really questioning it. If you post too much on social media, people will get annoyed, the algorithm won’t like it, and eventually it starts to hurt your brand. It sounds logical, and honestly, I believed it for a while. If you keep seeing the same account over and over again in your feed, it can feel repetitive. It can feel like too much. I’ve even seen people say that anything more than two or three posts a day is overkill, no matter how much they like the brand.

    And to be fair, that’s not a bad point. There’s something real about that reaction. If the content isn’t adding anything new, or it starts to feel like noise, people will tune it out. But what started to throw me off was seeing examples that didn’t follow that rule at all—and instead of hurting them, it seemed to be working in the opposite direction.

    So I went looking for actual data to see what marketers are really doing. One thing that stood out right away was how infrequent most posting actually is. According to HubSpot, only 19.7% of marketers post multiple times a day, the most common cadence is multiple times a week at 30.9%, and 64% of marketers post less than daily. That number stuck with me more than anything else. Sixty-four percent posting less than daily just feels low, especially when you think about how fast content moves now. Feeds refresh constantly, attention disappears in seconds, and if most brands aren’t even showing up every day, it makes you wonder how much they’re actually being seen.

    That’s when I stopped looking at what people say you should do and started looking at what’s actually happening. I looked at Hope for Ukraine, a nonprofit that shares updates directly from the field—food distribution, aid delivery, real moments from people affected by the war. Their posting isn’t spaced out or cautious. It’s constant. Sometimes every one to two hours there’s something new, and on certain days it adds up to seven or more posts. But instead of pushing people away, the engagement is there. With over 247,000 followers, people are still liking, commenting, and interacting. It doesn’t feel like they’re being overwhelmed—it feels like they’re being kept close to what’s happening.

    Then I looked at something completely different, like the NBA, and it was almost the same pattern. Ten or more posts a day isn’t unusual—highlights, clips, reactions, updates happening in real time. And it works, because the content is constantly changing. There’s always something new to show, so the volume doesn’t feel forced. It feels natural to the platform.

    But then you look at a brand like Chipotle, and it’s the opposite. Maybe one post a week, sometimes even less. More polished, more spaced out, more traditional. And that’s where things started to shift for me, because now it doesn’t feel like there’s a single rule you can follow. It starts to feel like the type of content and the purpose behind it matter way more than the number itself.

    I came across an experiment from Candid that made this even more interesting. They compared periods where they were posting around 2–3 times per day to periods where they increased it to over 10 posts per day, eventually reaching as high as 18.35 tweets per day in May. Total engagement increased from 731 in January to 3,114 by June, which shows that posting more does bring more overall attention. But at the same time, the average engagement per tweet dropped from 16.13 in February to 7.47 in May.

    Blog comments

    So more posts led to more total engagement, but each individual post became less impactful. And that’s the part that makes this harder to simplify. It doesn’t give you a clean answer. It just shows that there’s a trade-off depending on how you approach it.

    The more I looked into all of this, the less I felt like there was a “right” posting frequency. It started to feel more like alignment than anything else. Alignment between what you’re posting, why you’re posting it, and how your audience experiences it. A nonprofit sharing real-time updates is naturally going to post more. A sports league with constant content is going to post more. A restaurant or brand without that same flow probably shouldn’t.

    So instead of thinking about frequency as a rule, it started to feel like something you earn. If your content consistently gives people a reason to stop, watch, or engage, you can post more. If it doesn’t, even one post can feel like too much.

    And I think that’s the part most people skip. You’re not experiencing your content the same way your audience is. You’re creating it, not consuming it. That difference matters more than the schedule you follow. It’s easy to focus on when to post and how often, but the real question is whether someone actually wants to see what you’re posting again.

    The same thing applies to engagement. It’s not just about getting likes—it’s about what happens after. When someone comments, that’s a real person choosing to interact with what you made. Responding to that, building on it, turning it into something more—that’s where the connection actually happens. Not just in posting, but in continuing the conversation.

    I also don’t think there’s anything wrong with learning from what works. If certain brands are seeing success with a certain style or frequency, it’s worth paying attention to. Not copying it blindly, but understanding why it works and seeing if it fits your own content. Sometimes it only takes one post to realize what clicks.

    And honestly, one of the biggest shifts is realizing how low the barrier is now. You don’t need a full team or expensive equipment. Most of the content people engage with every day is shot on a phone. It’s more about the idea, the timing, and the feeling behind it than anything else.

    So where I’ve landed on all of this is pretty simple, even though it took a while to get there. Posting more isn’t inherently good, and posting less isn’t inherently better. What matters is whether your content actually earns the right to be seen again.

    Because at the end of the day, the real signal isn’t how many times you post. It’s whether someone sees your next post and chooses to stay.


  • Why People Believe in Bitcoin (Even Without Fully Understanding It)

    Why People Believe in Bitcoin (Even Without Fully Understanding It)

    The Way It’s Usually Explained

    When people talk about Bitcoin, it’s almost always explained the same way.

    It’s technology. A decentralized currency. A system built on blockchain with no central authority controlling it.

    And all of that is technically true, but it doesn’t really explain why people buy it.

    Because if you’re being honest for a second, most people holding Bitcoin couldn’t fully walk you through how it works. Not in detail, at least.

    So something else has to be going on.


    Understanding Isn’t What Gets People In

    If you go back to when Bitcoin first started, it wasn’t exactly intuitive.

    It felt abstract, a little complicated, and honestly kind of questionable if you didn’t already understand the space. Mining, cryptography, distributed systems… it sounded more like something you’d study than something you’d put your money into.

    And yet people adopted it anyway.

    Which makes it feel like understanding isn’t really the entry point people think it is. It’s not that people fully “get it” and then decide to buy—it’s more that they reach a point where getting involved doesn’t feel like a bad move.

    That’s a much lower threshold, but it’s also a more realistic one.


    What People Are Actually Buying

    It’s easy to call Bitcoin a currency, but that feels incomplete.

    Because what people are really buying isn’t just a digital asset, it’s a set of ideas that come with it, whether they realize it or not.

    Things like independence from traditional systems, personal control, or the idea of owning something that isn’t easily reproduced. None of that is technical, but it’s what makes the whole thing feel compelling.

    So instead of asking, “Do I fully understand this?” people are really asking something closer to, “Does this make sense for me to be a part of?”

    And that feeling does a lot more work than most people think.


    Why Scarcity Changes the Way It Feels

    There’s one number that keeps coming up with Bitcoin—21 million.

    That’s the limit. No adjustments, no changes later, just a fixed cap.

    What’s interesting is that most people aren’t sitting there analyzing what that means in a technical or economic sense. It just lands in a simpler way.

    Scarcity changes how a decision feels.

    The question quietly shifts from “Do I need this?” to something more like “Am I going to regret not having this later?”

    And that second question tends to stick longer than expected, because now there’s a sense of time attached to it. Not urgency in an obvious way, but more like a low-level pressure that makes the decision feel more important.


    The Strange Way Trust Works Here

    The trust part is where it gets a little unusual.

    Most things people buy come with someone attached to them—a company, a founder, a brand that you can point to and say, “That’s who’s responsible.”

    Bitcoin doesn’t really give you that.

    There’s no CEO explaining things, no central authority stepping in to reassure people, and at first that feels like a problem. But then something shifts.

    Instead of trusting a person, people start trusting the structure itself.

    The system is visible, the rules don’t quietly change, and no single entity can control it. It creates a different kind of confidence, not based on who’s behind it, but on how it works.

    And once that belief starts to settle in, even partially, it tends to reinforce itself over time.


    Attention Isn’t the Same as Belief

    Bitcoin has had a lot of attention over the years.

    Prices go up, headlines follow, people talk about it constantly, and it becomes part of the conversation whether you’re involved or not.

    But attention doesn’t mean understanding.

    And more importantly, it doesn’t mean belief.

    Plenty of people who follow it, talk about it, or even invest in it couldn’t fully explain it if you asked them. But they’re not really operating on full comprehension anyway.

    They’re operating on whether or not it feels like something worth being part of.

    And that distinction matters more than it seems, because attention might get someone to look, but belief is what actually gets them to act.


    What This Starts to Say About Marketing

    If you step back for a second, this connects to something bigger.

    There’s this assumption in marketing that if people understood something better, they would be more likely to act. That clarity leads directly to action.

    But that’s not really how it plays out.

    People don’t wait for perfect understanding. They don’t need every detail explained. They move when something feels clear enough, valuable enough, and trustworthy enough to make a decision.

    That “enough” is doing most of the work.

    Because decisions rarely come from certainty. They come from a moment where something just feels like it makes sense to move forward.


    Why This Goes Beyond Bitcoin

    At that point, Bitcoin starts to look less like a piece of technology and more like a case study in how ideas actually spread.

    It didn’t grow because everyone suddenly understood it. It grew because it fit, or at least felt like it fit, with how people already think.

    That’s usually what gets overlooked.

    For something to really catch on, it doesn’t need to be perfectly explained. It just needs to land in the right way. It needs to feel like it means something, reduce just enough doubt, and make the next step feel reasonable.

    Not obvious, not risk-free, just reasonable.


    A Final Thought

    Bitcoin isn’t just a financial system, even though that’s how it’s usually described.

    It’s more like a reflection of how people make decisions when things aren’t fully clear, when there’s uncertainty, and when the outcome isn’t guaranteed.

    Which is most decisions, if you really think about it.

    And once you start looking at it that way, something becomes a little clearer.

    People don’t adopt things because they completely understand them.

    They adopt them because, in that moment, it feels like the right move.


  • Why People Don’t Buy on Amazon (Even When They Want To)

    Why People Don’t Buy on Amazon (Even When They Want To)

    The Assumption Behind Online Shopping

    I was thinking about how something like Amazon is designed, and the assumption behind it feels pretty obvious.

    If someone is searching for a product, clicking on it, and even adding it to their cart, then they probably want it. At that point, it almost feels like the decision is already made, or at least very close.

    But when you actually think about how people behave, that’s not really what happens.


    The Moment Where People Pause

    People don’t just move from interest to purchase in a straight line. They sit in this middle space where they’re clearly interested, but not fully decided.

    They’ll scroll through reviews, open multiple listings of the same product, compare small differences that probably don’t matter as much as they think, and sometimes leave things in their cart without ever checking out. What’s interesting is that they don’t lose interest—they just don’t move forward.

    So it starts to feel like interest isn’t the thing that actually drives the decision.


    Why It Doesn’t Come Down to Price

    At first it seems like it would be something obvious, like price or convenience, but that doesn’t really explain it. A lot of the time the price is reasonable, the shipping is fast, and the product is exactly what they were looking for.

    The hesitation comes from something less clear, which is whether or not the person feels confident choosing that specific option over everything else they’re seeing.

    Because at some point, the decision becomes less about the product itself and more about whether it feels like the right choice.


    The Quiet Question Behind Every Purchase

    There’s a moment that happens in almost every purchase, even if people don’t think about it directly.

    It’s not something they say out loud, but it’s there in the background:

    Am I choosing the right one?

    And if that question doesn’t feel fully answered, people don’t move forward. They don’t reject the product either, they just keep looking, thinking that maybe the next option will feel more certain.


    Why More Options Make It Harder

    What’s interesting is how most product pages try to solve this. They add more information, more features, more comparisons, and more choices, because it seems like giving people more should help them decide.

    But when you’re actually the one going through it, more doesn’t always make things clearer. A lot of the time it just creates more room for doubt. Instead of feeling confident, you start wondering if you missed something, or if another option might be slightly better.

    So instead of helping the decision, it slows it down.


    When Someone Finally Decides

    When someone actually does buy something, it usually doesn’t feel like they found the perfect option. It just feels like the one that’s easiest to settle on.

    It’s clear enough, familiar enough, and there’s nothing about it that makes them want to keep searching. At that point, continuing to compare starts to feel unnecessary.

    So the purchase doesn’t really come from interest alone. It comes from reaching a point where the decision feels resolved.


    What This Actually Means

    So it’s not really about getting people interested, because that part already happened.

    It’s about getting them to a point where they feel done looking.

    And that’s a completely different problem, because now you’re not competing for attention anymore, you’re competing with uncertainty.

  • Why Attention Doesn’t Equal Action in Marketing

    Why Attention Doesn’t Equal Action in Marketing

    The Assumption That Attention Is Enough

    I was thinking about how most marketing is built, and the assumption behind it feels pretty simple.

    If someone sees something, that should be enough to get them to act. If they watch the video, click the ad, or read the post, then the hard part is done, and the rest should follow naturally.

    At least that’s how it’s treated.

    But when you actually think about how people behave, that doesn’t really hold up.


    The Part Where Nothing Happens

    People notice things all the time and still do nothing with them.

    They scroll past ideas they agree with, save posts they never come back to, open emails they were interested enough to click on, and then forget about them a few minutes later. It’s not like the attention wasn’t there, because it clearly was, but it just doesn’t turn into anything.

    So it starts to feel like attention isn’t really the thing that drives action.


    Why Visibility Doesn’t Solve the Problem

    At first it seems like the issue would be reach, like maybe not enough people are seeing it, or the right people aren’t seeing it often enough.

    But even when something does get seen, even when it gets engagement, that still doesn’t guarantee anything happens after.

    Which makes it feel like the gap isn’t about visibility as much as it is about what the person actually understands or feels in that moment.


    The Moment Where Someone Decides

    There’s a point where attention either turns into action or just disappears, and it usually comes down to whether something feels clear and meaningful enough right away.

    Not in a deep, long-term sense, but in a very immediate one.

    Does this matter to me?

    Does this make sense?

    Is this worth doing right now?

    If those questions aren’t answered quickly, people don’t reject it, they just move on, because it’s easier to come back to it later, even though most of the time they won’t.


    Why More Content Doesn’t Fix It

    What’s interesting is how the response to this is usually just more content, more posts, more emails, more ads, as if repeating the same message more often will eventually push someone to act.

    But if the original message didn’t fully connect, seeing it again doesn’t always help. It can even make it easier to ignore, because now it feels familiar without ever feeling important.

    So instead of creating action, it just creates more moments where nothing happens.


    When Action Actually Happens

    When someone does act, it usually doesn’t feel complicated.

    It feels clear enough, relevant enough, and immediate enough that not doing it starts to feel like the worse option.

    There isn’t much back and forth, and there isn’t much hesitation, because the decision feels resolved almost as soon as it appears.


    What This Actually Means

    So it’s not really about getting attention, because that part is easier than it seems.

    It’s about what happens after someone notices something, and whether it connects clearly enough in that moment to move them forward.

    And that’s a completely different problem, because now you’re not competing to be seen, you’re competing with hesitation.