Naming characters with Google AdWords
Here's a new trick.
In this book, I'm trying to craft a central character with some of that same iconic strangeness that makes Sherlock Holmes so appealing. There's a lot that goes into that, but for now, focus on the name. Sherlock Holmes. It leaves an indelible mark on the brain.
So, I have a name in mind for this character, and I was looking for a meaningful way to test it out—without giving it away.
That's where AdWords comes in.
Here's what I did:
Created a campaign attached to a bundle of search terms: mystery, detective story, sherlock holmes, noir, and more like those.
Came up with a whole set of names, basically wide variations on a theme. One was my original pick, but I liked all of them. Then, I created an ad for each one, all with the same body text but each with a different name swapped in for the headline.
Allocated a small budget ($40, to be exact) and kicked off the campaign. And wow there are a lot of people searching for stuff on Google. Over the span of 24 hours, my ads made about 100,000 impressions.
So the question—and I do think it's a serious question, insofar as it's a simulation of a decision that will confront many potential buyers of this book—the question is, which name worked?
The results, pixelated for secrecy's sake:
Here's the way I read this: The four names at the top all did about the same. I wouldn't choose a name with an 0.23% click-through rate over a name with an 0.20% just because of that measly 0.03 margin.
But the 0.07% at the bottom? I think there's real signal there. As it happens, the name at 0.07% was one I really liked—but it didn't make the cut. Alas.
My original idea—the name I came into the exercise with—is the one at 0.21%. So basically, I see this as validation: The name works. People don't see it and go "ew" or "meh."
But okay, I'll be honest. This was mostly just an excuse to try a new tool. Any nerd will tell you that tools can provide their own intrinsic rewards. There's an aspect of exploration to it, too: you're pressing out into new tool-territory, learning about what you can and can't do.
This little AdWords test is a first step. Mechanical Turk might be next. I mean, imagine—this is the sci-fi extrapolation—imagine highlighting a block of text, choosing a menu item called Test the way you'd choose Spellcheck today, and when you do, a little timer appears next to it. Five minutes later, ding—the timer goes off and you have the results right there, floating over the text. Aggregated feedback from an anonymous swarm of readers: "I stumbled here," "this variation works better," "this line rings false."
That might sound naive—it's definitely oversimplified—but I think there might be something useful lurking in this particular tool-territory.
So, finally, here's the irony: I'm making a big deal out of keeping this name secret. Functionally, it is secret—none of you know what it is yet! And yet... 100,000 people out there have laid eyes on it. Thousands of Google searchers have seen her name. What kind of secret is that?
Ah, liquidity. Ah, scale.
Sometimes, the vast sea of clicks can be a comfort.
You must be logged in to comment.
570
Backers
$13,942
pledged of $3,500 goal
0
seconds to go
Funding Successful
This project successfully raised its funding goal on November 1.Pledge $1 or more
ULTIMATE NINJA ALLY PACK. Get a PDF copy of the book. Join our movement to reinvent writing and publishing. (Ho hum!)
22 BACKERs
Pledge $3 or more
DIGITAL PACK. Get a PDF copy of the book and follow along with behind-the-scenes updates.
28 BACKERs
Pledge $11 or more
PHYSICAL PACK. All of the above, plus get a physical copy of the book. (The more people who choose this level or higher, the better the book is for everybody!)
100 BACKERs
Pledge $19 or more
SINCERITY PACK. All of the above, plus your book is signed, and it comes with a little surprise.
186 BACKERs
Pledge $29 or more
PATRON PACK. All of the above, plus your name (or secret code-name) is listed in the acknowledgments.
87 BACKERs
Pledge $39 or more
SUPER OCCULT VALUE PACK. All of the above, plus get three more copies of the book (for a total of four), so you can give one to a friend, donate one to the library, leave one in a coffee shop with a line of hexadecimal code scribbled across the title page...
122 BACKERs
Pledge $59 or more
INTERNATIONAL PACK. New addition! All of the above, but designed for international backers who want to help offset the cost of the trans-oceanic catapult launch. Thanks to Euan Mclaren for the idea.
10 BACKERs
Project By
Robin Sloan
San Francisco, CA
Send MessageBorn in Illinois. Grew up in Michigan. Learned to write in Florida. Now I live in San Francisco.
I also blog at Snarkmarket (link below) with my pals Tim and Matt.
Saheli says: I just wanted to say that I don't think 0.07% should be villainous, but should be a misunderstood last-minute heroine, like Sydney Carlton.
tim inman says: This is a great idea, but it would be much more expensive to do it well. As an Adwords customer, I know you aren't getting a very big sample for forty bucks. Don't rule out your favorite name over maybe a dozen or two clicks difference.
Robin Sloan says: @Stephanie: Good question. It was a placeholder page that said essentially "Hey, thanks -- you just helped me out with my writing, even though you didn't realize it." Then a link to a short story.
@Jeff: Love that! Yes, Mechanical Turk is next.
Jeff Barr says: I'd suggest Mechanical Turk (even if I didn't work at Amazon).
A few years ago one of my colleagues was trying to come up with a creative yet descriptive name for an internal accounting system. I asked Turk to suggest some first names that would be appropriate for an accountant. I got 100 good answers in a very short time and we ended up choosing "Penny."
Stephanie Rosenblatt says: My question is, when people clicked through the ad, what did they see on the page they landed on?
Jimmy Stamp says: I'm once again blown away by your use of technology. This is an amazing project!
Kevin Meyer says: We can only hope Carmen Sherlock Holmes-Diego use such innovative detective techniques in the book!
Robin Sloan says: @Lionfire: Then again, maybe the whole thing is a ruse... ;-)
Robin Sloan says: @Lionfire: Someone else pointed out the same thing. Shhh. (Lots of digital detectives out there, it turns out.) And yeah, I agree w/ you re: not over-interpreting the results. I think it's a good data point to have, though.
Lionfire says: No one knows any of those names. No one except, of course, those detectives who recognised the that you left a clue or two, and that Google caches its own ads.
Perhaps a little more secrecy is required, but the idea has some merit. I'd be a little hesitant to assume that click-through implies a like or dislike of the name. Perhaps it just means that the name is familiar, and therefore possibly too similar to another character?
Lily Sloan says: I agree with Gavin. .07% = villainous
Gavin Craig says: So are you going to make the 0.07% name a villain? I think you really need to use that name somehow, especially if it was your favorite.
Robin Sloan says: @Burt Yes! That's what I'm talkin about. It's like design thinking for fiction. Maybe this whole thing is just a prototype.
Burt Herman says: Awesome use of adwords, go user testing!!!
Andy Baio says: Clever. Let me know if you need MTurk help.
Regina Gelfovision says: love it! :)
Jack Cheng says: I see what's going on here. This is the old bait and switch, right? Make us think it's a sci-fi book when It's really going to be a book about how write and market a book in the 21st century ;)
But seriously, I'm loving the updates and that you're keeping the what's actually going to be in the book secret.
Yancey Strickler says: great post, robin
Dan Bouk says: This is geek-tastic. Love it!
Tim Carmody says: It's the lesson of "The Purloined Letter"! The only way to truly hide something is to hide it in plain sight.