What does AI say about insurance advertising?
Updated: 3 days ago
When I asked, AI responded:
“Insurance advertising is a multi-billion-dollar industry focused primarily on building brand awareness rather than immediate sales. Major insurers achieve this by utilizing memorable characters, humor, and catchphrases.”
When I prompted AI to summarize the message, this is the response:
“Leading auto insurers Compare Quotes through massive advertising budgets, primarily relying on highly recognizable characters, recurring comedic scenarios, and emotional storytelling to secure consumer retention and build brand.”
When I asked AI to summarize plaintiff law advertising for accident victims, here is the response:
“Core Strategies and Claims
Emotional Appeals: Ads target victims when they are most vulnerable, emphasizing the stress of dealing with insurance companies.”
Notwithstanding that plaintiff law is one of the best friends of insurance companies (it causes rates to increase by giving carriers a reason to raise rates and show growth where otherwise there would be none), the messaging is worlds apart. Insurance companies use oddballs because oddballs are more trustworthy than the companies themselves, and they promise price savings. Plaintiff attorneys promise help, emotional and financial help.
Obviously, people don’t care about an insurance company before a claim, and most see insurance as a commodity with no differentiation beyond price, so what else can the message be? No one cares about their coverage until they need it.
But is it necessary to emphasize that insurance companies also believe their product is a commodity? This strategy works well, at least for some companies (advertising spends versus results are anything but equal), to get business but not so well to build trust. It’s no wonder no one likes insurance.
How much could it hurt to at least have some advertising addressing good claims service? How hard can it be to advertise that if you hire an attorney, you will not get the full settlement? You’ll have to pay 25%- 40% and potentially wait for years.
Insurance companies are like substance-dependent abusers. They take a bad situation and make it worse, and they spend more and more money on their problem, and then have the audacity to complain and moan about nuclear verdicts. What do they expect when virtually zero percent of their advertising is about taking care of people when they have a claim? Why wait for news reports to show that when an entire house burns, the adjuster requires a count of the insured’s socks? Why not just dig insurance reputation graves deeper now?
The reality is that carriers really don’t care about their reputation if degenerate advertising increases sales. The suits are not a factor because they simply raise rates.
This branding debacle creates a phenomenal opportunity for people who care, truly care about clients. The carriers really don’t care, and neither do plaintiff attorneys. The insureds are just pawns. Insureds need an advocate.
This is why more agencies are creating claims advocacy positions. I am not a fan of having claims advocates within an agency because this creates a potential conflict of interest relative to the agency’s carrier contracts. Instead, create a different company with separate people and separate tax IDs. A complete separation that does nothing but claims advocacy. A fee needs to be charged, so the agency will need to develop its own messaging. Done well, I have not seen customers balk at the fee.
Alternatively, claims advocacy consultancies now exist, in which the insured pays an entirely independent third party to assist them. These are not independent adjusters. These are people who have deep knowledge of policy language and claims procedures. Refer your clients to one of these people. My clients’ experience so far has been heartwarming because clients are getting claims paid more fairly and more quickly, and they don’t have to explain how to spell "insurance" to some of the IQ-deficient adjusters who exist today.
If you need advice on structuring a solution for your clients, let me know. This is fun work for me.
NOTE: The information provided herein is intended for educational and informational purposes only and it represents only the views of the authors. It is not a recommendation that a particular course of action be followed. Burand & Associates, LLC and Chris Burand assume, and will have, no responsibility for liability or damage which may result from the use of any of this information.
None of the materials in this article should be construed as offering legal advice, and the specific advice of legal counsel is recommended before acting on any matter discussed in this article. Regulated individuals/entities should also ensure that they comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations.