The DRTV Brand Bell Curve

How Direct Response Television Became a Brand-Building Engine

Originally published in Target Marketing Magazine, 2003
By Jim Warren

Not long ago, suggesting direct response television (DRTV) as a legitimate brand marketing tool was enough to raise eyebrows in most corporate boardrooms.

For decades, DRTV carried cultural baggage—hard-sell pitches, questionable products, and late-night airtime that brand stewards wanted nothing to do with. Mainstream marketers viewed it as transactional, not transformational.

That era didn’t end quietly—but it did end.

By the early 2000s, trusted consumer brands had begun using DRTV not just to drive response, but to build equity, recognition, and long-term value. And if you looked closely, a clear adoption pattern was forming—one that mirrored the same curve seen in every major technology shift.

DRTV Through the Lens of the Technology Adoption Curve

In his landmark book Crossing the Chasm, marketing strategist Geoffrey Moore outlines how new technologies move from obscurity to ubiquity via a predictable bell curve: innovators, early adopters, and finally mass-market acceptance.

If you treat DRTV itself as a “technology”—and brand managers as its users—the parallels become impossible to ignore.

What follows is the DRTV Brand Bell Curve.

Stage 1: The Innovators

Innovators represent a tiny percentage of adopters. They tolerate risk, ignore convention, and see opportunity where others see friction.

While infomercials date back decades, most early players were focused purely on transactions—not brand value.

One of the first true branding innovators in DRTV was Sheldon Adelman, founder of Blue Coral.

When Adelman proposed using an infomercial format to sell the most expensive car wax on the market, it ran counter to everything the industry believed at the time. The prevailing wisdom was that DRTV only worked for low-priced, impulse products.

Adelman disagreed—and explained why.

“The problem with your industry is that you build a relationship to get a transaction, and then you walk away.”

That insight changed how I viewed the medium. The resulting campaign built a loyal following, earned premium retail placement, and ultimately helped Blue Coral sell for over $100 million.

That wasn’t just response.
That was brand equity.

Stage 2: The Early Adopters

Early adopters validate a new approach by proving it works at scale—and by doing so publicly.

Three brands defined this phase for DRTV:

• AOL
• GEICO
• Dell

All three shared an important trait: deep experience in direct marketing before moving into television.

AOL combined direct-response offers with iconic brand messaging (“You’ve Got Mail”). GEICO fused its now-legendary gecko with a clear call to action. Dell paired humor and personality with measurable response incentives.

These brands didn’t abandon direct response principles—they elevated them.

And the results spoke for themselves.

Stage 3: Mass-Market Acceptance

Between early adopters and the mainstream lies what Moore famously calls the chasm.

The early majority doesn’t seek disruption—they seek reliable, incremental improvement.

By the early 2000s, clear signs emerged that DRTV was crossing that threshold:

• Pfizer used direct-response television to introduce consumers to Viagra, pairing education with action.
• The Home Depot integrated DRTV with phone, web, and in-store purchase paths—long before “omnichannel” was a buzzword.

These weren’t experiments.
They were performance-driven brand decisions.

From where I sat at Warren Direct, inquiries from major brands were no longer theoretical—they were serious, strategic, and sustained.

A Warning to the DRTV Industry

The Technology Adoption Curve isn’t just an opportunity map—it’s a cautionary tale.

Brand managers in the early majority aren’t persuaded by legacy DRTV arguments alone. Pure cost-per-order logic doesn’t resonate when brand safety, context, and long-term value are on the line.

To cross the chasm, DRTV service providers had to evolve:

• Speak the language of brand stewardship
• Integrate response with reputation
• Prove incremental value—not just immediate volume

This wasn’t “your father’s direct response”—and pretending it was would leave many firms behind.

Integrating Brand Without Sacrificing Response

For direct marketers entering the brand arena, the fundamentals still matter. The difference is how they’re applied.

Key principles remain timeless:

• Make bold promises credible, not incredible
• Buy media that enhances—not undermines—the brand
• Align brand and response metrics before campaigns launch
• Never forget the core DR formula: attention, differentiation, benefit, action

When any of these elements are missing, expectations fall short—and confidence in the medium erodes.

Looking Back—and Forward

The path from direct response to brand marketing was never easy. It required humility, adaptation, and a willingness to collaborate.

But the reward was substantial.

Two decades later, the convergence of brand + performance is no longer controversial—it’s foundational. And many of the lessons learned during DRTV’s climb up the bell curve now shape modern performance media across every screen.

Sometimes, the future arrives exactly the way the curve predicts.

Editor’s Note: Why This Article Still Matters in 2026

When this article was first published in 2003, the idea that direct response television could be a serious brand-building tool was still controversial. DRTV was largely viewed as transactional media—effective, measurable, but incompatible with long-term brand stewardship.

Two decades later, that debate is effectively over.

What Jim Warren described through the lens of the technology adoption bell curve now reads less like theory and more like a roadmap that played out in real time. Today’s performance marketers routinely blend brand storytelling with response mechanics across connected TV, streaming, social, and short-form video. The language has changed, the platforms have multiplied—but the underlying tension between brand value and measurable action remains exactly the same.

In 2026, as marketers wrestle with attribution loss, rising media costs, and renewed interest in high-impact video formats, the lessons outlined here are newly relevant. The brands winning now are the same ones identified early in the DRTV curve: those that respect the brand experience without abandoning the discipline of response.

This piece is republished not as nostalgia—but as context. Understanding how DRTV crossed the chasm helps explain why modern performance marketing looks the way it does today—and where it’s likely headed next.