Text books will probably tell you about three types of advertising objectives: inform, persuade, and remind. Well done, you get full marks for your answer!
Now wake up and look out there. While three types of objectives are still correct, we need to look little higher in the sky. Count on number of channels and number of advertising that you are exposed to everyday. Count on how many times you are pressing that remote console to switch to another channel. Count on how much time you can afford in a day to sit down and watch programs in your favorite channels. Now do the math. How many “informing” advertisements are there? Many, right. How many “persuading” advertisements are there? Probably they outnumber those of “informing” type. How many “reminding” advertisements are there? A lot, correct. So how do you measure the effect that those advertisements have actually informed, persuaded, or reminded whatever they intended to do, unless someone had the opportunity to actually see those advertisements? Do the probability calculation having total number of occurences as denominator and specific occurence as numerator. Evidently, unless we either increase the frequency and spread across media, or infuse radical creativity in our message to create a viral buzz, it would be almost impossible to cut through the clutter.
When textbooks were written, three objectives were appropriate because the underlying assumption was that the audience was going to see the ad. While we will definitely keep these objectives in mind, I think the first challenge would be to design a message and decide on its media decision that would cut through the clutter no matter what your ultimate objective is.