::scr more on text ads

[Simon Batistoni]

On 16/11/01 06:29 -0800, matt jones wrote:
> People put up with intrusive advertising on TV (IMHO) because it gives
> them a chance to get up and make a NCOT. Well, that's why I put up with
> it, anyway. It's just sad that the marketing world didn't seem to be able
> to get the "web" ne "tv" thing for so long. 

I often wonder how effective TV ads are. I mean, there are some that
are quite amusing the first few times you see them (Reebok's "Lose
the Belly" and "Escape the Sofa" ones pop into my head, for
example), but they don't make me go buy the product. I own no Reebok
kit whatsoever, and don't want any. And Gap? Their insistance on
selling a lifestyle (see Simon W for more details) actually makes me
embarassed to wear the Gap trousers I have, lest I be indentified
with a bunch of bland fuckwits.

> I mean, how easy is it to figure out that slappin g stuff in people's face
> when they're trying to use an *active* medium is Just Plain Wrong. I think
> the whole marketing/advertising industry showed enormous intertia and even
> complacency in its apparent inability to adapt from the broadcast model of
> mass communications to the networked model. They seemed to have no
> contingency for a shift ofg control to the consumer.

Arguably, this is the problem with the whole media industry. The
RIAA and MPAA are currently fighting tooth and nail to stop their
control of distribution and consumption of music and film slipping
away from them into other channels. And make no mistake, their
current battles are as much about making sure artists can't
successfully self-publish as they are about protecting existing
revenue.

Same with the TV industry's fights with TiVO/ReplayTV et al.

Now, there has to be a balance. Companies have to make money, or
there's no point doing it. But what irks me beyond belief is the way
that so many industries are complacently trying to defend existing
ways of doing things to the detriment of the end consumer (adverts
that my video recorder *forces me to watch*? Fuck off...), rather
than try and find creative ways of funding what they do, be it
effective, unintrusive advertising, or something entirely new.

And in some cases, they seem to be making things worse than they
used to be. Why should my ReplayTV stop me zapping ads when I've
been fast-forwarding through them on my analogue VCR for the past 15
years?

> Now, these pop-under adverts are doubly counterproductive to me. Sure,
> they try to hide the ad when they pop it up (which shows that they *do*
> learn, albeit really fricking slowly) and it gives the ad time to load
> (rather than just being shut on sight), but hiding which site spawned the
> damn thing leaves only the product/manufacturer to bear my ire.

I've heard good things about X20's kit. I'd never buy it because of
those bastard ads that keep appearing everywhere.



Having known people tangenitally related to advertising, I think
that the people who devise these things are just too far removed
from the consequences of their actions. They simply never sit down
and say "would I be impressed if this website did that to me?" They
impress the client with a flashy set of slides, some made-up numbers
and a bit of patter, and that's all that matters. <sigh>