Internet advertising fails miserably because it stinks?

**pluckyduck** · #1 05-06-2002, 04:54 AM

Is it possible that the reason internet advertising has failed to live up to a fraction of it's supposed potential is because it's just bad?

I am the queen of hating and cursing pop-ups. Meet the first pop up ad I didn't mind flying in my face:

Granted, it was a pop up on The Onion..but the time I took to look at the ad, laugh, grab the url for the jpg, check the link out...is 100 percent of the time I've ever spent on a pop up, saving finding the box to click closed as fast as I could.

Is it possible that all the advertising done to date on the internet is just bad and that's why revenue is in the toilet?

Andrea

murasaki · #2 05-06-2002, 07:20 AM

I would immediately have guessed that the filmmaking ad was British.

I find most of the advertising on the internet annoying and easy to ignore. I also don't do much in the way of click-throughs (except on this board once in awhile to help generate revenue).

For the problem is not how well or how badly the ad is, I don't usually need/want what they're selling. Bookstores--most likely already in my favorites; credit cards--have some; travel services--have a great one, etc.

I don't know if I'm necessarily a normal consumer though.

--naomi

**pluckyduck** · #3 05-06-2002, 08:36 AM

Here's what I'm thinking:

Ads on the television networks used to be completely lame. As competition with the remote control heated up, the ads got more enjoyable -- quality shot up. Legions of people tune into the Superbowl now for the ads.

Internet advertising is a completely new medium. This is the first ad I personally have ever seen that had entertainment value. Caught my eye, stopped me in my tracks, made me laugh.

It's not selling something I'm buying, which is a shame...but what if it were? We spend half our internet lives sending great links to each other, things that catch our eye, make us laugh, catch our heart.

Where's that in internet advertising? Where's that in corporate websites? Who is sleeping behind the wheel?

Andrea

frazzledspice · #4 05-06-2002, 02:04 PM

Internet ads are annoying because there are so darn many of them and they pop up when you're in the middle of trying to do other things.

On the other hand, I can't say they're ineffective.

A banner ad was what initially brought me to Epinions, for example.

magenta321 · #5 05-06-2002, 08:18 PM

Huh. I avoid sites that use pop-ups, generally. One reason is because I really don't want to see celebrity look-alikes, another is because I don't need a spy-cam, and the real reason is because I want to speak out against pop-ups with my pocketbook.

I tune out banner ads completely. I tune out tv ads completely too. Magazine ads though -- those I pay attention to.

kurt_messick · #6 05-09-2002, 10:57 PM

Interesting that my first thought was that this was a British advert, too.

**Joubert**[$] · #7 05-09-2002, 11:53 PM

I'm still a proponent of Internet advertising because you're either going to pay through impressions or pay in subscription or transaction fees.

There ain't no free lunch, said Bobby Heinlein, who would no doubt smack me for calling him Bobby.

But with ad blockers and the like, we're simply going to end up with five media companies running the web. I want web ads to work. I think they will as the medium matures.

kurt_messick · #8 05-13-2002, 12:36 PM

I guess my main problem is the all-pervasiveness of the advertising. Unlike television advertising, where there are lots of adverts, but not every second of every show, you get a break. On the internet, it seems there's never a break. Because they are there on every page, I ignore them always. If they would come occasionally, between pages, at top pages, etc. I might not be so overwhelmed by them.

Why don't newspapers put advertising front page above the fold? Why don't magazines put advertising on the front page? Because they know it is a turn-off. The internet hasn't found the right model to follow; but even newspapers and magazines (the ones they seem to be copying most closely) know there is a balancing act to be done.

**hymie**[$] · #9 05-13-2002, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Unlike television advertising, where there are lots of adverts, but not every second of every show

With the improvements in ad-skipping VCRs and DVRs, along with the growing popularity of letterbox format and news show text crawls, I see a clear and inevitable outcome. All shows will be broadcast in letterbox, and the previously black areas above and below the picture will be filled with continuous advertising.

**conradd** · #10 05-14-2002, 05:42 PM

And yet another use for duct tape.

Deb

**Joubert**[$] · #11 05-15-2002, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by conradd
And yet another use for duct tape.

Deb

Y'know, I'm wondering what other uses Deb has, but I'll skip that question for now.

satan · #12 06-05-2002, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by hymie
All shows will be broadcast in letterbox, and the previously black areas above and below the picture will be filled with continuous advertising.

Admit it . . . you've been reading Neal Stephenson, haven't you?

CurtisEdmonds · #13 06-05-2002, 05:42 PM

Internet advertising works.

The fact that it (largely) doesn't work for you and me means nothing. It still works.

It works because it targets REALLY STUPID PEOPLE.

Fortunately, there are enough of them out there to make it profitable.

Quote:

The main trade that was carried out was in the skins of the NowWhattian boghog but it wasn't a very successful one because no one in their right minds would want to buy a NowWhattian boghog skin. The trade only hung on by its fingernails because there was always a significant number of people in the Galaxy who were not in their right minds. -- Douglas Adams