| |||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSSCreating these buttons has never been that popular with the revenue side of Web publishing since, typically, advertisers only pay sites for ads that actually run, and not for those that are skipped. But publishers nevertheless allow skipping because they fear how users might react if they didn't. In the Web-publishing world, competition is just a click away. Users almost always have someplace else to go to get similar, if not exactly the same, content or experience. As much as publishers want to maximize every advertising opportunity, most don't, believing that upsetting visitors will result in lost loyalty and fewer page views.
Will it always be so? Will publishers always feel the need to provide these ad escape buttons when they use particularly invasive ad formats? Have consumers already become too accustomed to them?
I think not. I think that there is a good chance that "Skip the Ad" buttons will disappear some day; and, most significantly, consumers won't even care.
How is that possible? Simple. The advertising will get so much better and so much more useful that consumers won't want to skip it. This is the challenge that we as an industry should embrace. We should strive to produce and deliver ads that people want, not just ads that they are willing to tolerate. This is what it will take for online to win in a future that is all about the consumer, not about the media, the advertisers or their products.
How will we do it? We'll do it with more relevant ads. We'll do it by providing more value in our ads for consumers, with more and better information or entertainment. And we'll do it by giving consumers more control over the ad experience, such as better interfaces for interactivity or the improved capabilities to select lengths or formats. Some details:
If we are successful--and we will be--this will certainly be the future of advertising in all digital media, not just on the Web. Television has its remote control and TiVo problems, and ad skipping on TV will only go away with the same solution. In the future, people will be able to skip ALL advertising. If advertisers want to actually engage users, it will only be possible though ads that provide so much value that consumers will really want them.
RSS FEEDS
Publisher - who monetizes the entire demand curve for premium content Advertiser - who gleans good will plus a guaranteed full-screen, two-way interactive engagement Viewer - who is respected with an ad format that only plays when they choose to watch it while giving something in return for their time
As far as relevance, I agree it is very strategic and will benefit any advertiser. However, mass branding through engagement is key to building awareness and reputation. Show me an ad for a product I've never heard of or don't understand, I don't care how relevant it is, I'm still not going to buy it.
Paul Grusche paul@ultramercial.com
The "file me" sends the ad to a Desktop/Outlook folder or creates an Outlook task. The "follow me" buttons links to a concise, accurate, static, and severly focused web experience that contains additional links to fluff (only because advertisers can't resist,) product specifications, targeted consumer blogs, industry comparison, availability, pricing, etc.
The constraints above provide the highest degree of consumer control, reach without excessive, negative frequency, and delivery options.
Does ABC think it will win fans by disabling their ability to skip what's invasive, irrelevant and wasteful? Today's ad models of disruption are not all bad, but mostly bad, and mostly inneficient.
www.web-strategist.com