• by Bill McCloskey , June 13, 2002

Remember the TV anchor in the movie Network who rants, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”? I felt like that while reviewing the long-awaited Rich Media Guidelines from the IAB. Now, I feel like the same character later in the movie, when he announces, “it was a nice try fellows, but the revolution is over.” Why do I feel so glum? Let’s take a look at some of the guidelines.

Rich media banners are defined as those that support HTML, Macromedia Flash, Java, or HTML. (Current advancements in DHTML technology are not discussed.) For standard rich media banners, a 15k initial load is allowed, with 85k allowed to stream-in behind—but only when a person clicks or mouse-overs the ad—making a total of 100k.

Of course, since the additional 85k load can only happen when the user initiates it, it means a delay in the rich media experience—a hiccup in the action not only sanctioned but mandated by the guidelines—especially for those with slower connections. Why not just make the guideline 100k? Or 15k with a subsequent download of 85k without stipulating how it gets initiated? The way the “guideline” is written, it pretty much guarantees that the banner experience will be suboptimum.

The rich media skyscraper gets a 25k initial load and three separate loads of 50k each, but again only after the user initiates it. Of course this begs the question: If you are going to make it “user-initiated,” why limit the additional downloads to three? If the user wants to drill down in the ad and they are initiating it, why not make it five or ten loads of 50k? Why the limit, at least as far as the site is concerned?

The expandable rollover ad gets some respect: support for expanding the standard sized banner to 460 x 240 on rollover gets adopted, but no rollover sounds. All sounds must be user-initiated by user click, eliminating some of the more interesting and creative uses of sound I’ve experienced. Videos also, even silent videos I guess, must be user-initiated. But here there is no mention of Flash. Certainly the movement of Flash creative is no less distracting (eye-catching) than video. Why must video be user-initiated but not Flash? Or better yet, why should there be any restrictions on what is primarily a creative decision?

There is a definite sense in these guidelines of playing to the lowest common denominator. Guidelines should raise the bar, not lower it to the level of the most conservative member. For sites serious about moving forward with rich media, these guidelines, as written, will provide little solace.

But in the end, it may not matter. These guidelines seem more of an obligation—something the IAB promised they would do and can now say they’ve done. But we do need real guidelines: guidelines on tracking and reporting—the type of bread-and-butter infrastructure problems that are really holding the industry back.

What we really need is for someone to raise the bar, throw down the gauntlet, and inspire better creative. We don’t need baby steps: We need giant leaps if advertisers are going to get on board. We need a strong voice out there challenging expectations. Unfortunately, from where I sit, these guidelines, as well-intentioned as they are, seem more of a whimper than a roar.

Emerging Interest founder and CEO Bill McCloskey can be reached at bill@emerginginterest.com.