Re: Salon.com and taller ads
MICHAEL MARTINEZ <Michael_at_xenite.org> WROTE:
>There is simply no statistical or mathematical reason to
>argue that forcing people to look at large, ugly, intrusive
>ads is going to save the Internet advertising industry.
>The surfers don't have to look at those ads if they
>don't want to. They can go elsewhere, and they will.
>Until such time as the business community comes to grips
>with the realities of the Internet, it's going to be real
>tough for the business community to be innovative in the
There's little one can add to your statements regarding
commerce's approach to the Web specifically and the Net in
general. Any reply would merely be a case of, "Right On!"
Nevertheless it deserves to be said. So thanks for speaking
for a lot of us by detailing what amounts to a distillation
of sentiment and cold, clear fact. Brevity always does it
best. That post should be nailed to the forehead of every
dollar-eyed layabout who's ever planned to build an empire
on nothing but self-induced perceptions of their own
brilliance and the projected idiocy of others. I guess,
over the past eighteen months, the Web's shown such
scuzzballs that most of its users, for all of their candor,
are anything but dumb.
One good thing to come out of the dotcom meltdown is that
business people might now start realizing that the Internet
does not owe them a living and is quite capable of spontaneously
ejecting them if their motives, expectations, and most
importantly, deliverables, aren't up to scratch. In the
context of the medium, advertising is itself a deliverable.
And yes, we do need advertising but I reckon GoTo's underhand
links and Google's AdWords are showing all and sundry just
how small Web users like their banners and billboards to be.
I've no doubt that most dejected would-be millionaires will
either come to terms with these things, get over them, or go
into real estate :-).
Would that GoTo and other PPCs would sort out once and for
all the huge holes in their system. The potential for and
allegations of IP-spoofing and fraudulent clickthroughs by
cheapjack affiliates and nere-do-wells doing the rounds on all
the boards must be doing irreparable damage to their reputations
and medium-term prospects. Where true, they must be costing
their advertisers an inordinate amount of money. Trouble is,
most advertisers are probably unaware of what is going on, i.e.
it's possible to automate clickthroughs to advertisers' sites
to generate revenue for all concerned. It appears that in
Web-vertising, as with so much else in life, we all have a
lot to learn.
Back to the point, though. Keep up the good stuff. If such
an approach were pervasive, I doubt we'd have had to witness
the ghastly death last year of so many hopelessly optimistic
and completely unrealizable dreams.
Received on Fri Apr 06 2001 - 12:25:52 CDT
HOW TO JOIN THE ONLINE ADVERTISING DISCUSSION LIST
With an archive of more than 14,000 postings, since 1996 the
Online Advertising Discussion List has been the Internet's leading forum focused on professional discussion
of online advertising and online media buying and selling strategies, results, studies, tools, and media
coverage. If you wish to join the discussion list, please use this link to sign up on the home page of the Online Advertising Discussion List.|
Online Advertising Industry Leaders:
Local SEO with Video
Austin Web Design
Add your company...