Re: Pop-Ups/Unders Dilemma

From: Sally Krumholz <salinka_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Thu 03 Oct 2002 12:55:47 -0500

Hi all,

Rather than launch into the to pop or not to pop debate, I would like to
just add that ads, no matter the format, are intrusive. That is the nature
of advertising. As a consumer you have the right to: 1) click close; 2)
install a pop-up killer; 3) ignore it; or 4) click or view it. To me, it's
the same analogy as a commercial. I have the right to: 1) flip the channel;
2) ignore it and do something else; or 3) watch it. The action that the
advertiser is concerned with is the post-view action. If the consumer
viewed the ad maybe a few times in a few sites, there may be some
recollection of the brand if the ad creative was targeted correctly.
Alternatively, if the user clicked to the advertiser's site, perhaps they
delved further and a lead was generated. If nothing, it would be like a
forgotten commercial.

I know that my comments might seem simplistic, incite a few comments and
that's ok. It's all part of a healthy discussion. I as a conumer choose to
ignore them. My only annoyance is publishers who implement clutter. That
would be tantamount to showing me three commercials on the same screen. Too
much eye candy and the brain gets confused.

I do not have a crystal ball to discuss whether or not this format is long
lasting. In Internet time, that is just not feasible yet. However in terms
of trends I am noticing a few shifts. Firstly the rise of sponsored
content, contextual advertising and surround sessions. These tactics
combined with clever and relevant use of certain formats might yield
stronger results for advertisers to leverage the interactive channel as a
marketing vehicle. Personally, I'm a proponent of advertising where it's
demographically and contextually relevant. I've never been one for
saturating channels a la` X10 but hey, I remember the ad. Does that mean I
will buy it? No. Brand recognition and translation into increased sales
growth is relevant.

Just my 2-cents for the night. :)

Sally Krumholz






Received on Thu Oct 03 2002 - 12:55:47 CDT