Desperation, Thy Name is Advertising
Advertising has never been particularly pleasant, but it was, at one time, a good-enough bargain for whatever it was you got in return: magazine content, tv shows, music on the radio.
But these days, it has become just too much - and is running into Problems of a Potentially Insurmountable Kind.
First, there are too many given the relative amount of content. Once upon a time, a station break with commercials might be 2-3 minutes, then back to programming. Now it can run 10, 15, even 20 ads in a break. I'm not even kidding. I jokingly voiced over a break as I fast-forwarded through a break on DVR, and I made up a headline for no fewer than 10 ads. Suddenly it wasn't so funny.
Ads on the radio have driven customers away - except possibly from talk radio - to the extent that now the host will simply segue into a "commercial" that amounts to an endorsement for a product or service that he or she works into the narrative of the programming.
Then there are those "jaw-droppingly" annoying Internet ads - deployed in ranks under and beside the content you'd like to see, that cause the site to load ever so slowly, have click-bait headlines and pictures, and chase you around the Internet like a desperate bad first date looking for a second.
Worse, many of these sites (which today I vowed never to visit again) have employed a method of getting more "clicks," hence more payment based on clicks that show a particular ad (or dozens, more like). The actual story is broken up into individual sentences so that in order to read it - and naturally it's seldom worth the effort - you have to continue clicking "next" endlessly. And of course, the page is set up with lots and lots of arrows and "Next" and "Continue," all of which lead to advertiser's site or information, not the next page of the content. An of course you are forced to scroll down past all the "Jaw-dropping" ads to find the real "Next" button.
More and more, people are opting for streamed content so that they can avoid the advertising. Or bowing out of the one sentence at a time stories, or, like me, selectively deploying Flash on my browser so I don't have to put up with the auto-play nonsense - five ads, all trying to start at once, in addition to all the static ones.
Advertisers are running into a significant problem: too much competition for our attention. Too many ways to avoid "seeing" the ad. Actual annoyance with the product or service because we're so offended by the advertising. Too many ads at a single sitting, so that we tune out, change stations, click off the page, go away while the ads run and do something else.
Worse yet, the ads have become downright stupid in many cases. Not all of them - so clearly advertising can be done in an intelligent and entertaining way - but often enough, like, say, the Liberty Mutual ads, they are so distressingly bad we simply don't want to endure them, and we're left with a bad feeling about the product.
The other piece of this puzzle that is not-good-for-the-consumer is that advertising has traditionally supported the content - the story, the entertainment. So as ad revenue drops, will content inevitably follow?
One option is to make advertising better, and less overwhelming. Create ads that actually do mean something, have a good or useful message, or blend in well with the content (though please, no more of the trickery that makes you pause as you're fast forwarding through the ad block because it's created to emulate the show - so you start watching, thinking you're going back to the programming. Hint, advertisers: people don't like to be tricked.)
There actually are ads that are fun to watch for one reason or another. They really are funny (think of the Sprint commercial featuring an amusing zombie character); or they really are endearing (think of the Microsoft Windows 10 ad featuring the adorable children around the world); or they have a fun concept (like the first round of "Don't Be This Rob Lowe" spots, which, sadly, they have now overdone).
Then there is a thing called "native" advertising, or content advertising. That's advertising that is built into useful and interesting content. So if you are selling legal services, for example, you can give away some useful information in a longer format ad, which promotes your intelligence on a subject without a hard sell.
Ads actually, aside from paying for our programming, perform a useful service: they alert us to products and services we may be interested in obtaining. And that's ok. I'm even resigned to the bargain of getting the content in exchange for a reasonable amount of my attention on the product.
But nobody likes a desperate person. Or an annoying idiot. So two lessons: first, don't overdo it. A little sugar is nice; twelve teaspoons in a cup of coffee is just sickening. Second: have some class and creativity. Even if you're advertising legal services, it can be done in a way that is appealing and either useful or entertaining.
And one more small piece of advice from a consumer: don't try too hard to be cool. If desperation is unattractive, then desperately trying to be cool is the bottom of the barrel. Don't be that ad. (Just kidding!)
But these days, it has become just too much - and is running into Problems of a Potentially Insurmountable Kind.
First, there are too many given the relative amount of content. Once upon a time, a station break with commercials might be 2-3 minutes, then back to programming. Now it can run 10, 15, even 20 ads in a break. I'm not even kidding. I jokingly voiced over a break as I fast-forwarded through a break on DVR, and I made up a headline for no fewer than 10 ads. Suddenly it wasn't so funny.
Ads on the radio have driven customers away - except possibly from talk radio - to the extent that now the host will simply segue into a "commercial" that amounts to an endorsement for a product or service that he or she works into the narrative of the programming.
Then there are those "jaw-droppingly" annoying Internet ads - deployed in ranks under and beside the content you'd like to see, that cause the site to load ever so slowly, have click-bait headlines and pictures, and chase you around the Internet like a desperate bad first date looking for a second.
Worse, many of these sites (which today I vowed never to visit again) have employed a method of getting more "clicks," hence more payment based on clicks that show a particular ad (or dozens, more like). The actual story is broken up into individual sentences so that in order to read it - and naturally it's seldom worth the effort - you have to continue clicking "next" endlessly. And of course, the page is set up with lots and lots of arrows and "Next" and "Continue," all of which lead to advertiser's site or information, not the next page of the content. An of course you are forced to scroll down past all the "Jaw-dropping" ads to find the real "Next" button.
More and more, people are opting for streamed content so that they can avoid the advertising. Or bowing out of the one sentence at a time stories, or, like me, selectively deploying Flash on my browser so I don't have to put up with the auto-play nonsense - five ads, all trying to start at once, in addition to all the static ones.
Advertisers are running into a significant problem: too much competition for our attention. Too many ways to avoid "seeing" the ad. Actual annoyance with the product or service because we're so offended by the advertising. Too many ads at a single sitting, so that we tune out, change stations, click off the page, go away while the ads run and do something else.
Worse yet, the ads have become downright stupid in many cases. Not all of them - so clearly advertising can be done in an intelligent and entertaining way - but often enough, like, say, the Liberty Mutual ads, they are so distressingly bad we simply don't want to endure them, and we're left with a bad feeling about the product.
The other piece of this puzzle that is not-good-for-the-consumer is that advertising has traditionally supported the content - the story, the entertainment. So as ad revenue drops, will content inevitably follow?
One option is to make advertising better, and less overwhelming. Create ads that actually do mean something, have a good or useful message, or blend in well with the content (though please, no more of the trickery that makes you pause as you're fast forwarding through the ad block because it's created to emulate the show - so you start watching, thinking you're going back to the programming. Hint, advertisers: people don't like to be tricked.)
There actually are ads that are fun to watch for one reason or another. They really are funny (think of the Sprint commercial featuring an amusing zombie character); or they really are endearing (think of the Microsoft Windows 10 ad featuring the adorable children around the world); or they have a fun concept (like the first round of "Don't Be This Rob Lowe" spots, which, sadly, they have now overdone).
Then there is a thing called "native" advertising, or content advertising. That's advertising that is built into useful and interesting content. So if you are selling legal services, for example, you can give away some useful information in a longer format ad, which promotes your intelligence on a subject without a hard sell.
Ads actually, aside from paying for our programming, perform a useful service: they alert us to products and services we may be interested in obtaining. And that's ok. I'm even resigned to the bargain of getting the content in exchange for a reasonable amount of my attention on the product.
But nobody likes a desperate person. Or an annoying idiot. So two lessons: first, don't overdo it. A little sugar is nice; twelve teaspoons in a cup of coffee is just sickening. Second: have some class and creativity. Even if you're advertising legal services, it can be done in a way that is appealing and either useful or entertaining.
And one more small piece of advice from a consumer: don't try too hard to be cool. If desperation is unattractive, then desperately trying to be cool is the bottom of the barrel. Don't be that ad. (Just kidding!)
Comments