Aardvark

[Bruce Simpson]

This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2010/0308.shtml

So what is it that makes online ads so evil yet made so many of those print-media ads in our favourite magazines so interesting and worthy of a read?

Could the future of the ad-funded online publishing industry be in a return to interesting, informative and entertaining advertising, rather than those annoying little animated Flash banners?

What bout the infovertisement concept?

Could one way of drawing interested potential customers to your message be to actually build it into a page that's loaded with useful information, background and support material?

Can online advertising ever be as interesting or attractive as print-media advertising?

Or will we all (eventually) have to capitulate to the subscription model for our online content?

[keewee01]

Bruce - I think your "infovertisement"'s might work quite well.

It's a very smart way of slipping the advertising into the page, and because it is highly specific in its targeting, then people who are interested enough to read the article have a high likely hood of following any links through to the contributing companies.

The hard bit is going to be convincing the companies you want to come on board that there is better value in this than in the normal models. Maybe you want to offer them a 2 month trial as a cheap rate as proof of concept to them and then whack them with how much you really want to earn from them.

All the best with it.

[rlj]

Ok, I am guilty of using ad-blockers. But then I am never tempted by glossy ads anyway.

But sponsored articles can work as long as its a "wart and all" review of a product, otherwise you would end up just losing credibility. I do look for honest evaluations of gear I am interested in but many are obviously no more than PR puff pieces. Perhaps that is one of the reasons I gave up buying computer mags (oh for the thick juicy reading of Byte, it would keep me going for the next month!).

No product is perfect but as long as it does the job for me, and I know the limitations, I am interested.

[Bruce Simpson]

The site I'm thinking of trying this on is this one:

RC ModelReviews.

It already has a very good reputation as a reliable and totally objective source of product review information, unbiased by commercial pressure, within its narrow niche.

By separating out the advertising/product-release aspect into a separate section, removed from and in no way influencing the review processes, I'm thinking that this may work.

The infovertisement will represent no endorsement or comment as to suitability, performance or value for the products concerned -- it'll simply be a place where advertisers can tout there wares alongside a lot of useful (non-review) material.

Still mulling it over -- hence the request for feedback.

[zkarj]

That is a fascinating point I had never thought of. I, too, remember reading through all the adverts in the magazines. You're right, they were almost as good as the actual editorial content.

One thing to take a look at is Leo Laporte's approach to advertising on TWiT. He only uses sponsors that he personally believes in and uses. He reads the ads himself (sure, there are canned words used often) and sometimes the ad blurs into the content - especially when guests can tell real-world stories of the product in use.

I think the key point that Leo has covered off is trust. He's always up front about what is advertising and what isn't and he stands behind his sponsors.

[barryl]

The adverts have to be appealing, interesting and not in your face.

For instance, the TV channels are cretins, I can only think of 1-2 current adverts that are amusing, and I don't even buy their products, a shame really. And as for buggerin up a great program with several minutes of mindless dribble !!!!!

What I'd love to see is every advert bearing a compulsory 0800 number where we can call the adwriter, or whomever is responsible, and tell them exactly what I think of their puerile and insulting efforts.

But my main vitriol today is reserved for the punks who scream and shout at you from their advert. It was amusing to see "Chaser's War" in Oz go into several retailers who did this, and scream at the staff in an identical fashion! None of the staff were that impressed, so why do their adwriters think we would be? Is there any chance an advertising weenie will be reading this and please explain? Or are they all hiding?

However, for a reasonably good example of on-line advertising that is not too offensive and is useful see http://www.rfcafe.com/ I'd copy that.

[Gijoe-]

micheal moore has alot to say about where publications are today and his points on news papers are to the point

http://fora.tv/2009/09/17/Filmmaker_Michael_Moore_on_Capitalism_A_Love_Story


also in the last year our liquor store of all places has increased print sales of the
http://www.gisborneherald.co.nz/

its all about content content content. well written articles by good investigative journalists, the mass media decided advertising would be where they would focus on, and not the readers or subscriptions as the basis of making there money

[Ross]

I think in the end there will be a range of revenue "gathering" methods depending on the site and the business behind it. I can see the what Bruce is describing would be great for tech type products.
For blog sites , I can remember reading a few years ago of a guy in New York who was setting up a business which involved him finding say the top 10 blog sites and approaching the owners and saying " I don't think you are going to make much money from ads or any other money making method with your site BY YOURSELF . But if you get together with other successful blog sites you have more leverage and I can manage that for you" He drew the analogy of a rock band manager for new groups. He would approach the big corporates or ad spenders with this group of successful blog sites to present a better package to them.With the proliferation of new blogs he could now be putting together groups of niche sector blogs with targeted ads.
For the Rupert Murdochs of this world I think micropayments are the way to go. Even though up until now alot of MSM news producers have provided free access I don't think that model can last , at least for the reasonable quality news content providers. Afterall we happily paid for newspapers for years so I don't see why we should expect free access to their content.

[Gijoe-]

[Sophocles]

Yes, advertisements in the technical magazines I used to read were good and almost as compelling reading as the articles. I kept many magazines for years because they were a good way of finding out (or remembering) where one could get some of those important little things.

Then came non-informative ads, and the loss of the stores selling those necessary things. I can't remember which came first. But about that time came blister packs, (another red-rag of mine!).

Your idea for on-line advertising is interesting---very interesting. As I "know" modern adverts are only intended to catch my eye and don't contain important (for me) information (in other words: they are poorly targeted), I have learnt to ignore them. I don't run flash or shockwave plugins with my browsers ---- but it's only the work of a few seconds to set it up for an experience if I need to. So I might miss the informative aspect of them. You might need to tell visitors about your old-new style adverts on the front page!

[Gijoe-]

your RC reviews, of all your sites is actually your most promising best returning site after 7am.

we should catch up some time and plan how you can turn it into a mix between web 2.0 site and magazine, and start to capitalize on your existing work there.

I can put a bit of sweat equity in.

Cheers,

[thrashcardiom]

I block ads using a number of methods and will continue to do so. Most ads are so in-your-face that they detract from the page and distract me from reading it. The worst are those flash ads that leap around and jump and move etc. I'm there for the content, not the crap.

However, that said, I don't block google ads. They are small, innocuous and easily ignored. Anything else is fair game.

[BlueShift]

I don't block ads, but I do block flash, that cuts out 80% of the really irritating stuff.

Ignoring ads is a skill that pretty much everyone learns by experience. I can read an entire newspaper, and they will be lucky if I can recall any of the ads in it. My reading eye just tunes them out. Of course, the entire ad agency industry is aware of this and seeks to catch my eye however they can - hence me blocking flash.

As other posters have mentioned, we generally don't mind ad content if it is relevant, up-front, relevant, honest and relevant. Google have spent billions (and earned billions) developing techniques to automatically target ads to eyeballs, and still they have some glaring cockups. Hand picked ads are always going to be better targetted, but the human element makes them that much more expensive.

[Gijoe-]

[edwin]

[BlueShift]

[goldedge]

Hi Bruce, it seems to me that the key is to actually offer the prospective purchaser/viewer some good value/information for their time.
It might be simpler to combine quality content (information) and an offer that provides REAL value to the customer linked to that content
rather than a fee based system for your business's with products or services to sell.
How about supplying your service at no charge but providing an article/advert code eg aardvark1234 etc. The offer code that must be used
to get the best value for the customer,(this must be a competitive offer that meets or similar competitor offers) .

Your renumeration would be based on the sale of goods / products or services linked to the unique offer code.

Ads suck.. valuable information combined with competitive value offers and ease of purchase does not. INMHO

Regards
Michael