TV Commercials Between Web Pages = Bad Idea

How would you feel if a 15 or 30 second commercial popped onto your computer screen while you were navigating between web pages? Without taking any action other than browsing through your favorite web publisher's site, a video ad interrupts your Internet session. Could this really be an avenue that companies want to explore? How can this be looked at as anything other than another way to spam consumers with intrusive advertising?

Against what you would hope to be its managers' better judgement, ShortTail Media is working to develop a new online advertising unit that "interrupts" your movement between web pages. The Company wants to park television style advertisements across content-rich web portals like MSNBC and Weather.com. AdWeek reports that the company’s Digital 30 (D30) is a “deliberately intrusive” ad placement that loads as you browse between web pages.

If that sounds awful to you (and it should) well, too bad. Earlier this year, ShortTail CEO David Payne gave a speech at the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s annual meeting, saying publishers need to be less sensitive to user experiences (though he does promise frequency capping the ads so users don’t get overwhelmed).

In an age of greater consumer involvement in content consumption, I struggle to see how ShortTail, and the companies participating in its beta test, would think that taking advantage of web visitors in this way would lead to a viable business model. It reminds me of digital signage companies who want to place screens wherever people stop, sit, or wait, and build networks made up of 100% advertising content. It is the lowest common denominator within our industry. Consumers deserve our respect. Exploiting them is not the answer.

You can't deny the fact that media companies are struggling to fully harness the revenue potential embedded within the mass of people that surf the Web for hours each day. Media owners can't agree on whether or not the medium should be defined by impressions or click through rates. Beyond banner and display ads, there continues to be debate on the ideal advertising format for the maturing medium.

Network owners want to know what will generate the most revenue without alienating consumers. Advertisers want to know which format will deliver the greatest brand recognition and consumer response (what delivers the best ROI). Sites have experimented with branded media players, clickable objects within videos, overlay text ads, and the stalwart of web video, pre-roll advertising.

Google is struggling to fully monetize YouTube, unable to define the most appropriate advertising vehicle to pair brands with user-generated videos. In the current media environment, displays ads are just not cutting it. It is a well know fact that in the world of social networking users ignore display ads at an alarmingly high rate. This is a major reason some media strategists are pessimistic toward the long-term advertising prospects of social networks.

Media companies walk a tightrope of crafting engaging experiences for consumers while still delivering enough value to advertisers. At the end of the day, without advertising revenue web portals like Hulu would not exist. It's nice to think (imagine, really) that networks produce content purely for our entertainment and enjoyment. In truth, the motors of content creation are driven by advertising revenue.

With the expansion of available content and the emergence of new platforms from which to consume it, the structure of a site's primary advertising unit plays a large role in whether or not a person continues to visit a web destination. From a digital signage perspective, think about what would happen if a person's favorite restaurant installed digital screens everywhere that played a non-stop loop of advertising content (with audio). It's pretty safe to assume that he wouldn't visit the restaurant anymore.

Sphere: Related Content