Opinion: Victor Loh holds forth on the direction advertising is taking and has some advice for corporations that want your attention, and dollars.
The broadcast of the
Super Bowl is one of the few programs in which the ads get at least as much attention as the actual content. And now, you can even visit a number of websites dedicated to streaming just the commercials so that you can watch them without any of that bothersome pigskin tossing. The rest of the year, most of us try our best to watch as few ads as possible.
The tech savvy have plenty of tools at their disposal to this end, some more legitimate than others. There's a new American pastime—fast forwarding through commercials on TiVo or an HTPC. For internet browsing, Firefox has done away with annoyances like popups and "interstitial" ads. The AdBlock extension can help you fine-tune your ad-free browsing even further. Instant messenger ads from AIM and Yahoo! get the boot with alternatives like Gaim and Trillian. Ad-free content for pay is expanding thanks to services like iTunes and XM Radio. And the trusty P2P file sharing network does its part.
The upside to all these new technologies is greater choice and convenience—we can now access ad-free content how and when we want it. But there's a downside too: Corporate advertising isn't going to just wave the white flag and disappear.
If anything, it's getting more resilient and more pervasive. Every traditional advertising channel we circumvent through technology will inevitably be replaced by something else, as long as companies have goods and services to sell and we have money to spend. The arms race between advertisers and consumers will continue to escalate unless the advertisers figure out what actually works and start doing it. My hope is that the people trying to sell us stuff will see that trying to outdo the technology or the geeks who make the technology simply won't work.
Now, I should clarify that advertising isn't a Bad Thing per se. Corporations rely on advertising to sell their products and services, and as long as they're obeying the law and paying their taxes, they should certainly be allowed to do so to the best of their ability. But there are different kinds of advertising, and certain types are more effective than others—especially when you're trying to appeal to techies.
Let's call these carrot and stick ads. Carrot ads are effective because they're successful at creating awareness or buzz for a particular company, product, or service. They usually do so by providing some combination of information and entertainment that makes what they're selling appealing to you. The important point is that they do so without annoying or infuriating us in the process. Last Sunday's Superbowl ads were pretty effective at getting their message across to a large audience, and a lot of people went online to watch them again. Why can't they replicate this formula and come up with advertising that isn't annoying, invasive, or obnoxious?
Enter stick ads. These are the spam, spyware, popups, and other unsavory elements that make life more miserable than it has to be. Unfortunately, their message does stick—sometimes in a bad way. It says: "We don't really care about you, just hand over the money." And so we'll continue to filter out the unnecessary noise from advertisers with better hardware and software, lawyers, and our wallets.
For more clarification, let's look at a prime example of what not to do. Continued...
Recently, news stories from various websites have accused Nvidia and Arbuthnot Entertainment Group (AEG) of using deceptive "viral marketing" strategies to reach users of popular computer hardware sites. AEG allegedly hired individuals and instructed them to create "personas" on various website forums. Using these identities, the employees posed as normal forum members and frequently posted messages in an attempt to gain the trust of their online communities. Later, they capitalized on this rapport by spreading pro-Nvidia marketing messages disguised as friendly advice to unsuspecting fellow users. They did not disclose their affiliation with Nvidia or AEG to other members.
So far, the truth of these claims has yet to be verified. But I think the general response is more telling: We aren't all that surprised by this revelation. Let me clarify by stating: If you're a company that's either considering or currently employing these strategies, DON'T. We're going to find out, and we won't be very happy with you when we do.
If you want an example to follow, take a look at Apple's marketing department. Start a cult if you must. Make life without an iPod unbearable. Heck, bombard the world with black silhouettes donning white earbuds. But don't do something that's going to make us feel creepy, deceived, duped, or violated. Google's stumbled onto a happy medium with their unobtrustive text ads. And they're not just successful because they're low key. Targeted ads make for better ads. That's not to say they didn't skate thin ice with their Gmail scanning ideas. But Gmail has apparently prevailed despite the skepticism and suspicion, notwithstanding Loyd Case's labeling it as a failed tech trend.
More carrots and fewer sticks will go a long way toward winning the hearts and minds of a growing class of influential and empowered geek consumers. The solution to ending this arms race is détente—peaceful and mutually beneficial coexistence among advertisers and consumers. Forward-thinking corporations that "get it" will succeed. The rest will find themselves caught in a conflict against their own customers that can't be won.
Online Media 
