What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
160 Comments
- inactive, on 03/22/2009, -4/+198AdBlock Plus?
- inactive, on 03/22/2009, -5/+76Written by an academic and IT guy with no advertising or business experience. OK.
Professor of Operations and Information Management.
Advertising is information.
The good professor seems to have forgotten that important fact.
Traditionally, advertising has always been ignored. A 1-2% response to an initiative is considered good.
Sure, we all hate commercials and advertisements, but we do respond to them, like it or not. Not every single time and all the time, but you cannot deny that advertising has an influence.
The Internet is here to stay.
Advertising is here to stay, sure most of it gets ignored, but it has always been that way.
Was he paid to write this for some print journal? Does he consult for some newspaper chain? Is his wife a print journalist?
There must be a reason for an IT guy to suddenly start trumpeting his expertise on advertising. - pagit, on 03/22/2009, -3/+65except for brand recognition, advertising doesn't work as well as the marketing and advertising world would tell you
Consumers do not want to view advertising - RichPowers, on 03/22/2009, -3/+57Heh, Google would go bankrupt tomorrow if everyone used AdBlock Plus.
You can download TV shows in HD sans advertisements (or fast forward through them using your DVR). Who the hell listens to the radio anymore, especially now that you can plug your mp3 player directly into your speaker deck? And of course AdBlock + Noscript makes the internet usable again. Now I just need to eliminate junk mail and billboards :D
Advertisers did this to themselves. Loud commercials? Flashing and beeping banner ads? Huge popups that block half the screen? Eat *****. - j1ggy, on 03/22/2009, -2/+48In time, I'm sure it will somehow be declared illegal and advertisers will begin suing people the same way the RIAA does. Sad but somehow inevitable.
- CSFFlame, on 03/22/2009, -1/+41The more annoying ads get, the more popular it gets.
- StonerThomas, on 03/22/2009, -1/+36Or just blocking people that use adblock from their sites.
- inactive, on 03/22/2009, -0/+33And love those full page popups and bandwidth sucking video adds...
- dazparkour, on 03/22/2009, -0/+32People do trust ads.
Almost everyone I know are less tech savy than me, not a boast, they just do different things. IT is my job. I see a lot of it.
I'm always fixing things for neighbours and family.
I've seen them googling things - they click the ads at the top because they are at the top. They click the ads at the sides because they match what they type exactly.
They click banner ads with iPods flashing (GOD DAMNIT I TOLD YOU TO STOP THAT!)... - inactive, on 03/22/2009, -1/+26And yet his site has advertisements
- Khast, on 03/22/2009, -0/+22Well, AdBlock Plus is doing it's share online.
However, there would be no need for it, if the ads weren't getting more and more obnoxious, and actually trying to push the ads in your face, often with sound or animation that is just so annoying.
Text Ad (AKA Google) okay
Banner Ad (Borderline, depending on the content)
Popup window that comes up screaming "YOU ARE A WINNER" (Reason AdBlock was invented)
Page that has 70% ads and 30% content (Adblock really shrinks these pages down to content only.) - HastyNameChoice, on 03/22/2009, -0/+21You're right that in general people don't like advertising, but you're wrong that it doesn't work. Companies don't tend to spend money for the fun of it. Most people think that they're not affected by advertising, and most people are wrong.
- chriswastaken, on 10/27/2009, -1/+20^^^
That stoner might be on to something!!! - charlietree, on 03/22/2009, -0/+17I think spam is the main reason that Advertising is suffering on the internet. There are too many people scamming other people out there. I think if done right, there should not be a problem advertising on the internet
- bigteebo, on 03/22/2009, -1/+17Last I checked, I surf the web for fun, and don't buy everything I see flashed in front of me.
- themastersb, on 03/22/2009, -0/+14Your penis isn't large enough until you pass out from the loss of blood when having an erection.
- redwallhp, on 03/22/2009, -0/+14You have malware. I fixed a computer recently that had the exact same problem. The malware was replacing common ad networks' ads with their own, and the same ad each time.
The ad would show up on CNN, Ars Technica, and other sites that generally have less offensive ads, so that was a big tip-off that it was hidden malware causing the problem.
Run your antivirus software, then try several antispyware packages, such as Ad-Aware, SpyBot Search And Destroy, etc.. Check your HOSTS file too. If the problem persists, do some Googling. - JYoungest1, on 03/22/2009, -2/+14Tell that ***** to Hulu.com. They have found a gold mine.
Its Google and the likes that are killing internet advertising, I have yet to see a relevant Google hosted AD, with any kind of professionally designed worthwhile. Just dancing people saying some ***** about a credit report.
This recession should be host to a new wave of internet advertising, but very few companies can even get their ***** together. - mrsteveman1, on 03/23/2009, -1/+12No, people do like advertising. What they don't like is being forced to watch irrelevant ***** they have no interest in.
As a sysadmin i'm well aware of how how annoying most internet ads are. But you know what happens when i see an ad that describes something i want or something I'm interested in? More often than not i click it, and more often than not it was something i did not otherwise know about.
So in the respect that advertising is used to let people know about something want, that they otherwise would not have known about, people DO want it. In the respect that idiot advertisers shove crap no one cares about into the browser with flash and annoying sound effects, or waste 15 minutes of a 60 minute long show on TV with pure crap, people don't want it. - scootra, on 03/22/2009, -1/+12agreed. this is a lame article.
- OomBok, on 03/22/2009, -3/+13http://adblockplus.org/en/installation
Problem solved. - Wilddigi, on 03/22/2009, -4/+14Unless the advertisers use their own products, it's all lies
- inactive, on 03/22/2009, -2/+11This is written by an Ops guy, not a marketing person, so take his opinion with a grain of salt. Besides, he specifically mentions selling a subscription to Second Life as a way to make money on the internet, and as modern marketing 101 will tell you, anyone who thinks SL is a good opportunity to market your ***** or even to associate with is a moron.
- A2007HokieAlumn, on 03/23/2009, -0/+9Big business has it all wrong. Online marketing should be an extension of the brand. Many brands think an overly animated flash-based site is the way to attract and retain customers. Instead, the online identity of a company must contribute to the value of the products they sell. For instance, Amazon.com. The value of their brand is based in not only the products they sell, but also their consumer reviews. This increases the value of their brand, and encourages people to purchase products from them. A second example, Coca-Cola. The Coke Rewards program transcends beyond the traditional promotional program. The coke rewards website is an extension of the soft drink brand. The promotions are tied into partner brands as well as philanthropic programs. Finally, @dakdak900 (i know this isn't twitter, but that would be cool), I agree with point #2a: Internet advertising is not evaluated on the same playing field as traditional media, because it can be measured by viewer actions, whereas traditional media cannot.
- MrAnimosity, on 03/22/2009, -0/+9Oh my god, I think it might be working...
Thanks. A lot.
But what guarantee do I have they they won't just come after my family now??? - TheUndertoker, on 03/22/2009, -2/+11I listen to the radio...NPR and ESPN Radio specifically. Radio will never die.
- StonerThomas, on 03/22/2009, -2/+11@Kyrgizion Can't block you on the first hit, but after it's clear you don't process any javascript or download any files from anything in a folder called /ads/, someone can make a pretty good bet you're running adblock.
It'd only require a bit of PHP to keep track. - gpmidi, on 03/23/2009, -0/+8Hand Gun, apply directly to forehead.
- MrAnimosity, on 03/22/2009, -1/+9That's not really stopping those "Get a bigger penis!" adds from following me through almost EVERY SITE I VISIT. Its driving me nuts... And its the SAME ***** ADD each time! My god, I really feel like I'm being sexually harassed here. I mean if this was a salesman doing this exact same thing I could probably have him arrested... But Noooo... Who stops Vimax from stalking me HUH? My life is a wreck now...
My penis is just fine! Please go away!!! - one1plus1one, on 03/23/2009, -0/+8Advertising works great with me!
But only when it features babes in miniskirts and bras that are making out with each other.
That's the problem with advertising these days: not enough of that: hot women making out. - desertDenizen, on 03/23/2009, -0/+8I attended Wharton and Clemens is a world-class intellectual and lecturer, extremely popular with the always-pragmatic MBAs. Don't let the IT part fool you; he teaches at Wharton and his focus is on business.
That said, I completely reject most of his conclusions. His "as general as he could make it" definition of advertising is waaay too specific, for instance. He also clearly knows nothing about social media marketing, which is push-driven, not pull (you want people to talk about you, not ask). His examples of location-based advertising are so old it was painful to read (as though hotels and restaurants are the only location-based businesses in the world, and everyone eats out every night... in the suburbs). In fact, if I were not so ***** busy on this Sunday evening (even as I type this) needing to get back to work helping my paying clients manage their online media budgets and social media marketing strategies, then I would spend an hour composing a point-by-point rebuttal. Alas, I'm a practitioner and not an academic.
Finally, yes, he is an academic, which if you know anything about academia, then you know he needs no ulterior motive to trumpet anything remotely iconoclastic... that's what research profs try to look for every day, so call it an occupational hazard, but it's off base to be so cynical (let alone paranoid) about his motives. - inactive, on 03/22/2009, -1/+9and you are basing that on WAHT? You see...companies hire people FAR smarter than you. And those smart people use acutal FACTS that show how much sales increase depending on advertising. If the profits from those extra sales didn't increase by more than the cost ofhte advertising, they would not do it.
But please...feel free to make statements based on your GUESSES! There is no better source than a digger's hunch. - enantiodromia, on 03/23/2009, -0/+8online advertising will not go away, it will evolve.
if 90% of the ads you were served were about things you actually wanted and cared about, when you were actually in market, why would you not want that?
keyword advertising is probably on its way out for the most part, but it always play some role in ad selection. the real revolution is in non-obtrusive behavioral ad selection.
btw, TechCrunch seems to like online ads: http://www.techcrunch.com/advertise/ - inactive, on 03/22/2009, -0/+8I discovered Pandora through an internet ad and now use it daily.
If ads are not working for you, its might be your product, not the ad. - dakdak900, on 03/23/2009, -0/+8The reasons internet advertising is failing:
1) everything being advertised sucks, proactive, newsweek, weightloss? I wouldn't buy this based on TV ads so why would I buy it form internet ads
2a) internet advertising revenues are (generally) directly linked to viewers actions. TV does ad revenue does not depend on you buying the product or even being in the room when the ad airs, this allows media companies to charge for what ends up being nothing, if digg charged for every time a proactive ad loaded instead of each click it generated then digg would be rolling in dough
2b) sales based vs branding based revenue. We have to see the ads but we don't have to make the decision while we're at the computer. Advertisers should try and program us to make future buying decisions based on what we see online not immediate buying decisions. Build a brand like (RED) via online ads stating what great things they support then sell (RED) endorsements for products to be sold in stores
3) internet advertising is still in its infancy. It took TV advertising decades to reach the level of deceptive effectiveness it has achieved, it will take internet advertising a while as well but nobody is trying to think of new ways to innovate in this new medium
NEVER buy into the BS that we have to pay for content on the internet, the point of the internet is open access to accurate information, not monetization of everything we see - cubicledrone, on 03/22/2009, -2/+9Funny how the only advertising that seems to be mentioned in the article is Google. Car commercials that are direct copies of ads that ran in the 1960s during reruns of 77 Sunset Strip are the kinds of ads that don't work. Here's a quick summary of where we are in 2009:
1. Sitcoms are stupid, and nobody thinks they are funny.
2. Nobody gives a ***** what the official car is.
3. Stupid me too joke/Slogan/Logo commercials are tuned out by everyone on the planet 100% of the time. No exceptions.
4. "Conversation between two fake people on the radio" ads are tuned out by everyone on the planet 100% of the time. No exceptions.
There. I just saved your ad deparment a millyunz dollarz. Have a nice day. - irishjays, on 03/23/2009, -0/+7Head on, apply directly to the forehead.
- jjheath, on 03/22/2009, -1/+8Frankly I think advertising works just fine and will continue to do so. The person that wrote this is retarded. Go be involved with an internet lead gen service. It's ludicrous how many people click the ads! His opinion has no basis in reality.
- MtheoryX, on 03/23/2009, -0/+6"NEVER buy into the BS that we have to pay for content on the internet"
1.) Someone spends time producing said content
2.) There are hard infrastructure costs (domains, sites, bandwidth)
But those should be paid for... by the person doing the work to make the content? And all for free?
Open access to information does not necessarily mean no-cost access to all information. Nor is it mandated by law that a content provider should work for free, and pay the costs of the visiting public to consume said content. - robusto, on 03/22/2009, -0/+6haha loved the alternative monetization ideas. completely worthless for most sites. watch all of our favorite sites disappear. digg is having their own problems with monetization so we're glad they'll operate pro-bono or they start charging "per digg". /joke
ads don't target the savvy; they use flashing gifs, boobs, and little games because that's what the bottom of the bell curve will be entranced by. like someone else up there said, all you need is 2%. they're still using IE6 and an out of date norton antivirus.
....BUY ACAI BERRY JUICE AND LOSE WEIGHT LIKE MEEELOLZ - MrAnimosity, on 03/22/2009, -0/+6Well thanks for the advise. I suppose knowing is half the battle.
- Elliuotatar, on 03/22/2009, -0/+6I had to stop running Google ads for my product on all but one website because Google's keyword pricing is screwy. Obscure keywords which should only trigger for people looking for products like mine were much more expensive than very common keywords that recieved tens of thousands of hits. As a result, it was costing me 100% of my profits from the ads, to run the ads in the first place.
For a while, Google had a new ad setup where you could pay only for those hits that resulted in some event, in my case, a sale. That was great because I could make sure that exactly 50% of my revenue was going back into advertising, and no more. Sales were pretty good for a while too. But then the decided that that method of advertising wasn't profitable enough for them and shut it down.
So now, instead of getting X number of dollars from me for all those ads, they get 0 because they refuse to sell the ads for any less, even though they aren't actually worth anything near what they're trying to charge. $1 per hit on a keyword is absolutely insane. As it is, I had to double the price of my product just to make it financially viable to run ads. - rd1010, on 03/22/2009, -2/+8Stupid article.. internet advertising is a very young field, it will take time until it evolves into something successful, we are still stuck with a lot of sites with tired, outdated user interfaces (Digg is no exception to this), also its too broad of a field to say its failing.. surely there are companies who are using internet advertising successfully.. you have to target niche markets.. of course the days of mainstream ads targeted at "everyone" are going out the window but for smaller companies the internet allows them to be much more cost effective in reaching their audiences and not paying for wasted "eyeballs", it sounds like the writer is just some hack for big business.
- Bamboolemur, on 03/23/2009, -1/+6Maybe this will help drive costs for advertisers down some. I really don't feel like paying $15 per click for a keyword.
Bastards. - HastyNameChoice, on 03/23/2009, -0/+5Advertising won't die, but old school agencies and thought will. Advertising needs to become more engaging and less annoying to survive in a truly competitive market where ppl aren't forced to watch.
- mooninite, on 03/23/2009, -3/+8@Thomas, then Adblock Plus will change to download the files and not display them. I guess your brain was too fried to think of that one, or will you send me a "stoner.org" link to disprove me.
- irishjays, on 03/23/2009, -0/+5I was a outdoor ad salesman for years, I sold traditional billboard media. If done right, it's both un-intrusive and hard to ignore. The difference is a billboard creates trust, online takes it away. Many of my local clients bought billboards just to let clients know that they were still there and still successful enough to afford a billboard. Online though, ad-words and sponsored listings are broad, cheap and unreliable. People like us don't ever bother clicking the toshiba ad on the right of this page (that I happen to notice simply to type this sentence). If they are on the net looking for a computer, they aren't looking for a computer on digg. Unless they google, "best new laptops site:digg.com" to see if the results provide any insight to the products they are curious in.
Just trying to relate it to what I know:
Imagine if you saw a billboard every 20 yards. (some places come close to this). They would be annoying and cheap, you wouldn't need to wait a year to get on one, you wouldn't need to pay very much, therefore, you would have advertisers like Joe's Hourly Hotel, and LaundOmat. Places that you don't respect, and you know it because you've seen these places. The internet lacks, high profile advertising, it's like putting the amount of outdoor ads of Times Square, at a Jets game. No one goes to the jets game to shop and hang out, they go there to watch a jets game. Your ads will be ignored. Now put one ad before the replay on the megavision at a jets game, high profile, frequency. Put one ad before you're able to read the above article, cheesy, intrusive. Why? You had to pay for the jets ticket, and people are still showing ads, you didn't have to pay for the web article, and you get pissed that you have to see a sponsor. It all has to do with the price. People just respect the guys on the jumbotron, because they paid $14,000 to be on it. - cubicledrone, on 03/22/2009, -1/+6"few companies seem not to be able to get anything right."
Because middle management doesn't listen to the people who know how to fix it.
If something is wrong in a company, and you guess that it is middle management's fault, you will be right 100% of the time. - StonerThomas, on 03/23/2009, -1/+6@mooninite: There's a lot more you can do. I'm not going to try and post a technical doc or code here.
But it's really not brain surgery. Everything from ajax requests to detecting the image width/visibility. Bot trapping(which is essentially all it'd be; just looking for people that acted like bots within the ads folder) isn't brain surgery. Just would require a bit of testing. Or a bit of money. Whichever. -
Show 51 - 100 of 161 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is