From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 16:39:08 +0800
To: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: Re: Advertising Creepiness
In-Reply-To: <v03130303b26af796aaf9@[209.66.101.228]>
Message-ID: <199811080818.AAA05625@netcom13.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



I like the wired.com site and hit it almost daily. I consider
it one of the highest quality sites on the net, and their
system of linking to other daily articles on other sites
I really like. (wish they would summarize their articles
better though before you click through-- something that
they have resisted for a long time but for what reason
I have no idea)
I do look at banner ads but rarely click on them.

regrding copyright issues on the web, there is an
interesting article in an old CUD called "the cyberspatial
copyright" that captures my own thinking on the subject,
for anyone with the lack of laziness to seek it out <g>

it would have been nice if Declan identified his affiliation
with Wired in his complaint.. 

a nice post TCM, you have written on the idea of
the worthlessness of banner ads long ago. but you've
been way wrong too (er, ah, more diplmatically, "off")
based on your old posts. I recall a post, I think, in which
you predicted that ads would eventually be thrown 
away on the net after proven worthless.  your current
msg contains a similar theme.

clearly
the absolute opposite has happened. ads are successfully
funding the net and entire new cool and innovative
startups such as "doubleclick" etc. that are in many
ways "virtual businesses" that run on information flow.
3rd wave, alvin toffler, is definitely HERE.

TCM, you appear never to have worked in advertising.
advertisers do not put out ads so that every person
who reads it buys the product or clicks on the ad.
they are satisfied with 1/100 "click thrus", and that's
exactly what they get. online advertising is very,very
cost effective if done properly. it can really be
"microtargeted" in a way existing advertising isn't.

so TCM, you are confusing two issues. advertising in
general is annoying, ubiquitous, in-your-face in our
culture. some estimates are that 1000+ ads are seen daily
by each individual when you look at tv, magazine, outdoor,
etc.   online advertising shares all these traits. 

however, online advertising does not have to be a miracle cure.
it only has to be as good (but idealy better) 
than *existing* advertising systems
in use. and they are very inefficient and wasteful at times
if you are aware of that industry. online advertising is
downright streamlined compared to other forms that have
preceded it.

consider the breakthrough of geocities in which entire free
*personal* (not corporate!!)
web sites are supported by advertising solely!! geocities is
a small cyberspace miracle unappreciated by many. they are growing
insanely and their quality is getting to be really top notch.

personally
I think online advertsiing is really cool because it is funding
the civilization of cyberspace. it's annoying and tacky and
in-your-face, but it pays the bills, and is doing more so
every day. it will get less obnoxious over time in some ways
as you begin to run into only the ads that interest you based
on "microtargeting" so to speak. 

you buy stuff, right TCM?
well online ads may get to the point where you stop complaining
and find them a very valuable resource to make your buying
decisions--even objectively (for example an ad could link
to an objective 3rd part like "consumer reports"). 
I think this day is not too far off. in many ways it is already
here.