3 ms·
Hmm I think you've missed my point (or perhaps my point was poorly stated). The point is that serving up sidebar/header/pop-up ads is no longer effective becau
by omginternets 10y ago
Hmm I think you've missed my point (or perhaps my point was poorly stated).
The point is that serving up sidebar/header/pop-up ads is no longer effective because these forms of advertising are intrusive and subject to blocking.
What seems to be effective is the "sponsored content" or "native advertising" model whereby ads are served in a form that mimics desirable content. The crucial point here is that the advertisement is useful and relevant to the consumer, and so is not interpreted as an interruption or distraction. Moreover, these ads don't tend to carry malware because they're media produced by the media company in question, often hosted on the same domain.
This is a model that presently works. My point is that ad-blockers block obsolete ads, whose monetization is increasingly malware-driven, precisely because the content is no longer relevant to consumers.
- pmontra 10y agoOk, I got it now. Sponsored content has been done on the web, explicitly or not. I agree that it is less annoying than ads. It probably doesn't scale as well because it must be customized for every site. Current ads are the same for everybody.
- madeofpalk 10y agoThis is it. Buzzfeed can afford to not use display advertising and instead use native advertising for all their revenue, but because they have massive sales and advertorial teams. But because everyone feels entitled they have a unique story to tell and want to start up their own media property, we have ad networks they can use to make money to try and fund it.
- omginternets 10y agoI'd argue that it scales well, albeit not as well. Articles, for instance, don't take much effort or money to produce. The trick is to segment your population into clusters and write articles targeting relevant clusters. Write once; serve many times.