4 ms·

I'm a Millenial and I have a hard time believing advertisers have gotten a positive return from what they've spent advertising to adult me. Clicking on an ad is

I'm a Millenial and I have a hard time believing advertisers have gotten a positive return from what they've spent advertising to adult me. Clicking on an ad is always unintentional. Pop-ups are closed immediately and automatically, as are auto-playing videos. Other ads are scrolled past as quickly as possible to remove them from my field of view. And all this is when I don't have an ad blocker running. TV is almost unwatchable now because of ads. I can tolerate them for an hour or so, but past this I get anxiety and then frustration from seeing them if they aren't muted. At some point I begin to feel irrational hostility to the brands on TV. I struggle to remember the last time I saw an ad that triggered real curiosity or a desire to purchase something. Usually I'll hear about things I want from personal channels, by seeking them out myself, or from mailing lists I've explicitly signed up for. Of course, maybe I'm being influenced in ways I don't realize or understand. But I kind of doubt the effect is very large. I compare products on ingredients, price, utility, etc. and make a decision from there. There are a handful of brands which have intrinsic value to me, but it's because of good experiences and recommendations from people I trust, not ads. I don't think I'm atypical for my demographic, and there seem to be others who concur [0] [1]. Whether it's the majority, I'm not sure, but a sizable chunk seem to have become averse/resistant to traditional in-your-face, attention monopolizing ads. Influencers, sponsored content, and product placement may have better reach in the near future among these people. There's also IoT purchasing interfaces like Amazon Echo and Google Home which stand to be a powerful gatekeeper to products. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out and whether the marginal influence of an ad increases or decreases over time as AI, surveillance, and micro-targeting improve and as society and culture respond. [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2015/04/28/research-shows-millennials-dont-respond-to-ads/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2015/04/28/researc... [1] http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Millennials-really-hate-advertising-study-finds-7393642.php http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Millennials-really-ha...

jacobush 9y ago
It may be that ads fail in the moment, the click-me-now-sense. But they may still work in the old-fashioned "strong signal way", i.e. you notice that a brand is strong (can pay for a lot advertising) and you remain aware of the brand. The "strong signal" message is diluted by ultra-targeted-ads, but you will still be aware of the product. Whether it still is a net gain in your (and similar targets) case, maybe no one knows.
- tzakrajs 9y ago
  For bigger brands, I am sure advertisers can use the audiences browsing patterns to predict their buying patterns and so therefore which ads to show them. An inversion of the basic advertising model.
- ramblenode 9y ago
  > But they may still work in the old-fashioned "strong signal way" This is a good point and does affect me to varying extent. I would say strong signaling is the least effective for certain food items, mouthwash, toothpaste, vitamins, etc. where the makeup and price of the item is simple and comparable between brand names and off-brands. Where there are sufficient trustworthy reviews of items, it is also less effective. When it's something I need quickly or when the tolerance for failure is low, I'm much more likely to default to a peacock type of product that's established itself.
  - jacobush 9y ago
    is that what you are aware of? I suspect a lot of us also choose the strongly signalled product also for mundane products.
Klathmon 9y ago
You mention that you hear about most things through social channels. What are the chances those channels found out about those products through ads? I don't necessarily see ads as a bad thing. As a consumer, I want to know if there is something that can improve my life or that I want. Once I canceled cable in my house, I found I stopped going to movies. This was actually a sad realization as I wanted to see a lot of them in theaters, but missed that window by quite a lot because I had literally no idea they were out. As a creator, obviously ads are a fantastic way to get your product or service out there and get the ball rolling. I don't want ads to be disruptive, but I also don't want them to be ignored completely. Finding that line is the hard part, and I'm hoping it's possible.
- ramblenode 9y ago
  > You mention that you hear about most things through social channels. What are the chances those channels found out about those products through ads? I hadn't considered a sort of diffusion process for ad reach, and it's an intriguing point. I can't recall a specific instance of this, although I would actually be surprised if it hasn't happened. My immediate social circle of friends and colleagues is similar to me, but even several degrees of separation out I could see a relevant product percolating through my extended network and reaching me by word of mouth. > I don't necessarily see ads as a bad thing I don't view them as inherently bad in theory, but my experience is almost never positive. Mass market ads feel like a drain on my time and attention without benefit. On the other hand, targeted and relevant ads will be paid for with my personal data, which carries risk to my privacy. Neither side of that trade-off is attractive. The time I do appreciate ads is when I'm shopping or getting offers from a merchant I've done business with, which of course excludes a large number of offerings I would and wouldn't be interested in.
gcb0 9y ago
you despise tv ads and banners the same way a 80s kid mocked radio ads but was raised by tv ads, and a 90s kid used kazaa to get mp3 and never even saw a radio ad but was raised on banner ads and email spam. today you ignore banners, probably never saw a tv ad, but is raised on disney movies selling a franchise and consume social feed that tell you about all the products that ended up in your home

jacobush 9y ago

It may be that ads fail in the moment, the click-me-now-sense. But they may still work in the old-fashioned "strong signal way", i.e. you notice that a brand is strong (can pay for a lot advertising) and you remain aware of the brand. The "strong signal" message is diluted by ultra-targeted-ads, but you will still be aware of the product. Whether it still is a net gain in your (and similar targets) case, maybe no one knows.

tzakrajs 9y ago
For bigger brands, I am sure advertisers can use the audiences browsing patterns to predict their buying patterns and so therefore which ads to show them. An inversion of the basic advertising model.
ramblenode 9y ago
> But they may still work in the old-fashioned "strong signal way" This is a good point and does affect me to varying extent. I would say strong signaling is the least effective for certain food items, mouthwash, toothpaste, vitamins, etc. where the makeup and price of the item is simple and comparable between brand names and off-brands. Where there are sufficient trustworthy reviews of items, it is also less effective. When it's something I need quickly or when the tolerance for failure is low, I'm much more likely to default to a peacock type of product that's established itself.
- jacobush 9y ago
  is that what you are aware of? I suspect a lot of us also choose the strongly signalled product also for mundane products.

Klathmon 9y ago

You mention that you hear about most things through social channels. What are the chances those channels found out about those products through ads? I don't necessarily see ads as a bad thing. As a consumer, I want to know if there is something that can improve my life or that I want. Once I canceled cable in my house, I found I stopped going to movies. This was actually a sad realization as I wanted to see a lot of them in theaters, but missed that window by quite a lot because I had literally no idea they were out. As a creator, obviously ads are a fantastic way to get your product or service out there and get the ball rolling. I don't want ads to be disruptive, but I also don't want them to be ignored completely. Finding that line is the hard part, and I'm hoping it's possible.

ramblenode 9y ago
> You mention that you hear about most things through social channels. What are the chances those channels found out about those products through ads? I hadn't considered a sort of diffusion process for ad reach, and it's an intriguing point. I can't recall a specific instance of this, although I would actually be surprised if it hasn't happened. My immediate social circle of friends and colleagues is similar to me, but even several degrees of separation out I could see a relevant product percolating through my extended network and reaching me by word of mouth. > I don't necessarily see ads as a bad thing I don't view them as inherently bad in theory, but my experience is almost never positive. Mass market ads feel like a drain on my time and attention without benefit. On the other hand, targeted and relevant ads will be paid for with my personal data, which carries risk to my privacy. Neither side of that trade-off is attractive. The time I do appreciate ads is when I'm shopping or getting offers from a merchant I've done business with, which of course excludes a large number of offerings I would and wouldn't be interested in.

gcb0 9y ago

you despise tv ads and banners the same way a 80s kid mocked radio ads but was raised by tv ads, and a 90s kid used kazaa to get mp3 and never even saw a radio ad but was raised on banner ads and email spam. today you ignore banners, probably never saw a tv ad, but is raised on disney movies selling a franchise and consume social feed that tell you about all the products that ended up in your home