5 ms·

Only if they are done intrusively. Nobody cares about the ads on CrossMe, for example...but Jewels Jungle, the interstitials may aggravate a small number.

ergothus 8y ago
I have troubles with the concept of a "non-intrusive" ad - If you don't notice it to any degree, it's not doing its job, and if you DO notice it to any degree, it's intrusive and disruptive (to a matching degree) I think you mean "Nobody cares ENOUGH" rather than "Nobody cares", and that's a big distinction.
- DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
  Actually, I'd have different concerns about ads that I didn't consciously notice.
  - ergothus 8y ago
    Good point - while I'd still lump that in as "disruptive", it's more accurate to be a bit more granular. One of the things that I think got completely overlooked in the recent Cambridge Analytica (and related) scandal was the idea that microtargeting actually WORKED to some degree. (Granted, it's easy to be manipulative when you aren't accountable for anything, but still - the idea went from vague promise to actual implementation). We've paid attention to the CONSCIOUS effects of those ads, but not so much to the subconscious ones. Even the ads that I dismiss as ridiculous are affecting my impressions of certain groups, and when the ads are primarily there to increase division, dismissing them still has the same result.
    - lapnitnelav 8y ago
      Yeah, it has more power than one can think. Every-time I go for groceries in one of the Costco equivalent here, they have an alley to funnel you into the self-service machines area. This path has on both sides sweets and at the very end the bakery stuff before you are free to do your checkout. Every single time, despite being well aware of the trap, I can't help but grab either some muffins or cookies.
- eli 8y ago
  I think "intrusiveness" is pretty subjective and has a lot to do with the content of the ad. If HN ran native ads for reverse mortgage companies instead of job ads for YC startups you'd feel very different about them even though the format is the same.
- stevenwliao 8y ago
  Intrusiveness depends on the ad's relevance and value: An ad for a product you don't care about is disruptive. A 30% off promotion for a rarely discounted product you've wanted for a few years is amazing.
  - ergothus 8y ago
    In that case it is intrusive...but relevant and welcome. Not all intrusions are unwelcome, but they remain intrusions.
    - ryandrake 8y ago
      A targeted ad is intrusive, but in a different way. When I see an add that is eerily relevant to me, I know it was served to me because of data surreptitiously collected about me. That is no less intrusive. Honestly, I find irrelevant, non-targeted ads more acceptable because I am more confident that the advertiser has not intruded on me personally to serve it!
- dbcurtis 8y ago
  You may have a point. Maybe we need to draw a distinction between "non-intrusive" and "non-distracting". Ads should not move, period. No animated gif's, no video. And for $DIETY's sake, no audio. NONE. No audio. EVER. Slicing up the reading in the middle. Covering with spashes, etc. I just close the tab. But a non-distracting static ad? It is easy to ignore if I don't care, but if, in fact, it is something I care about I will see it. Ads that relate to my needs at work or to my hobbies will likely get clicked on. Non-distracting will keep me from closing the website, relevant and timely will get me to click on the ad. The human mind is funny that way. A non-intrusive, non-distracting ad for, say, carpet, I likely won't even notice. But display a non-intrusive, non-distracting ad of exactly the same size for a piece of shiny, new, ham radio gear... it will get noticed. It might even get me to think about my credit card limit. Basic psycho-perception at work.
  - kaybe 8y ago
    Some ads are intrusive in the way that they highjack my thought processes. I'm reading about hard-drives, I don't want to think about science fiction right now, and vice versa. So unobtrusive also means matching the content in spirit. (I might be fine with related tech, for example.) At that point there shouldn't even be any point in user preference tracking any more. I even click these ads on occasion if they seem trustworthy (another important point - there is still too many 'You won a car!'/'Lose weight with one simple trick!'/'Doctors hate him!' kind of ads).
- reallydude 8y ago
  > If you don't notice it to any degree, it's not doing its job That's a subjective statement. The giant billboards of pepsi with a celebrity doesn't register as an Ad as much as a recognition of someone of interest with a subliminal associative positive reinforcement of a brand. Nobody cares about what Matthew McConaughey thinks about cars, but everyone knows he's associated with a specific brand. Ewan McGregor, in contrast, is quite the motorcycle aficionado (https://moneyinc.com/five-celebrities-love-motorcycles/ https://moneyinc.com/five-celebrities-love-motorcycles/).
  - AdsAreLazy 8y ago
    Similarly, the toxicity of ads in your daily life is nearly possible to perceive without completely disconnecting from the internet, cities, tv, etc.
- ContentTho 8y ago
  Where did this myth that if we don’t process things consciously we are not impacted? There is no such thing as a reasonable ad, except a person to person recommendation where no money changes hands.

ergothus 8y ago

I have troubles with the concept of a "non-intrusive" ad - If you don't notice it to any degree, it's not doing its job, and if you DO notice it to any degree, it's intrusive and disruptive (to a matching degree) I think you mean "Nobody cares ENOUGH" rather than "Nobody cares", and that's a big distinction.

DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
Actually, I'd have different concerns about ads that I didn't consciously notice.
- ergothus 8y ago
  Good point - while I'd still lump that in as "disruptive", it's more accurate to be a bit more granular. One of the things that I think got completely overlooked in the recent Cambridge Analytica (and related) scandal was the idea that microtargeting actually WORKED to some degree. (Granted, it's easy to be manipulative when you aren't accountable for anything, but still - the idea went from vague promise to actual implementation). We've paid attention to the CONSCIOUS effects of those ads, but not so much to the subconscious ones. Even the ads that I dismiss as ridiculous are affecting my impressions of certain groups, and when the ads are primarily there to increase division, dismissing them still has the same result.
  - lapnitnelav 8y ago
    Yeah, it has more power than one can think. Every-time I go for groceries in one of the Costco equivalent here, they have an alley to funnel you into the self-service machines area. This path has on both sides sweets and at the very end the bakery stuff before you are free to do your checkout. Every single time, despite being well aware of the trap, I can't help but grab either some muffins or cookies.
eli 8y ago
I think "intrusiveness" is pretty subjective and has a lot to do with the content of the ad. If HN ran native ads for reverse mortgage companies instead of job ads for YC startups you'd feel very different about them even though the format is the same.
stevenwliao 8y ago
Intrusiveness depends on the ad's relevance and value: An ad for a product you don't care about is disruptive. A 30% off promotion for a rarely discounted product you've wanted for a few years is amazing.
- ergothus 8y ago
  In that case it is intrusive...but relevant and welcome. Not all intrusions are unwelcome, but they remain intrusions.
  - ryandrake 8y ago
    A targeted ad is intrusive, but in a different way. When I see an add that is eerily relevant to me, I know it was served to me because of data surreptitiously collected about me. That is no less intrusive. Honestly, I find irrelevant, non-targeted ads more acceptable because I am more confident that the advertiser has not intruded on me personally to serve it!
dbcurtis 8y ago
You may have a point. Maybe we need to draw a distinction between "non-intrusive" and "non-distracting". Ads should not move, period. No animated gif's, no video. And for $DIETY's sake, no audio. NONE. No audio. EVER. Slicing up the reading in the middle. Covering with spashes, etc. I just close the tab. But a non-distracting static ad? It is easy to ignore if I don't care, but if, in fact, it is something I care about I will see it. Ads that relate to my needs at work or to my hobbies will likely get clicked on. Non-distracting will keep me from closing the website, relevant and timely will get me to click on the ad. The human mind is funny that way. A non-intrusive, non-distracting ad for, say, carpet, I likely won't even notice. But display a non-intrusive, non-distracting ad of exactly the same size for a piece of shiny, new, ham radio gear... it will get noticed. It might even get me to think about my credit card limit. Basic psycho-perception at work.
- kaybe 8y ago
  Some ads are intrusive in the way that they highjack my thought processes. I'm reading about hard-drives, I don't want to think about science fiction right now, and vice versa. So unobtrusive also means matching the content in spirit. (I might be fine with related tech, for example.) At that point there shouldn't even be any point in user preference tracking any more. I even click these ads on occasion if they seem trustworthy (another important point - there is still too many 'You won a car!'/'Lose weight with one simple trick!'/'Doctors hate him!' kind of ads).
reallydude 8y ago
> If you don't notice it to any degree, it's not doing its job That's a subjective statement. The giant billboards of pepsi with a celebrity doesn't register as an Ad as much as a recognition of someone of interest with a subliminal associative positive reinforcement of a brand. Nobody cares about what Matthew McConaughey thinks about cars, but everyone knows he's associated with a specific brand. Ewan McGregor, in contrast, is quite the motorcycle aficionado (https://moneyinc.com/five-celebrities-love-motorcycles/ https://moneyinc.com/five-celebrities-love-motorcycles/).
- AdsAreLazy 8y ago
  Similarly, the toxicity of ads in your daily life is nearly possible to perceive without completely disconnecting from the internet, cities, tv, etc.
ContentTho 8y ago
Where did this myth that if we don’t process things consciously we are not impacted? There is no such thing as a reasonable ad, except a person to person recommendation where no money changes hands.