>>"Advertising's not in a bubble..." Nothing in your essay has anything to do with advertising not being a bubble. Sure, it depends on your definition of "bubb

>>"Advertising's not in a bubble..." Nothing in your essay has anything to do with advertising not being a bubble. Sure, it depends on your definition of "bubble," but in the sense that I imagine most people understand it (over-hyped marketplaces leading to inflated, unsustainable valuations), you didn't refute nor address the concept at all. In fact, a lot of your post could be used to support jerf's point. The methodologies that you're saying are worthless actually have huge advertising budgets behind them. Inflated value over true, intrinsic value = bubble. Also, this statement: >> "One future of advertising looks like the Deck Network, where people so trust the advertisers that they'll click on the ads willingly." This goes without saying, but click's aren't the intrinsic value of ads. There has to be a transaction at some point for the value to be justified from the advertisers standpoint. It's actually pretty ironic that in your shining example about advertising's golden future, you stop short of the true value of advertising. >>"The real bubble is: stop treating people like products, start treating them like people." ?