DescentBB

I'm ok with hulu's commercials, because I'm expecting commerical break in shows I watch. But when I watch a youtube clip, the last thing I'm expecting is a commercial break; I don't think those types of ads will ever sit comfortably next to short clips that are sometimes just as long as the desired clip. Even the snipes, at the bottom of the screen, don't always work with the kind of content Youtube users post.

This idea works, because the Youtube channel operator, for lack of a better word, would be able to decide where the ads go within their video, so the ads are less intrusive. That's awesome! It's better for Youtube, because people won't be fighting to get around their ads and better for the channel operators, because they won't have their videos maimed by ads. The only reason I'm mentioning Youtube is because I love Youtube and hate their advertising attempts.

Just to be clear: In contrast, I'm fine with longer commercial breaks on Hulu, because that method of advertising works for the type of content they use. Youtube doesn't really have pretty way to advertise and it can't always do what Hulu does, especially with its short clips, unless they use the method linked above.

I'm impressed by the technology, but no so much impressed by the idea. I've worked in Advertising for 15 years and in buying/selling Entertainment content for 3 years. This technology in my opinion serves neither the advertiser, the content owner, the media or the advertising client particularly well.

Subliminal advertising doesn't work - it's a myth. Active, willing participation between the advertiser's brand and the target audience is the ultimate goal. This technology assumes that there all ad impressions are created equal - and they most definitely are not. There is no engagement with the advertisement's brand, nor any guarantee of making the impression memorable.

This insertion medium only creates distractions from the content. It creates an extra reason NOT to watch a program, subverting the very reason for buying media in the first place. Plus this software will also fall under the growing international legislative and consumer resistance to product placement in entertainment programming.

It serves static images very well, but forget about video or any type of moving image. Effective multitasking is a myth when it comes to absorbing multiple video feeds. Advertising creatives work like hell to distract people from their current tasks and have them be absorbed by their commercial. This at best is a reinforcement medium. You don;t get the full advert impression, you are only reminded of other impressions you have already seen.

Ultimately its another gimmick for media buyers to employ, and not a super effective addition to their arsenal.

Personally I won't be betting the farm on this taking off in a big way.

You're right Issac about it being preferable to pop-up adverts on YouTube for independent film makers and smaller clients as it is less intrusive. But my earlier point about it being a reminder medium still stands. I would NOT use this as a major part of my media buy, but I MIGHT try it as a reinforcement medium to backup the majority of my media spend.

I would rather have the type of advertising in Isaac's link than anything else.

I'm sure I'm not alone here in that I despise almost all forms of advertising. I couldn't care less about \"supporting someone by looking at their ads\". I am not going to buy what they are advertising anyway so why do I need to see it? I have ad and script blockers on all my browsers and almost always watch my TV shows with the ads already removed. I got to the point with normal cable tv broadcasts where I had to mute the TV every time it went to commercial because the commercials were at least double the loudness as the show was. I started thinking \"why am I paying monthly to watch TV with all these commercials?\" I haven't seen an Enzite or tampon commercial in over a year which is great.

I don't understand most advertising. If I want something then I will search it out. I don't need you shoving it in my face any chance you get. The only advertising I don't mind is seeing game advertisements in game magazines for example.

Advertisers and advertisements today ruin our quality of life.

@ Gekko71 very interesting! So what you're saying is, since this isn't a real alternative, it's more likely that Youtube would use this on top of everything it's already doing with ads or not use it at all.

@Xamindar Companies really don't want to show you ads you don't want to see, upsetting you. I'm sure that we'll someday see exactly the kinds of ads that do interest us from companies we like to see, now that everything is going streaming. It's possible you might see only video game commercials and movie trailers (if the cloud thinks that's what you like) after 2020 because you resent everything else.

Showing people ads they don't want to see is a waste of money. I do every survey Hulu throws at me and vote on commercials it shows me. And yes, I generally watch the commercials it shows me, which seems always be food, tech, and insurance.

Xamindar wrote:I'm sure I'm not alone here in that I despise almost all forms of advertising. I couldn't care less about "supporting someone by looking at their ads". I am not going to buy what they are advertising anyway so why do I need to see it?

The thing is, though, from the content provider's perspective, it doesn't matter one bit whether or not you patronize the companies advertising through them. They get paid by said companies either way, so it's your view impression itself that counts. I fully agree with blocking obnoxious and/or browser-crippling ads (is it just me, or have some Flash ads become ridiculously performance-intensive recently?), but doing something like blocking simple AdSense banners from a small gaming forum you frequent only hurts that forum.

Isaac wrote:@ Gekko71 very interesting! So what you're saying is, since this isn't a real alternative, it's more likely that Youtube would use this on top of everything it's already doing with ads or not use it at all.

Something like that. To my mind it would gain its best advantage for the advertiser as a cheap adjunct to their regular campaign. I reckon any company who is trying to use this method as their main / only source of advertising is most likely going to fail and fail badly.

I could see small content-producers / emerging mediums trying to use this technology to monetise content. Plus here will always be some advertisers willing to use/trial new technology (especially at the very small or very large ends of town - but not too many in the middle I think...)

...but at the end of the day it's just not that involving a medium. IMO, even blatant, insulting, patronising and downright aggravating product placement would be superior to this technology in terms of effectiveness.

That being said, there could well be other applications of the technology aside from advertising. For the sake of the investors and inventors involved I certainly hope there is.

Here's something you should take a look at: CBC The age of Persuasion

Top Gun wrote:I fully agree with blocking obnoxious and/or browser-crippling ads (is it just me, or have some Flash ads become ridiculously performance-intensive recently?), but doing something like blocking simple AdSense banners from a small gaming forum you frequent only hurts that forum.

That's a whole other issue. Ads from third party sites have been known to send adware/viri (not that I would get any in Linux) so it is a great idea to block third party sites by default. NoScript comes in very handy here. I can have it allow the main site and block anything else. It usually makes the site load a lot faster. Now, if the site is hosting the ads its self then they usually get through and that is fine.

You lost me at 'advertising.'

Heh, it can be interesting. Look at my link. It makes it veeeeery interesting. Could I interest you in my telephone service? It only costs... your soul! (One time fee). But it's a very good telephone service. Call 488-2468.
Of course when you need to self advertise like I do I guess you find it more interesting. (Try putting that in context!... then again maybe... don't).
But if you don't have anything to add to the topic, why'd you make a post in the first place?

In case you haven't guessed I'm job hunting... and seeing that I'm the only Winnipegger here I don't think anyone else here can help (so why am I saying it?).

Alter-Fox wrote:Heh, it can be interesting. Look at my link. It makes it veeeeery interesting.

Nope, not going to even bother. Anything having to do with advertising does not interest me one bit. If you feel you need to force your product in my face then maybe you are in the wrong business and should try something else.

Personally i don't think it's the medium that's the problem, it's the message.

i very rarely see any advertisement that i consider so relevant to me that i'm actually interested in it, even in online targeted marketing based on personal profiles (which is really saying something).

The entire industry of advertisement needs to change if they're to fix this. ATM it seems that only multi-million dollar franchised industries can afford advertising access to my eyes - it's all i ever see and i'm not interested.

Polished Turds.