Online advertising is now dead
scripting.com
scripting.com
I don't believe for a second that online advertising is dead, because advertising has been around for a long time and I don't see why it should go away just because like in every recession it's going to be severely hit.
But the issue is click-throughs. I do have my doubts whether people will keep clicking on ads as much as they did in the past. I don't click on ads. I never have. Not because it's some kind of protest but because I never felt it would lead to anything I wanted. And there has been a study (sorry I don't have the quote) showing that the more people are familiar with the internet (or even generally more educated) the less they click on ads.
The point Winer was making, that people will rely more on peer recommendations and generally knowledge about what other people do than on advertising campains is plausible in my view.
This whole 'the economic world is ending and you must learn to live in the new economy that is totally unlike the old economy because times are really bad' thing is getting really, really old.
I don't think it makes sense to support this argument by correlating the value of advertising with the health of the economy or whatever he was trying to do. He should have left the economy out of the equation if he wanted a stronger case.
I would argue that online advertising will become more and more accurate with its targeting methods, which in turn will raise its value as opposed to destroying it.
Disclaimer: I did not read this article, only the title, which enraged me sufficiently.
Question: does a company like Cuisinart have to pay to list their product in Amazon?
At the end of the last boom Overture (purchased by Yahoo in 2003, right as the economy began to emerge from the bust) and later Google brought us a new form of advertising which didn't even look like advertising to begin with: search advertising. Overture's original goal was "sponsored search": the more you bid for a term, the more relevant should the term be in search results.
Perhaps with this bubble dying a new form of advertising will emerge or has already emerged - which we won't initially (or can't yet) identify as advertising.
Brand advertising too has less of a future on the web: search advertising (especially with Google and their consideration of relevance of the ad and not just the bid value - something which didn't exist in Overture's model until Yahoo's Project Panama) enabled the "little guy", the local small businesses, the webmasters to sell their products to an audience that was looking to them.
It's folly too say "all that can invented [in advertising] is already invented". Traditional PPI/PPC banner/display advertising is drying up and rightly so (it encouraged a reductionist thinking, treating users as captive "eye balls" as opposed to customers of a product; it encouraged mee-too copycat websites which called themselves "start-ups"). Yet I wouldn't be quick to discount the possibility of something entirely different taking its place.
Perhaps not in its current form (banner ads, text links) but I don't see this going away anytime soon. I generally don't agree with Winer but his pieces are usually more thought out than this.
I agree with other commenters that bringing up the economy weakened his argument. I'm no economist but when times are touch elasticity and neccessity have a lot to do with what people spend money on.
Advertising is elastic and not a neccessity, its generally a means to grow your business. People are not worried about growing their business in a recession, they're worried about staying alive.
Coke bombards you with ads because it wants to promote coke as part of your lifestyle. If you don't click on their ad banner right now, that's fine. You're more likely to recognize coke though at the grocery store.
The article also doesn't take into account that advertising is not static. Like a cat and mouse game, it evolves as its audience evolves.
In the future, advertising may be more "guerilla" or underground. Also, advertising has the capability to go "viral" now. In a matter of days, they can spread a meme across the internets. :-)
True, but a lot easier said than done, haha.
I wish that was always true.
However, most people don't care that much and will take the first thing that looks shiny to them. Advertising is a great way to make people look at shiny things, and I think it will remain profitable as a result.
Well, lots of ads say or infer that people who have X really liked it. I think marketers just hope you'll get your memory confused over whether you heard real people say they liked it or whether it was a more or less obvious ad.
However, maybe there will still be advertising, we'll just call it differently.
Or it will just be the "people who liked x also liked y" thing. For example, if someone googles for a coffee maker, he gets to see ads for coffee. I am pretty sure Google already does this.
As long as consumers exist, advertising will always serve as a platform for manufacturing demand.
Is generic Ibuprofen different from Advil? I think not.
yawn
until you can tell me what the <viable> alternative is, ads aren't going anywhere.