27 Huge Publishers Join To Replace The Banner
businessinsider.com
businessinsider.com
Seriously, these things are going too far. I guarantee people aren't going to click through more often, but they are going to be more annoyed.
I wish websites would just charge me money for their content. It is much easier for everyone.
I would be willing to look at -- or at least let co-exist -- more ads with the content I view, if those ads respected both my interests and my needs.
+ Don't move. Ever. No exceptions. (And no bleeping music, either.)
+ Intrigue me with appealing information. Tell me what, concretely, you propose to do for me.
+ Don't move! Don't think it's cute to slip in an animation after waiting a bit. I don't care if it's the "Firefox girl" from Daily Tech News. Don't move.
+ Don't be more garish than the encompassing page design. I am only frustrated by people who think "Hotdog" is a legitimate color scheme.
+ Don't track me. I'm not interested in a "more extensive relationship" with your marketing efforts. Concentrate on delivering a tolerable, appealing ad for this impression. I'm sorry if you feel this hampers your effectiveness; as far as I'm concerned, you're putting your effort into the wrong end of things. I may be willing to flex on this point, but you'd better make it real clear how you are protecting my privacy, with an iron clad commitment, and provide me controls for turning on and off the tracking.
I've learned of some useful things from ads. And I don't mind a respectful presence on the page. Ads in print newspapers? No problem. Bouncing monkeys on a yellow banner -- big problem.
What I've been wondering about, recently, is why no one has tried to organize a codified and instantiated compact between browsers and publishers/advertisers. E.g., as a browser, I'll let this class of ads through -- probably provided by a set of whitelisted URL's. I understand doing so helps to support this site that I value and may offer me additional, useful information for consideration. In return, you promise not to violate the above (or whatever the set of rules ends up being).
Perhaps this is to say, ad brokering should be a two-way communication and not a one-way communication. Bringing together viewers and advertisers on mutually agreed terms. I suppose this is not realistic, and I'll welcome any explanations as to why.