Bye Bye, ADs
Just Say No to Ads!
Surprise, surprise: People Don't Want Ads!
They don't love those trashy banners, ugly pop-up, pop-under, and screen take-over ads.
In short, - Internet users *HATE* ADs!!!
This "secret" is known to everyone, excepting ... advertisers. But the problem has became so huge, it's almost impossible to hide it anymore.
I don't want ads (including related spyware, tracking cookies, etc). And seems no one does! It's only a matter of time when ads, in the form they exist now, will disappear from Internet.
Imagine the Web with no advertising! It's beautiful!!!
The World Without Ads?
Relax, ad-related industry. Until there is demand, there will be supply. But wait a second, is there a real demand for ads? And how effective your ad business is?
"Who Clicks on Ads?" - asks the legendary blogger Lorelle VanFossen: "I don't. ... And most of my friends claim that they never click on ads.. Who are the people that click on ads?"
The shocking news for advertisers, - people do NOT READ ads!
The #1 usability expert Jakob Nielsen in his article "Banner Blindness" claims most people simply SKIP them! A special eyetracking technique revealed that users don't fixate on ads:
Some interesting data from Professor Hal Varian, Google's consultant:
- 2% of ads might get clicks
- 2% of clicks might convert.
He still wonders who the resulting 0.04% are.
Here's the dirty, nauseating truth about online ads:
Typical heavy ad clickers are *UNEDUCATED* rural folks or housewives! Too young (or too old) to realize what they are clicking on. And usually with no money to spend.
Under no way they are representative of the general Internet public.
Look at just two citations I found recently:
So, why you and me are still bombarded with ads? It seems we are victims of a wrong business model. In particular, the law of volume: if total number of clicks is counted in billions, even a fraction of percent can bring someone some earnings.
But why ALL people must suffer because of that? Why browsers of the overwhelming majority(!) of users are "highjacked" by ads?
Once legitimate, now a scam?
Once upon a time, multi-level marketing was a legitimate business too. Today almost all MLM programs are scams. And the first word that comes to our minds when we see the ads we didn't choose to see is the SPAM! Should ads be viewed with the same skepticism as MLM scams schemes? As with search engines links are widely available to everybody, ads exists mostly for defrauding people to click some irrelevant destinations.
Is ad industry a PYRAMID? In the sense that only the top websites make money with it, - yes! In a typical MLM network less than 2% of its promoters are successful (what this means is that they have become "successful" by scamming other people)!
Advertisers pretend they don't know about reasons for existing ad-blocking programs (despite some of which were called the best products of 2007).
They even boast: "See? It works: We've GOT YOU to look through all our ads!"
Users pretend they believe Internet cannot exist without ads.
This reminds me the words of Edward Maurer about newspaper industry:
A popular, - but false, - belief is that ad-free Web would kill commercial websites. I don't think so. On the contrary: Further polluting webpages with advertising will definitely kill the Internet as we know it.
There is a twofold trend: On the one hand, more and more bloggers put ads on their pages. On the other, there is a quickly growing number of people who do not run any ads.
And guess what, the group that create "clean" websites (stripped of advertising) consists mostly of famous thought leaders, - elite of blogosphere!
The simple but forgotten truth:
We're not here for convenience of advertisers. We pay for access to the Internet already. While ads are simply eating up our BANDWIDTH and our TIME, - without our permission!
This is a free market. And in a free market, the customer has the final say!
We won't miss ad-sponsored websites if they go away! There is a countless number of websites that offer valuable content without ads! The super famous Wikipedia and BBC are just few of them.
What we need for making it reality?
A shocking event for ad industry!
For example, this ads-free initiative.
Let's Take Back Our Internet!
The first step is easy:
Kiss the ads goodbye!
R.I.P.
Amen!
They don't love those trashy banners, ugly pop-up, pop-under, and screen take-over ads.
In short, - Internet users *HATE* ADs!!!
This "secret" is known to everyone, excepting ... advertisers. But the problem has became so huge, it's almost impossible to hide it anymore.
I don't want ads (including related spyware, tracking cookies, etc). And seems no one does! It's only a matter of time when ads, in the form they exist now, will disappear from Internet.
Imagine the Web with no advertising! It's beautiful!!!
The World Without Ads?
Relax, ad-related industry. Until there is demand, there will be supply. But wait a second, is there a real demand for ads? And how effective your ad business is?
"Who Clicks on Ads?" - asks the legendary blogger Lorelle VanFossen: "I don't. ... And most of my friends claim that they never click on ads.. Who are the people that click on ads?"
The shocking news for advertisers, - people do NOT READ ads!
The #1 usability expert Jakob Nielsen in his article "Banner Blindness" claims most people simply SKIP them! A special eyetracking technique revealed that users don't fixate on ads:
"The most prominent result from the new eyetracking studies is not actually new. We simply confirmed for the umpteenth time that banner blindness is real. Users almost never look at anything that looks like an advertisement, whether or not it's actually an ad."
Some interesting data from Professor Hal Varian, Google's consultant:
- 2% of ads might get clicks
- 2% of clicks might convert.
He still wonders who the resulting 0.04% are.
Here's the dirty, nauseating truth about online ads:
Typical heavy ad clickers are *UNEDUCATED* rural folks or housewives! Too young (or too old) to realize what they are clicking on. And usually with no money to spend.
Under no way they are representative of the general Internet public.
Look at just two citations I found recently:
"So, basically, it's only the people who are older and probably less educated than the average and who live outside major urban centers and who probably have less than wonderful jobs who click on banner ads, and for the most part, only if they're bored and/or there is some stupid giveaway or contest. That's what you call a 'dream target', right?
People who are too stupid or too lazy or too bored to get out of your 'marketing fire'. Couch potatoes, basically.. So I'm sure you can 'target' these people fine."
People who are too stupid or too lazy or too bored to get out of your 'marketing fire'. Couch potatoes, basically.. So I'm sure you can 'target' these people fine."
(Massimo Moruzzi)
"When discussing the click-through rate of banner or email campaigns, the discussion centers around fractions of a percentage point. These are not highly effective campaigns (I'd wager that many of them even lose money), but the people in charge of running them have a poor grasp of what they are actually dealing with. I often find myself wondering whether the people pitching these ads have ever been on the internet at all.
My suspicion is that a lot of the heavy click-through is associated with people who are new to the web. Most urban people (especially those with a higher level of education) have been using computers and the internet for some time now.
Rural housewives are probably the demographic with the most click-throughs because they are one of the newest demographics to get online. I consider my own mother to be pretty web-savvy, and she is neither rural nor a housewife, but I've watched her accidentally click ad banners and wonder why she's suddenly on a different site.
Of course, the punchline to all of this is the fact that most click-throughs don't translate to actual sales. If an ad campaign is relying on accidental click-throughs, or on attracting the attention of a niche market who can't afford what they're selling, then the joke is on the person footing the bill. The model is clearly broken, and most people in the industry know that, but the people signing the checks aren't in on the joke."
My suspicion is that a lot of the heavy click-through is associated with people who are new to the web. Most urban people (especially those with a higher level of education) have been using computers and the internet for some time now.
Rural housewives are probably the demographic with the most click-throughs because they are one of the newest demographics to get online. I consider my own mother to be pretty web-savvy, and she is neither rural nor a housewife, but I've watched her accidentally click ad banners and wonder why she's suddenly on a different site.
Of course, the punchline to all of this is the fact that most click-throughs don't translate to actual sales. If an ad campaign is relying on accidental click-throughs, or on attracting the attention of a niche market who can't afford what they're selling, then the joke is on the person footing the bill. The model is clearly broken, and most people in the industry know that, but the people signing the checks aren't in on the joke."
(Casey Rae)
So, why you and me are still bombarded with ads? It seems we are victims of a wrong business model. In particular, the law of volume: if total number of clicks is counted in billions, even a fraction of percent can bring someone some earnings.
But why ALL people must suffer because of that? Why browsers of the overwhelming majority(!) of users are "highjacked" by ads?
Once legitimate, now a scam?
Once upon a time, multi-level marketing was a legitimate business too. Today almost all MLM programs are scams. And the first word that comes to our minds when we see the ads we didn't choose to see is the SPAM! Should ads be viewed with the same skepticism as MLM scams schemes? As with search engines links are widely available to everybody, ads exists mostly for defrauding people to click some irrelevant destinations.
Is ad industry a PYRAMID? In the sense that only the top websites make money with it, - yes! In a typical MLM network less than 2% of its promoters are successful (what this means is that they have become "successful" by scamming other people)!
Advertisers pretend they don't know about reasons for existing ad-blocking programs (despite some of which were called the best products of 2007).
They even boast: "See? It works: We've GOT YOU to look through all our ads!"
Users pretend they believe Internet cannot exist without ads.
This reminds me the words of Edward Maurer about newspaper industry:
"The prof winked at me reminding me that, if not for ads, there would be no paper. Didn't like to hear that then, don't now. I prefer to think that, if not for READERS, there would be no paper!"
A popular, - but false, - belief is that ad-free Web would kill commercial websites. I don't think so. On the contrary: Further polluting webpages with advertising will definitely kill the Internet as we know it.
There is a twofold trend: On the one hand, more and more bloggers put ads on their pages. On the other, there is a quickly growing number of people who do not run any ads.
And guess what, the group that create "clean" websites (stripped of advertising) consists mostly of famous thought leaders, - elite of blogosphere!
The simple but forgotten truth:
We're not here for convenience of advertisers. We pay for access to the Internet already. While ads are simply eating up our BANDWIDTH and our TIME, - without our permission!
This is a free market. And in a free market, the customer has the final say!
We won't miss ad-sponsored websites if they go away! There is a countless number of websites that offer valuable content without ads! The super famous Wikipedia and BBC are just few of them.
What we need for making it reality?
A shocking event for ad industry!
For example, this ads-free initiative.
Let's Take Back Our Internet!
The first step is easy:
Kiss the ads goodbye!
R.I.P.
Amen!
