Pubblicità

The Internet Is for Upstarts

As said, The Internet Is For Porn and Direct Marketing.

And for upstarts.

Internet advertising has been around for a quarter of a century and it has created no discernible brands in any category, as Bob Hoffman rightly pointed out.

That’s hardly surprising. The banner ad is the worst advertising format ever.

Those who like to blame Ad Tech for everything say that, if only banner ads were not targeted, they would carry a signal, and could contribute to the emergence of brands.

Not so.

The format sucks. You can’t tell a story. It’s the same format on The New York Times and on your cousin’s website. Internet users are flooded with way too many banner ads.

There are more problems that need to be solved than some would like to think.

Away

On the other hand, to say that the Internet has created no brands is not true.

Away, Glossier and Warby Parker are huge hits.

I’m sure there a quite a few more mid-level brands that made it.

This is what the Internet is for, apart from porn and direct marketing.

It’s a shitty, distributed, low-cost Kickstarter to help small companies emerge.

Then, if they ever make it, they will start doing real advertising.

Offline

Real advertising means offline.

Like the Big FANG. Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google.

Do the big brand you work for a favour: act like a grown-up.

Like the Big FANG, not like some small company operating in a basement.

Do real advertising, not the tricks the small guys do to get noticed.

Don’t make your brand look dumb just because you want to look cool.

I know, I know…

I know, we were all hoping for better things for this child of ours, the Internet.

Some hoped it would spread knowledge. Not fake news.

Somebody else said it was “unconceivable that we should allow so great a possibility for service… to be drowned in advertising chatter”. No, that was not Tim Berners-Lee.*

But porn, direct marketing and helping upstarts get a breakthrough is not too bad.

—

* It was Herbert Hoover, then US Secretary of Commerce, speaking about radio, in 1922.

Pubblicità digitale (bis)

Mi dispiace, ma non è pubblicità se… utilizza il peggior formato della storia, un formato col quale è difficilissimo far passare un messaggio. Utilizza il formato più ignorato della storia. Chi ti ha mai detto: hai visto che figo quel banner di ieri? Utilizza il formato più odiato della storia, e l’unico boicottato da mezzo miliardo di persone. Utilizza un formato che in un quarto di secolo non è riuscito a contribuire a creare un singolo brand. Utilizza il formato più cheap — in tutti i sensi della parola — della storia. Utilizza un formato che chiunque può comprare, col risultato che non passa il messaggio… “siamo grandi”. Utilizza un formato che, dopo aver fallito più volte come formato pubblicitario, è stato trasformato in un formato di direct response. Utilizza una targettizzazione spinta: ogni persona potenzialmente vede un messaggio diverso e quindi non è una promessa pubblica.

Mi pare evidente: purtroppo con un simile formato si può solo fare direct marketing.

The Internet Is For Porn and Direct Marketing

I am troubled by posts like the latest one from Doc Searls that praise the advertising of olden days and seem to imply that advertising on the Internet was hacked.

The Old Days

The good ol’ days were actually terrible. Advertising has always been a borderline and devious field. Advertising did create great brands, but for what kind of products?

Snake oil remedies. Booze. “The best sigarettes for your health”. And take two tablets of Alka-Seltzer after you ate more than you should have in the first place.

Mass-produced orange juice. Because, you know, squeezing the damn oranges yourself was too much of a hassle. And frozen mass-produced orange juice.

Tropicana. Or Minute Maid. Stuff that tastes exactly the same if you’re in Boston or Buenos Aires, Barcelona or Beijing. Ever wondered how that is possible?

What about margarine? Processed food? Frozen food? Frozen processed food. Refined everything. Diet soda, fat-free cheese and decaf coffee.

After WW2 a lot of shit was sold to consumers. Advertising certainly played a large role in making it possible, but I’m not sure there’s much to celebrate.

And last but not least: it’s true, advertising helped pay the bills. But not just for the New York Times. It also gave us the New York Post. And The Sun.

Then Ad Tech

Ad Tech did not come out of nowhere. Contrary to what Doc Searls seems to imply, advertising on the web was not hacked while it was sleeping.

The web was oversold to companies on the promise of interactive advertising and a one-to-one future. It didn’t work and we ended up where we are now.

Why was it assumed that consumers who were dodging advertising on television would want to interact with companies and their ads on the web?

The dotcom bubble burst, ad space on the web wildly outgrew demand and prices tanked. It was off to the races to see who could squeeze something out of the wasteland.

First it was affiliate marketing programmes and guaranteed results schemes such as Advertising.com. Then come Adsense. Finally, Google acquired DoubleClick.

Interactive advertising, then online advertising, then display advertising were rebranded as programmatic advertising. But they are still selling the same dumb banner ads.

Only, targeted. More targeted than ever. Targeting, in fact, is the only thing they are selling. Hey, we know this shit ain’t working, but at least you’re hitting the right target.

Except when your ads end up on videos of Neo-Nazis or Jihadists, that is.

Now, don’t get me wrong: I certainly dislike Ad Tech, and I have a lot of respect for people like Doc Searls who are looking for an alternative way to sell ads at Linux Journal.

But I’m not sure it’s going to work, and I am especially doubtful that it’s going to work for larger publishers. I have the feeling that there’s probably no going back.

No going back to a world — one of normal advertising on the Internet — that never was and probably never will be. Repeat with me: The Internet is for porn and direct marketing.

Le aziende e il digggital

Nella grandissima maggior parte delle aziende, chi decide su marketing e pubblicità non è il CEO. E se anche decidesse il CEO, il CEO non è certamente Steve Jobs.

Il CEO è uno che non ha la più pallida idea di cosa sia Internet.

E neanche di cosa sia o fosse la pubblicità, di solito.

Spesso vive fra la paura di passare per vecchio e la speranza che i nuovi tool siano magia nera che funziona da dio — posso mostrare la mia pubblicità solo al target giusto!

Assume dei digital marketing manager. Qualunque cosa siano. Scarsi, in media. Polli di batteria prodotti dalle cazzate create ad arte da Google e Facebook, tipicamente.

Magari uno che ha lavorato in passato per Google o Facebook. Ma che non era bravo abbastanza e quindi l’hanno lasciato andar via. A lavorare per loro altrove.

Una volta assunti, il primo obiettivo è quello di non perdere il posto di lavoro. Google e Facebook producono un sacco di dati e di prove per aiutarli a tenersi il posto.

E ricordati: Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM. Or Google, or Facebook.

È un dialogo fra gente che vuole solo illudersi che internet non sia un rischio, un posto dove il loro brand può essere attaccato dai piccoli o dalle truffe o dai cinesi…

L’unica cosa che interessa a tutti gli attori è dirsi che “va tutto beeeene”.

Abbiamo un sacco di follower.

Ci amano.

Qualcuno ogni tanto commenta, quindi vogliono “avere una conversazione con noi”.

Va beh, con lo stagista che lavora per la digggital pi-ar agensi.

I nostri banner li ha visti solo “il target giusto”.

Non hanno spostato una virgola di percezione del brand, attitudine a comprare etc.

Ma non importa. Era il target giusto.

Più ogni tanto, per errore, anche il pubblico che guarda video nazi o jihadisti.

È un dialogo fra ciechi e sordi e soprattutto fra incompetenti.

Perché Love is mutual misunderstanding, come amava dire Oscar Wilde.