It’s taken an economic panic, but the advertisers who pay the Internet’s bills are starting to figure out users ignore banner ads, fretful agency and publisher execs told AdWeek.
“Internet ads are small and out of the way,” said Greg March, digital group director at Wieden+Kennedy. “Advertisers want to deliver impact, and I don’t think the impact for these ads is always that strong.”
Vivek Shah, group digital president at Time Inc., says that when budgets are tight, advertisers prefer spending their money on direct response ads over harder to measure brand ads. Shah says display advertising is “under assault.”
Agency MEC Interaction’s digital exec Carrie Frolich says online publishers should return to a simpler time, when ads were sold based on reach and frequency, not impressions. “The industry is still focused on impressions as a currency,” she told. “People are not impressions.”
This suggestion drove [email protected]’s Eric Woning into a froth as he commented on AdWeek‘s article. He favours saving display ads through better targeting:
We believe something completely different than Frolich or Shah: We believe that online has the power to be RELEVANT. It is this relevancy on which we should focus. Going back to reach and frequency is going back to the dark ages of advertising – when we did not know what worked and what didn’t work. It is the fundamental error of people in the media buying sector: to think that each reached person (or GRP) is essentially the same. Only those people who took the time to look at your ad, and to whom it was relevant enough to do something with it (either physically or mentally) in a positive way are people the advertiser would like to pay for. No relevancy means that people will not look at your ad. Period. No matter which medium. Therefore believing that we should go back to a reach model is insane, in my not so humble opinion.
NOW WATCH: Tech Insider videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.