Quote:
Originally Posted by phormwatch
I successfully block 99.9% of all ads on the web. I've been surfing ad-free for a few years now. Of course I am constantly bombarded with ads when I go into public spaces. This is not something I'm happy with, and, in fact, I think it's a problem which needs to be addressed... unless the public eventually wants to end up with every square inch of public space covered in ads.
|
Its not quatity, its quality. All posters, TV sets will get a digital connection - you are seeing "online" as pure browser-based PC activity. The same technology putting ads in browsers will put them on mobiles and digital TV and outdoor.
> Google doesn't track your every move across the web. Furthermore, you can delete Google cookies, or choose not to use Google, or use Google
Again, digital is not limited to the web... and besides have you not seen
http://www.google.com/adwords/tvads/
>Isn't it the case that advertising is shifting away from TV, simply because people are spending less and less time watching TV and more time on the web - especially 'target' groups who are young, wealthy, and have disposable income?
To some degree yes, they are also media-meshing - which is a phrase that is used to show relation of multiple methods of getting content - like watching TV whilst having laptop on knee and mobile in hand. Not just losing TV audience to web, but how you spend your time. So yes some are wayching with iPlayer for example, but what also is seen is how search goes practically vertical on a graph at time a TV ad goes on air - showing a correlation between ad effectiveness of TV and the user wanting to find out more. I myself find I think of something in a cab, and then Google it on iPhone, so we see external stimulii linking back to web activity. That is what people are trying to figure out how to enhance that experience based on user behaviour.
People who have disposable income are out doing stuff, disposing of their income, not sitting in on the web all the time... ;-)
>You know, you're not doing a very good job at selling Phorm, here...
I neither work for them, nor agree with everything they do, but I can see some technological merit - which is bizarre as I myself do not want to be tracked.
>121Media died precisely because users wouldn't tolerate it. There is no logical reason why the same will not happen to Phorm. It is, after all, an intrusive spyware technology, just like its predecessor.
I have a feeling they will survive, but need to adapt as opposed to ram ideas down everyones throat.
>>Here is a suggestion:
A user must go to a certain ISPs page, and OPT-IN to an agreement. This agreement means that the customer must fill in 20 questions related to his or her demographic information and interests. They customer promises that the information is truthful and promises to update the information. The customer is then given information to sign up to a proxy server to get his internet connection (this can alternatively be done very easily with a plugin) and given a cookie.
SPOT ON!!!! This is something I too have been toying around with. It equally is flawed, but is definately a move in the right direction. There is a business case in there that will make someone a LOT of money.
But you are right, dictatorial approaches are archaic and manipulating the public is not the way to move on this, its a matter of embracing them and giving them choice.