Current conventional wisdom: How do you create ad revenue on sites that repurpose television content? With interstitials. With the longer content you don't have to be constrained by file size or viewing time like you do with a banner. And in many ways it's a lot like a commercial - with one crucial difference. People hate interstitials way more. Way, way more.
We're trained to be passive viewers with TV (TiVo and clickers aside), but online everybody expects a lot of control. That's probably why brands that have simply repurposed their TV commercials have seen dismal click through rates. Online viewers don't like feeling hijacked.
Generally we advertising types try to circumvent this with interactivity, so that viewers become participators. Games, avatars, interactive storytelling and user-generated content are the usual tactics - concept, style, content, and design all effect whether each instance is successful.
Rarer is an entirely passive interstitial that manages to compel click throughs. You have to offer something else to foster a sense of active engagement. Sometimes just a "what-the-hell-was-that?" quirkiness will do the trick.
AdGabber had a few thoughts about an unusual ad that Organic did for the Chrysler Town & Country on abc.com: Lots of Words, and Something About a Pony.
Dave Sylvestre
Strategists & Planners
Comments (2)
I think there's a false premise here, which is that the measure of whether people are consuming interstitials is the click through. People ARE passive when watching video programming. They want to watch what comes after the commercial or they would turn off the TV. They are not likely to risk a further interruption by clicking. They are TRAINED by television that video commercials are to be watched and heard, not clicked. Therefore, clicks are an unlikely result of a video interstitial and you have to do more awareness-based studies to determine the effectiveness of the ad. This post indicates that the premise problem that digital advertising has -- the expectation that you can apply certain rote measures to all kinds of executions -- even still exists at digital agencies.
Posted by Matt | August 29, 2008 8:02 AM
Posted on August 29, 2008 08:02
I think there's a false premise here, which is that the measure of whether people are consuming interstitials is the click through. People ARE passive when watching video programming. They want to watch what comes after the commercial or they would turn off the TV. They are not likely to risk a further interruption by clicking. They are TRAINED by television that video commercials are to be watched and heard, not clicked. Therefore, clicks are an unlikely result of a video interstitial and you have to do more awareness-based studies to determine the effectiveness of the ad. This post indicates that the premise problem that digital advertising has -- the expectation that you can apply certain rote measures to all kinds of executions -- even still exists at digital agencies.
Posted by Matt | August 29, 2008 8:04 AM
Posted on August 29, 2008 08:04