The Face on the Ad is Yours!

“Your content and identity are being used as ads.”
-         Josh Constine

Advertising has come a long way due to the Internet. From same-ads-for-everyone (what TV and radio still do), we moved to ads based on what’s relevant at that instant (think Google search), and then to companies mining our data as we surfed to know what we might be interested in.

More recently, in 2011, Facebook started the concept of “sponsored” and “promoted” posts…from our friends!
“If you Like a brand’s Page or post, check in at a business, download or use an app, or share a link, advertisers can pay to boost that action’s visibility in the feed (of your friends).”
Twitter shows you ads based on what the people you follow like. Pinterest and Instagram are doing the same. And now Google has jumped on the bandwagon.

Oh, in case you didn’t realize, these ads show up with your friends’ names and faces alongside them as people who liked/ bought/used that product or service.

If you thought, “Who cares? I don’t click on ads regardless of why they turned up”, think again. This model is very effective, even if you did not click:
“If your friends’ names and faces got you to look, the ads have done their job.”

Most of us want the Internet to continue to be free for most things (information, e-mails, social networks); and so we understand the need for ads (someone’s got to pay the bills, right?). But in case you feel violated or used by this new approach to online advertising, Constine asks you to reconsider. If ads are a necessary evil, he says, then isn’t it better that the ads be more relevant and from trust worthy sources, i.e., your friends?
“Advertisers will say just about anything to get you to buy (they’ll even use pictures of babies…But you trust your friends. We’ve always asked them for advice directly. Social ads just scale that word of mouth and give you their recommendations without them having to repeat themselves.”
And for that to happen, people have to opt into such a model: that way, everyone gets to see ads they might believe. Which would make it a win-win for the advertiser and the person viewing the ad, isn’t it?

The downside, of course, is that everyone just became a brand ambassador for something! Andy Warhol was so wrong when he talked about everyone having 15 minutes of fame in the future: if this ad model is here to stay, then everyone will have a lifetime of publicity, or at least as long as they use the Internet. Come to think of it, they are pretty much the same thing.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Image
As a toddler, my daughter loved Alia Bhatt’s songs, esp. the ones from Student of the Year . (That movie did have many good songs and well-choreographed dances). Fast forward to present day, when she is 12 yo. She rarely watches Hindi movies now, but one of the few ones she likes of late, Raja aur Rani ki Prem Kahani has, yes, Alia Bhatt.   If I had any hopes that there was anything to be read in the name of her toddler-time favorite ( Student of the Year ), they have been dashed. Our conversations come exam time are perfectly captured by this photo and its caption: In fact, the pic below captures how she and I look at her answer sheets – me intently, she with an expression of “It’s over, so why are you even looking at it?”   Of late, we pull her leg and tell her that she isn’t showing any signs of academic prowess, she’d better find a rich guy to marry. Some time later, she showed us this meme on the Internet: “Me No Study, Me No Care Me Go Marry Millionaire If He Die
Read more

Why we Deceive Ourselves

In their book, The Elephant in the Brain , the authors describe this weird aspect of deception that we practice: deceiving ourselves! That is so weird: “If our minds contain maps of our worlds, what good comes from having an inaccurate version of these maps?” The Sigmund Freud school of thought treats self-deception as a defense mechanism, “a way for the ego to protect itself”. The mind seeks to protect itself from anxiety and other negative emotions. Many object to this reasoning: since accurate information is so critical to our survival, surely distorting information would be dangerous. Wouldn’t the goal of protecting our self-esteem have been better achieved by making the brain’s self-esteem mechanism stronger instead? The new school of thought explains self-deception as “primarily outward-facing, manipulative, and ultimately self-serving”. This is based on Thomas Schelling’s work on game theory: “In a variety of scenarios, limiting or sabotaging yourself is the winn
Read more

Handling of the Satyam Scam

The Satyam scam. How does that fit into Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s book on reforms in India, Backstage ? The reason is that, as both NASSCOM and the government of India felt: “(Satyam’s) collapse would create a great deal of disruption for clients worldwide and seriously damage India’s reputation as a reliable source of software services.”   Therefore, the government decided to work with the private sector to “organize a quick takeover by a reputable new buyer, who would quickly restart the company”. But that could not be done overnight. In the meantime, the new board would have to reach out to Satyam’s clients and “reassure them that the company would survive”.   For the new board to have credibility when it made that statement, it had to be staffed with people who understood the private sector, the IT sector in particular, and commanded respect and trust. Deepak Parikh from HDFC was made chairman, and other members of the board included a former NASSCOM chairman, CII member,
Read more