[LINK] Smart phones and web privacy
stephen at melbpc.org.au
stephen at melbpc.org.au
Mon Sep 17 00:10:12 AEST 2012
Perhaps somewhat surprizingly, and despite ad-industry attempts such as
http://www.youradchoices.com it appears that smart phones may be better
at protecting your online privacy than normal (PC, tablet etc) browsing.
Smartphone Ads and Their Drawbacks
By RANDALL STROSS NYTimes.com Sep 15, 2012
AT two inches wide and one-third of an inch tall, a display ad shown on a
smartphone isnt much of a canvas for a creative marketer seeking to
promote a product or service.
Thats one reason smartphones are not working well as a medium for many
advertisers.
The evidence is telling: advertisers are willing to pay much more to
reach a thousand pairs of eyes gazing upon a computer or tablet than a
thousand pairs looking at a smartphone screen.
Size absolutely does matter, says Christine Chen, director of
communication strategy at Goodby Silverstein & Partners, an ad agency in
San Francisco. If you look at the real estate available on a smartphone,
its really sad compared to not just banner ads on the Web, but also to
TV, print and outdoor advertising.
Size isnt the only problem.
Advertisers are also limited by what they can find out about smartphone
users. Its not technically possible to use cookies with smartphone apps
the way it is with a browser. On the Web, publishers typically record
users actions so that advertisers can make an educated guess about a
users identity and interests.
What makes Web ads so attractive to advertisers is the ability to track
actions and optimize accordingly, Ms. Chen says. Because a smartphone
cannot use the same technology, she says, your ability to track and
optimize is much more blunt, or in some cases nonexistent.
These limitations depress demand for smartphone ads and lead to low
prices. A banner ad on a Web page that costs $3 to $5 for every thousand
impressions may cost only 75 cents or $1 for a thousand impressions on a
smartphone, Ms. Chen says.
Another reason advertisers dont value smartphone ads highly is that
users tend to lack a receptive mind-set when using their phones. Its an
activity you do for a short burst of time, Ms. Chen says. Its very
functional. That is not a good time to try to make users stop what they
are doing and give their attention to an advertisers message.
Ms. Chen says she tells her firms clients not to bother advertising on
smartphones.
Jeff Lanctot, global chief media officer at Razorfish, says context is
much more important on smartphones than on larger devices. Requesting a
marketing-related action while looking at wedding photos would be
considered intrusive, he says, but while playing a game, it might feel
very natural.
Mark Himmelsbach, director of digital strategy at BBDO North America,
sees some potential uses for cell phones as an advertising medium, but he
says most marketers take care to limit the size of ads on phones so as
not to irritate people.
Mobile ads are relegated to a tiny portion of the screen and are often
invisible or ignored by consumers, Mr. Himmelsbach says.
Phones do have some benefits, like the ability to serve up ads based on
location or to integrate advertising into apps that are used for
something else, he says. But of all the possible options, he
says, mobile display ads give us the least amount of creative
opportunity.
Location-based mobile advertising, known as geofencing, is directed only
at nearby prospects, and it has proved to work well, says Doug Ray,
president of Carat North America, a media planning and buying
firm. Knowing where you are geographically and delivering a contextually
relevant offer has been effective in driving conversions and sales, he
says. Geofencing is not possible with a desktop PC.
Consumers, however, dont necessarily want to be reminded that their
phones are location-tracking devices for advertisers. A mobile device is
one of the most personal forms of technology we have, Ms. Chen says.
Location tracking is perfectly legal but apps ask users permission
during installation.
Using the Web on a desktop, laptop, or even a tablet, isnt likely to
feel as tightly bound to our personal selves. Much Web content is mass
media, broad in reach, and thats good for the advertising business
because users do not treat the accompanying ads as an intrusion into
their personal space.
Media consumption is less personal than, say, a Facebook page, a text
message or a phone conversation, says Mr. Lanctot of Razorfish, and so
historically is better suited to be ad-supported.
MR. LANCTOT mentions three companies that are doing well with mobile
advertising: Pandora, Twitter and Foursquare. But each of these is
fortunate to be in a business where it doesnt have to contend
with banner blindness among users.
Pandora inserts audio commercials into its music stream, Twitter puts
sponsored ads into tweet streams and Foursquare lets advertisers try out
geofencing.
The advertising on all three is a very natural part of the user
experience, Mr. Lanctot says. Its not intrusive.
What doesnt make his list is the smartphones minuscule display ad.
Digital advertisers working with smartphones must somehow make their ads
large enough to be noticed, but not so large as to be an interruption.
And they must be chosen to match a users interests, but not so closely
as to induce a shiver.
Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of
business at San Jose State University. E-mail: stross at nytimes.com.
A version of this article appeared in print on September 16, 2012, on
page BU4 of the New York edition with the headline: Advertising in
Lilliput: A Problem for Smartphones..
--
Cheers,
Stephen
More information about the Link
mailing list