h a l f b a k e r y
This would work fine, except in terms of success.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Every advert on a channel operating Votable Television Advertising would have a code visible in the corner of the screen (unique for each advert). Viewers are then able to vote on their favourite and least favourite adverts via the TV channel's web site or other response medium.
Every day the most
unpopular advert is removed and the most popular advert gains free advertising slots. Companies advertising would be informed of the voting system and its consequences beforehand (minimum advert run one week to give the advert a chance to be voted off). Hopefully this would make advertisers strive to produce adverts that, if not humourous and entertaining, would at least not make viewers want chew their own legs off.
[was Big Brother Television Advertising. Changed to 'Votable' to make the idea name more self-explanatory]
(?) Why Is AdCritic.com Offline?
Because they couldn't come up with a working business plan, either. [jutta, Jan 30 2002]
AdCritic shuts up shop
"The website's founders were forced to shut it down because they faced crippling bills for the bandwidth needed to stream the commercials to the hundreds of thousands of visitors." [waugsqueke, Jan 30 2002]
(?) SUPERSTITIAL® (100 & now Brand spanking new 300) are Internets Ad Darlings now.
Granted - this is about Internet advertising... 4.7% Click-through rate on BMW 5-Series = a response rate 12 times higher than that of other creative online advertising units. Point is, whatever makes the sound of "Ka-Ching" is Good. [thumbwax, Jan 31 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
The direction Ad Firms / Agencies and Studios 'formerly(?') in control of TV show content are headed
In my view, there will be a point where 'Critical Mass' of millions, if not billions of dollars over the long haul could be determined by utilizing 'sneak peek' or post-view feedback from Consumer level as proposed by ideas author and various annotations i.e. Rods 'Adulike.com' and "Collaborative web venture, anyone?" Crumbs are tasty [thumbwax, Jan 31 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
(?) Pepsi's new Brittney Spears ads
A bit different, but viewers can decide which ad will air. [1kester, Jan 31 2002]
(?) The Motherlode - all but last 4 months of AdCritics Ads - couple of thousand to choose from
Apparently only 716 clicks have hit this since it was created last summer - this was posted last week on a site I found. "I've got a crude list of links to adcritic's content on DVLAB's site." There must be 2000 QuickTime Movies here. This is to give an idea of what the load time is in the best of times since AdCritic.com was geared to high bandwidth users. [thumbwax, Feb 01 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
198.0 kbps Realplayer [thumbwax, Feb 01 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
Getting off the ground... 56 kbps means 80 kbps - a little more detailed in feedback - a little - doesn't seem to deal with Criteria [thumbwax, Feb 01 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
||(tax return advert) you will vote, you will,you will,you will,you will,you will,you will, ugh!
||Ad campaigns and popularity contests only occasionally have the same goals in mind. Moreover, it seems to me that the advertiser who plunks his hard-earned money down to create and broadcast an advertisement is entitled to make the decision about the most effective means of promoting his products in the public's mind (within the standards and ethics adopted by both the advertising and broadcast industries, of course). A recent example that comes to mind of an effective program of advertising that is probably universally hated by viewers is the long-running "Mentos" candy-mint campaign. I can't imagine anyone liking the ads they run, but try getting their song and irritating story lines out of your mind. Lousy entertainment, but good branding. In this case, and many others, effective and popular need not be synonymous.
||There are, of course, also many examples of very popular ads that failed to make back their costs in product sales and increased market share. Since we're on the topic of Big Brother, the famous Apple "Big Brother" Superbowl Ad is frequently regarded as a classic example.
||I agree with jurist: the purpose of TV advertising is to make the brand more visible, and possibly promote the product tag line. Liking the company for the quality of their adverts is not how most products are sold. I don't know his mentos example, but perhaps the best example in the UK is "Shake 'n Vac". You may have hated the jingle at the time, but more then 15 years after it was last aired, I bet most people remember that it "puts the freshness back". Utterly infuriating but tremendously effective.
||Well, now that adcritic has folded, this would be the time...
||Jesus and Maria, those guys had some numbers.
||One wonders, Rods, how successful such a venture would be in light of Adcritic's collapse. Bandwidth expense killed them. See link.
||Some Criteria Fields for Choices "/" = vs.
More Energizing, Exciting / more Soothing, Relaxing
Denser, Thicker / Lighter, Freer
Harsher, More Aggressive / Gentler, more Peaceful
Colder, Firmer / Warmer, Softer
Brighter, more Dynamic / more Low Key, Calmer
more Plain, Simple / more Elaborate, Sophisticated
Darker, more Pessimistic / Lighter, more Cheerful
more Sensual, Playful / more Sober, Arranged
Borrowed Sensibilities from allmusic.com - I think they apply here
||Have you ever noticed that in many ads any phone numbers or addresses that are given appear to be added in late post-production? They often appear on screen in a different font than anything else or are spoken by a different voice, and in a couple cases I saw a phone number appeared to be spoken by an actor on screen except that his back was to the camera while he spoke it (allowing for a post-production dub).
||One reason for this is to allow advertisers to determine which ad placements sell products. Oftentimes an ad which runs on different stations or in different timeslots will give slightly different addresses and/or phone numbers on each. All addresses in fact go to the same mailslot, and all phone numbers ring up the same operators, but the company can tell which ad prompted a potential customer to call.
||That is correct - the phone must ring more though.
I could make a Vernon-like post going on and on about it, but I'll leave it at this
The idea itself is to provide a service to Ad Industry via Internet. If an Ad Agency were to undertake their own program, there would be several pitfalls - bear in mind that the Advertising world is filled with some of the biggest backstabbers who ever walked the face of this earth - if a program is 'in-house' -all it takes is one Agent with access to divulge the upcoming plan, how much the Ad firm charged, blah blah blah. Regardless, time and money saved over and above what it would cost in somewhat of an ogilopoly (for lack of a better term - which escapes me right now) 'with' other Agencies with whom they are actually in competition for Client Dollars. Clients want Consumers. Ads create desire/ want - disguised sometimes as "need". Consumer sees that phone # and dials. Bottom line as far as Nielsen Ratings, Sweeps months, Commercial air time, Ad Agencies and Clients are concerned is to make more than they spent the last time around.
Here, there and everywhere is where this service fits in.
Current Commercial Productions are running at or above same levels of January any of the preceding 5 years. Going back a bit - September 11 (bless 'em all) - October were times of uncertainty, with a very slow crawl back upward in November with a strong close for December. Busiest December I'd seen from my meager standpoint in the Industry. Every year clients want and get more Advertising money from Shareholders, boards, etc. so they made damn sure they closed out their books in 2001. This created the current situation I see firsthand which I've already covered. AdCritic.com suffered financially because of September 11 - their hardware and people cost money. New York is the epicenter of Ad Decisions - pessimism ruled during the downturn. To put it at its most simple form - That same pessimism on the part of Ad Agencies - AND - Consumers clicking Ads on site cut AdCritic.com off incoming money - AND people were looking for escape - The closure came amid a brutal shakeout for companies that stream content online, (This is the peril) a costly business that has faced weak advertising sales despite the growing popularity of audio and video programming. Adcritic was attracting some 35,000 visitors and serving about 300,000 page views a day when it closed, according to the Web site. But its costs for delivering video and audio were never matched by comparable advertising revenue. Perhaps best known for its archive of Super Bowl spots, the site recorded peak traffic in January 2001, when it streamed 32.5 million video clips in a one-week period - Shut Down 11 months later. There may be manipulative ploys beyond the pale on their part, but I think they're pretty much screwed if they are up to that. Too much at stake one way or the other. Timing is good for someone to step in with a reliable alternative - key is to make it attractive not only to Creators of site, but Consumers aka users, Ad Agencies, but to potential buyers - muahahaha.
Latest Headline from Advertising Age's Site
January 30, 2002
UNIVERSAL MCCANN WINS SONY'S $600 MILLION MEDIA ACCOUNT
Consolidated Business Is for North America
... That's just a tiny piece of the pie.
To quote Bob Marley out of context: "Them Bellyfull, We Hungry"
||I think this is a great idea. With advertising spend dropping, and the proliferation of digital tv channels making advertisers worry that people will stop watching the ads and channel hop to avoid them, here is away of getting people to watch the ads again. Croissant.
||Rods - Internet Radio Stations send out their shows - much like any other medium i.e. Radio or TV - they just send it out - not holding on to 1-at-a-time requests...
Do you think video treated in the same manner would make it easier on servers? Think of it as a Cinema with different theatres and air times. "Now Showing", Next, etc. - listings in different 'theatres' to choose from.
I've laid some things out on paper with that in mind. I'm guessing there are quite a number of ways to lower the overhead of time, money and servers - all while increasing functionality of acting as an interactive service - bio to/from Advertisers, feedback from Joe and Joan Blow. "bio - feedback" if you will.
The downside to Storyboards is - they do this of their own accord - quite easy to do. I've seen many a storyboard for commercials - in day to day activity as well as having been requested by Casting Agents to audition in a few.
In case you missed it - I popped a link up that very briefly overviews what the future holds for TV in all its permutations, be they Actors, Agents, Casting Directors, Producers and Studios vis a vis Ad Firms and their Corporate Accounts. It's quite unsettling, the key is - how to make a few bucks without having the preexisting nepotism firmly entrenched. The future which looms ahead which can be done right which makes +$+ or wrong which makes -$- weighs most heavily in my mind.
||// So yes, let's collaborate (he says even though this HB idea is st3fs!).//
||You're welcome to camp here for a while as long as jutta doesn't mind. I'll have a tidy when you've found a more private spot to talk about plans.
||Love it. Thought of it, then found it was already here. Of course, after reading jurist's comments, I think I have to remain neutral.