February 15, 2012

Sponsored interruptions

Lately I’ve noticed an increase in the number of forced sponsored advertisements played in front of online videos – annoying ones that cannot be skipped.

I think it may have been YouTube that started the trend of running commercials in front of online video content, allowing content creators to opt-in to display advertisements in return for commissions. This can range from $2.50 to $5 per 1,000 views (CPM). Considering YouTube has more than 780 million unique visitors per month, some of the most popular content creators can earn six-figure annual salaries solely from YouTube. It is reported that the most-subscribed-to person on YouTube is making over $1 million per year through his YouTube channel!

There’s obviously a lot of money to be made through this type of online advertising, so it’s no surprise that other media publishers are jumping on board. Recently, I have noticed a number of online news publishers running 30-second adverts (that cannot be skipped) in front of their news videos. One publisher had the same advert played before every one of its news videos… it wasn’t long before I got annoyed and closed the publisher’s whole website. Sorry publisher, but I don’t want to watch a 30-second ad just to watch your 30-second news clip. I’ll read the paper instead.

Our online lives are fast-paced, and we’ve become pretty quick at processing the information overload we’re exposed to online – news, entertainment, social networking, advertising. It’s a speedy media landscape where a 30-second commercial feels like a bit of a road block.

Advertising in media such as newspapers/magazines, television and even online web banners is less offensive. If a web banner has an offer that interests me, I’ll choose to click on it. If a magazine advert interests me, I’ll choose to read it. If a television ad catches my attention for whatever reason, I’ll choose to watch it instead of re-stocking the popcorn bowl. Forced adverts preceding online videos, however, take the choice out of it.

If a company has an offer that is not relevant to me, I don’t want to be made to watch its commercial. When the choice is removed, I actually find myself a little frustrated at the publisher; and, to a certain extent, annoyed at the brand being advertised. In my opinion, this type of forced advertising could do more harm than good to publishers and brands.

YouTube did the research quite a few years ago… apparently up to 70% of viewers close a video when presented with a long commercial to watch first. This is why YouTube, for a while now, has offered the viewer the ability to choose between multiple adverts that might be of more interest to them, or to even skip the advert.

With any luck, other online publishers will follow YouTube’s lead. By returning the “choice” element, it also removes the likelihood that viewers will become annoyed and abandon their websites, or feel frustration towards a brand for interrupting their online experience. It also encourages advertisers to produce commercials that are captivating enough to engage viewers within the first few seconds – a win for creativity!