Wednesday, 12 November 2014

Another attempt to kill the banner

Sites should not run banner Ads

I´m coming up with a confrontation happened last week. This time it was the journalist Farhad Manjoo from NewYork Times who wanted to kill the banner. On november 5th he wrote an article called "Fall of the Banner Ad: The Monster That Swallowed the Web". Mainly he says banners ar not good because of these reasons:
- They are bad for usability (they ocuppy space and have animations)
- They are ineffective (see banner blindness)
- They are against privacy
- They make sites load slow

Also he made some comments on his timeline:



So, it was Randall Rothenberg, head of iab who actually answered him, explaining deeply every of his misconceptions in an article about record on Display Advertising  Also there were some tweets






Some days later on Business insider, there was an interview to Farhad Manjoo, at the Jay Yarow show where you can hear anothe replay from Mr Manjo:



Well, if you hear the whole interview about the controversial, there´s a pair of statements at Mr. Manjoo´s side:

First one: He says "banner ads are ruining the whole web". We should understand this from the point of view of a journalist. So, content is king, "those sites shouldn´t run banner ads, they lose the ability to connect with the audience". There´s the idea of content, engagement, quality Ads, instead of what he sees.

Next one: "The problem with banner Ads in these twenty years is that it is difficult to create another business model". This is about monetization.

Last one: "The difficulty of using the web because of banners. They slow down the web, they are not good for user experience"

Maybe this is a very romantic idea of what the web should be, don´t know, they say the internet has its own plans...

Anyway, this is not new. There are many people wishing to kill banners, whether they come from SocialMedia, Content Marketing, Native Advertising, UX, etc. Sometimes they want to sell their industry instead of display advertising, sometimes there are other reasons. I wouldn´t say banners are dying, I would say display advertising is evolving, and much more now than ever.

Some of Manjoo´s expectatives for banners possibly are in the trend for display advertising, we can see it clearly on november and december (everyone will be posting about trends). Manjoo says banners should be related to content, respecting user experience, creative (Ad Quality), effective, and with a new business Model. Maybe visibility can arrange that point. We´ll see.



Monday, 17 March 2014

Weborama



Just last video we´ve just launched at Weborama, where I work ;)

Also a document about Data Science


Tuesday, 11 February 2014

Responsive Ads are not a Trend



So, everyone is talking about BigData, RTB, NativeAds, Mobile and video, but no one is talking about Responsive Ads as a trend. I made a compilation of about 15 sites talking about what´s trending on digital advertising, and couldn´t find "Responsive Ads" as a trend.

Let´s go deeper: There are many points and actors involved in this to answer just with a digital trends compilation:

- Planning: Mainly related to Media Agencies
- Technology: This has to do with Publishers websites and AdServers
- Production: Creative Agencies 



- Planning 
This is the point, Media Agencies are planning for different screens, at least in Europe, there´s no the thought of "one for all" yet. So they plan this way:
  1. Desktop
  2. Smartphone
  3. Tablet 

Rarely will you see one placement for all of them. Probably here´s the big jump because this is involving budgets, investments and more. 



- Technology
In terms of technology if you go to the redesigns of well known american sites as  (http://www.usatoday.com/ , http://www.nytimes.com/ , or even http://www.bostonglobe.com/ (one of the greatest examples of Responsive Web Design), you still see those Flash banners there, specially for some positions. You always see the 300x250 and the 728x90. To move to Responsive Creative Design, Ad Technology shall be HTML based. This is not happening.

Why is this? There are some theories:
  1. First and obvious: The industry is not prepared for this. Specially publishers´websites are not ready for this jump. The tendence is to to a Desktop and a Mobile site (Mobile first has not won yet). A Responsive Ad must be inside a responsive Layout.
  2. RTB Ad Technology is based on Flash, usually with strict requirements for formats. Anyway, moving to HTML could be easy. All Ad Cookie system is working also with HTML. We still have to see if Google tries to launch "the Google Ad id".

- Production
Could be the hardest part of it. Designers are used to work with Flash, many of them are already working with HTML, we see it on microsites. Moving to HTML for Display Advertising is quite easy, there are good tools on the market such as GoogleWebDesigner, AdobeEdgeAnimate, just html5 Scratch and so on.

For example in last update from Adobe Edge Animate (CC 2.0), just less than a month, there´s a part about making responsive Ads or microsites. You can find a tutorial on AdobeTV


Also in the blog from Joseph Labrecque, one of the Adobe ingeneers working for Adobe Edge Animate project, you will find info about this

There is also a technology that could come, related to svg. Just see the demo of thi display Ad


See the Pen Snap Display Ad by fernandocomet (@fernandocomet) on CodePen.
In terms of Production this really means a serious change, I would say this is better for programmers than for designeers.

Maybe we shall see a kind of tool to make Responsive Ads the way Froont, Webflow or Adobe Edge Reflow are doing with RWD





- What does the iab says?
Let me give you a little summary of iab  Responsive Design and Ad Creative: An IAB Perspective:

In very broad terms, responsive design today refers to a web design process enabling content (including advertising) to resize, reformat, reorganize, and/or reposition itself in real-time so that it looks good and prioritizes itself to suit the likely needs of a user, based on the screen that user happens to be looking at.

It is important to distinguish between:
• responsive web design (RWD), for web content, and

• responsive creative design (RCD), for advertising creative.

Responsive Creative Design refers to an automated ad server process of optimizing the look and fit of an ad creative to the ad opportunity/ screen/ inventory available.

There are two main ways that responsive creative is being built today.
• Stretch. A responsive creative can use different forms of HTML5 or similar technology to dynamically adjust the size of a creative asset to fit the space available.

• Swap. A responsive creative can be assembled with the server dynamically selecting creative assets from a package of components to suit the ad opportunity.

What is not RCD:
- RCD is not a synonym for “dynamic creative.”
- RCD is not packaging different complete ad creatives in a single tag.
- QA test ads must be done with built using RCD.

- RCD is not moving ad assembly to the client side.

Industry Challenges:
- Ad operations: Planning, Tags, Tracking
- User Experience: Stretch method, Swap method, New Ad Units
- Standards: Still early, Mobile first
- Business models: Integrated sales, non integrated buyers
- Reporting: Inventory and pricing, Metrics by screen size

Implications for Publishers:
- Ad servers
- Ad positioning
- Mobile versus standard landing pages
- RWD and the mobile experience

- RWD and video

And my favourite sentence: "RCD is going to cause disruption".


Interesting articles on Responsive Banners
- Make responsive advertising work for you
- The state of responsive advertising: the publishers' perspective
- Making Advertising Work In A Responsive World
- Responsive Banner Ads with HTML5 and CSS3
- Good examples of RCD
- What Google says about Responsive Ad Units
- Responsive Ads in the Real World: Ad Server Implementation
- Econsultancy - Responsive design: the problem with mobile ads and how it can be overcome
- Responsive Design and Ad Creative: An IAB Perspective
- What every publisher needs to know about responsive web design and advertising... now&how
- Digiday: Responsive Ads are coming
- ThinkGoogle: The New Multi-Screen World Study

Thursday, 6 February 2014

Authentic YouTube Views

There´s a post on Google Online Security blogspot about YouTube view counts and their controversy related to fraudulent views.

I have received proposals to do for example a pre-roll video with a video from a YouTube video channel LOL

So, this is related to third party view service providers: It is not allowed purchasing views for videos directly from third-party websites (e.g. paying $10 for 10,000 views).

Why not use these services?
- YouTube is an organic video site and the best way to naturally distribute your video content.
- In terms of distributing branded content YouTube TrueView solutions offer a robust and scalable way to distribute media.
- TrueView builds view counts that creators care about at an extremely cost effective rate, on a pure/native video platform.
- TrueView offers a brand safe, native video-viewing experience with myriad targeting capabilities with deep insight into our content and audience makeup.

If you're going to use one of these services, find out how they promote your content and do your due diligence.
- Ask how they seed your videos
- Ask about transparency of data and analytics
- Ask about targeted demographics
- Ask if they use videos as incentivization or gating items

The question: How to increase YouTube Views?
A legitimate view is a view is a user-initiated watch of a video where the primary purpose is to watch the video; this means that a real human being wishes to see a video, chooses which video to watch, and then acts on that choice.

Strategies for gaining YouTube views not allowed:
Services that attempt to get YouTube views through automated means or attempt to force or trick viewers into watching videos are not ok. This could include the following:
- Purchasing views from third-party websites (e.g. paying $10 for 10,000 views)
- Deceptive layouts on third party websites that trick viewers into playing a video when they click unrelated elements on the page.
- Serving pop-unders: A new window that appears under a current window.
- Redirects: When the URL changes and sends the viewer to a new page in the middle of a click.

All these practices are describe here: Spam, deceptive practices, and scams as a result you could have a frozen view count
See also: YouTube Terms of service



See also: YouTube view counts on embeded videos