Mobile IM next year? Get real The real reason Nokia is purchasing Symbian

 
Tsahi Levent-Levi

Is advertising a viable monetization technique for entertainment?

Categories: Technology
June 23rd, 2008

It seems that in the last several years, the only business case presented by companies is advertising.

  • Search? Advertising.
  • Blogs? Advertising.
  • Calls? Advertising.
  • Entertainment? Advertising.

Although advertising is a good monetization technique for some, it is not a ‘one size fits all’ solution.

Advertising place in life - here or in hell?

Let me first split the markets into two specific types: hunters and gatherers. I am not talking about prehistoric human societies, but rather about the concept of what we do in different situations.

Gatherers

As gatherers, we’re collecting – usually information. Examples of this include searching or reading blogs.

When searching I am already on the lookout for something – searching for it, gathering information. When reading blogs, I am usually reading specific blogs and blog posts to gain insights about a given market.

In both these activities, we skim through information, usually not trying to concentrate and focus on anything in depth. Nicholas Carr has insights about this behavior over several posts in his blog.

This kind of an activity is quite suitable for advertising. As the user is already searching, why not provide him with relevant advertisements? He is not focused on anything specific thing after all.

Hunters

As hunters, we’re obsessed on a specific target.

Hunting is like calling – you cannot do it in parallel to other activities – you either talk to someone on the phone or do something else. Whenever I type on my computer and talk to my wife over the phone at the same time, she notices it immediately and I get reprimanded on the spot.

Entertainment is also a hunting activity. If you are watching a good movie at the cinema, you are bound to get annoyed at that nasty mobile call that someone receives in the most thrilling scene. It is no wonder that ABI research found out that people using IPTV are very likely to skip advertisements: “Nearly four of five TiVo customers and over 82% of service provider DVR customers indicated they skip all or most commercials”.

In entertainment today, the only possibility is degrading to silent advertising techniques. Now that we’ve gotten used to advertising in gathering scenarios (mainly searching), who wants to digress back to TV commercials?

For those thinking of monetizing through advertising, it is important to note that it fits a small set of large companies who provide the infrastructure. As Stacey Higginbotham from GigaOm explains:

“Application companies have some ad revenue, but right now they’re kind of like cable channels for the web, while an ad platform is the means to a business model that supports that cable channel.”

Companies need to search for other monetization techniques, especially in the entertainment and telephony markets. Advertising fits best to search, and even then, you’d rather be the ad platform and not the companies using it.

1

Comment or trackback

  • 1. Russel  |  June 23rd, 2008 at 10:46 am

    All the above is a perfect illustration of how much we have changed since the advent of the Net/CNN. Our approach to literature and news, as well as entertainment, has morphed significantly.

    In the days of the dial phone I used to devour a book a week and set aside two days to read (not scan) the newspapers; today I’m lucky to get through two books a year. I used think it was age but now I know that I have become dependent on the web both as a source of infotainment as well as a way to connect with people, which is useful for an immigrant.

    Is this a good thing? I don’t think so. I believe the Net has made me dumber. I may have access to the world’s biggest library, but I seldom have time to really read, to sift, to absorb relevant content. Most of the time I scrabble around frantically, like a crazed zombie searching for flesh in a post-crash London from the movie 28 Days.

    I feel the same way about the iPod-era. I was a muso and an audiophile for many years and then… I bought a friggin iPod.

    First I was captivated about having access to all my tunes on a single portable box (gatherer), but in time I found the whole experience draining. Clicking endlessly through songs (hunter) I found myself humming “Can’t get no… sat-is-fac-tion”.

    Age to blame yet again? No. I came to learn that most music recorded in the past decade has been optimised for iPod listening (i.e. through tinny speakers) so engineers tend to record everything at “Ten” just to get product through the door (much like the ridiculously loud adverts one is subjected to on TV and at the cinema).

    So now I get by using a small source, fed by FLAC, with only two or three albums (circa early ‘90s) on board as well as a quality set of phones and a mini p-amp. And now I am satisfied. LoFi is the way to go; and we have to find the same balance when it comes to the Net and advertising.

    In any event, true hunter-gatherer societies were very different to the way you describe them. They knew where they came from and they knew where they were going. They hunted, and gathered as and when, they did not obsess over acquisition and they knew when to rest. Ask any hunter-gatherer – “Quality trumps Quantity, every time.”

Required

Required, hidden

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed