Slashdot Mirror


How Text Ads Tamed Ads on the Wild, Wild Web

securitas writes "In Sunday's New York Times, Randall Stross writes about How Google Tamed Ads on the Wild, Wild Web and how it is largely responsible for the demise of the odious pop-under ad. From the article: "Without intending to do so, the company set in motion multilateral disarmament by telling its first advertisers in 2000: text only, please. No banner ads, no images, no animation.... Google introduced these ads at the very moment when X10 ads were strewn like chewed gum on every square of sidewalk. X10's pop-unders were accepted at mainstream sites run by companies including Microsoft, Yahoo and The New York Times." Remember that "in mid-2001, X10's company Web site was the fourth-most visited" on the Web. Thank you, Google." I'd actually argue that while the text ads had something to do with it, the massive growth in pop-up/under blockers made as much of a difference, if not even more.

23 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. The Google-fication of the facts by Billosaur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see... so Google saved us all from ourselves did they? I seem to remember that even though Google was much talked about in 2000, it had yet to become the preminent search engine it is today.

    Perhaps this has more to do with it: Results 1 - 10 of about 7,590,000 for Pop-up blocker software. (0.20 seconds). Taken from Google itself. Pop-ups weren't simply replaced, they were stamped out. They still exist, but not at the staggering, nauseating level they were once.

    Does anyone know anyone who ever bought one of those X10 cameras?

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    1. Re:The Google-fication of the facts by dslauson · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "Pop-ups weren't simply replaced, they were stamped out.
      Very true, but Google had a hand in that, as well. The Google toolbar, with popup blocking, was popular before browsers like Firefox that have integrated popup blocking were part of the mainstream. It's definitely what I used in IE before I made the switch.
    2. Re:The Google-fication of the facts by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think that the premise of Google killing these ads are false as well.

      Without ad-blocker turned off. (though Firefox is set to block ads), I still get 2-4 pop-unders per session. I wonder how many Firefox itself is blocking.

      In any case, I'm not focused on the ad but the little 'X' button to shut them off. I wonder how often it simply became uneconomical to advertise this way and how often would someone would return to an insignificant website that throws pop-ups or pop-unders around like that? It's a quick way to drive away your audience.

    3. Re:The Google-fication of the facts by trezor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I really hope that you are not actually surfing with Javascipt enabled.

      <sarcasm>Because as we all know, javascript can't be used to improve site functionality or reduce BW overhead in page updates.</sarcasm>

      I take it you've never ordered a plane-ticket online or used any site that actually uses javascript for good. For all you people saying javascript is all bad, I urge you to look at Gmail. That's a web-app at it's finest if you ask me.

      For the record: I have javascript enabled, and I almost never get popups. The annoyance of a popup every now and then hardly constitutes going back to the pre-javascript web.

      --
      Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
    4. Re:The Google-fication of the facts by Loonacy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm surprised no one (that i've seen) has posted this so far on this story:
      Popups died because they're DAMN ANNOYING! It's not because of the pop up blockers, they're only a symptom of the problem. If popups weren't so annoying, there would be no need for the blockers.
      In my opinion, the biggest reason for the decline of popups is how popular (with advertisers) they became. Most people see a popup and immediately close it without even looking at what it is. It's a reflex.
      Text ads just aren't so annoying, so not as many people feel the need to block them. But still, it's not one stamping out the other, it's one thriving and one dying, natural selection on the web.

    5. Re:The Google-fication of the facts by pthisis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I seem to remember that even though Google was much talked about in 2000, it had yet to become the preminent search engine it is today.

      Remember that Google was the preeminent search engine (as far as effectiveness) for over a year before it left "beta" status--it had supplanted Altavista and Lycos well before then among the technically sophisticated. And then note that Google dropped the "beta" label in September of 1999. By then it was clearly the market leader technologically and possibly the leader by market share.

      By June of 2000, Yahoo was using Google to do all their searches and it had clearly surpassed the alternatives by market share.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  2. I like google as much as the next guy... by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but what a stretch. Even Hemos notes it:

    I'd actually that while the text ads had something to do with it, the massive growth in pop-up/under blockers made a large difference as well.

    ( ignoring missing words and all. I have no room to talk in that dept )

    Can we please attribute things to where they belong? google may be the second coming of Christ, who knows, but let's try to keep their achievements realistic.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:I like google as much as the next guy... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pop up blockers have nothing to do with the reduction of in-page (ie, non-popup) flash ads and the like. I do believe that, for the most part, these have been declining as well. I think this can be attributed at least in part to Google's push for text ads.

  3. Capitalism at work? by altoz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's not forget why text ads and pop-up blockers became popular in the first place... People demanded it! I don't know a single person that likes intrusive advertising like the pop-unders and the flash animations that come on top of everything else. What the google ads show is what everyone should have known before... The internet is a place where people come looking for you, and when that's the case, you don't need loud, fancy graphics, you only need enough information for them to identify your product (text).

    1. Re:Capitalism at work? by HD+Webdev · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's not forget why text ads and pop-up blockers became popular in the first place... People demanded it!

      I think it would be fair to say that the Slashdot crowd as a whole has always had higher average bandwidth access than the masses. This difference probably is much more narrow compared to a couple of years ago.

      People did demand those blockers and my customers seemed to not be so much bothered by the fact of the ads themselves, it was the nightmare of navigating the web at 28-56K and often downloading more advertising per page than actual content.

      A lot of people that I've dealt with didn't really care about the ads if they had ISDN/DSL/CABLE unless they were seeing massive amounts of popup windows per page. It was the dialup people who spent 60+ seconds to load a page that otherwise would have taken a small portion of that time who were the most actively pissed off in my experience.

      --
      This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
  4. Other ad annoyances by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...and how it is largely responsible for the demise of the odious pop-under ad.
    Good! Perhaps they can help us get rid of other annoying ads, such as eye-wrenching Flash animations, or innocent-looking ads that play a sound when you roll the mouse over them. Some of those are bad enough to give you a heart attack if you have the sound turned way up.
    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  5. Not just Google by lheal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe Google had some effect, but I think they were just part of the more general backlash against such ads.

    Nobody but the parasuits liked them. Everyone savvy enough to know how to turn them off did so. I'd wager some people even quit web browsing over them.

    Google didn't want them because 1) they slurp bandwidth and B) they can't be tracked for content and $) because they don't fit the Google "no evil" culture.

    Those reasons pretty much coincide with how the rest of us saw them, too. Except for the pervs, that is. (Camera to spy on wife in shower? Ooh, baby!)

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
  6. Tamed? by DigitalWar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wouldn't say internet ads have been tamed. Sure there are less popups and popunders. But whatabout all the new ones which cover the page (Fox is a major offender here), or noisy ads (I don't know if America got subjected to the jamster ads much).

  7. Re:Pop-up ads are coming back by CokeBear · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Why not CBC Sports? If you're a Canadian taxpayer, you've already paid for it anyway! (And most of the ads are unobtrusive, and for other Canadian government things like the Postal Service)

    CBC Sports

    CBC Hockey

    --
    Reality has a liberal bias
  8. Adblock by DrJAKing · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are there adverts on the internet then? WTF...

    True enough though, for a while I couldn't be bothered to filter Google's ads. Nowadays I find RIP and CustomizeGoogle keep the interface nice and clean.

    Useful links for those that like to make their own mind up:

    http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
    http://www.customizegoogle.com/
    http://rip.mozdev.org/index.html
    http://adblock.mozdev.org/
    http://www.pierceive.com/

    And for those that might bleat "without advertising, many sites would fail" I say Good. Let those sites fail. Give me micropayments and an honest relationship.

    1. Re:Adblock by damiam · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If you shoplift, and everyone else shoplifts, you get free stuff, but the store soon fails. Bad.
      If you don't shoplift, and everyone else shoplift, you spend a lot of money, and the store STILL fails. Awful.
      If you don't shoplift, and nobody else shoplift, you spend money, and the store survives. Good.
      If you shoplift, and nobody else shoplifts, you get free stuff, and the store survives. Great!

      Before anyone gets all pissy, I'm not trying to equate adblocking with theft, morally speaking. But the cause/effect situation is similar. One person shoplifting is not going to significantly affect the bottom line of a business, and will probably not cause prices to go up. But that doesn't mean shoplifting is OK. This is where the tragedy of the commons comes in - if we all block ads/shoplift/let our cattle graze on the commons, then there will be nothing left for anyone and we all lose. That's the flaw in your argument - just because you have a small impact doesn't mean you have no impact.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  9. What's that, a Google PR stunt? by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone who is using AdWords knows that Google introduced standard (graphical) banners in skyscraper format a while ago... The only reason why text ads became so popular is that AdSense was made available in a very simple way to many small web sites that would have a hard time finding paying advertisers otherwise (and of course Google's popularity helped too).

    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
  10. Smart Advertisers Bought into Text Ads by xoip · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Google Ads made it possible to target advertising dollars in a way marketing managers could only dream of before. Text ads provide pinpoint market segmentation to advertisers, and was probably a strategic move do avoid higher bandwidth costs associated with Images. Once Google lights up their dark fibre, watch for an increase in Google Banners by companies looking for brand recognition rather than sales. Those like x10 (maybe your favorite VOIP company)who have no focus and listen to their ad agencies blow millions dollars by tossing stuff at people who are interested in their stuff.

  11. Pop-up blockers boosted Firefox more, Google also by CodeShark · · Score: 4, Insightful
    My experience might be a bit different, but it was Firefox's unobtrusive addition of a Pop Up Blocker that was the single most important change between the bad old days and now.

    Why? the Netscape browser was dying, IE Version whatever was the buggy, proprietary, virus-target of the day only other thing out there, and because MS is also in the advertising game via MSN, etc., they weren't about to give users the ability to turn off a specific class of advertisements without making it odious.

    Then Firefox declares war via pop-up blocker, and within a short time the early adopters (who are really the most important predictor of future technological trends, methinks) were moving in droves away from IE, and I don't think I was more than a few days behind them.

    Same time, Google's model saves me bandwidth and eye strain, and --ka- boom!!-- between the two the 'Net returned to being a useful tool with one tenth the amount of pain.

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
  12. Re:X10 not a bad company IMHO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    I'm not sure they learn the right lesson from that.

    "Another sale to someone annoyed by our ads."
    "Good. Up the placement for next week."

  13. Money by trollable · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is no moral here, people go for what works. For the webmasters (hosting the ads), AdSense text ads means more money because these ads are targeted and received more clicks. They are also less annoying. For the advertisers, text ads means less money because these ads are targeted and received only valuable clicks. They are also quite well perceived. So I would say the decline of popups is not due to text ads but to *targeted* and *less* intrusive ads. BTW, popups (being for ads or not) are considered something bad (in terms of ergonomy).

  14. More invasive by BenjyD · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Many sites have even more invasive ads now that everyone is using pop-up blockers. Things like the annoying paid links (double underlined) with huge tooltips inserted in the middle of articles, dhtml pop-overs, "infomercial" style text ads in the middle of articles.

    There was some research done recently showing that the sheer number of (non-internet) adverts we see every day has just caused people to develop better ways of filtering them out.

  15. Re:X10 ad museum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You misspelled ad nauseam.