geert on Wed, 17 Apr 2002 04:08:01 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] The Economist: The Internet sells its soul |
(Is the commercial doom right? Perhaps not. The tendency described in the article below has always existed and could even be traced back to 1993. Still, there are concrete measures of certain firms taken, such as Yahoo!, which now seriously start to piss off users. I would like to call on everyone here to start to withdraw from Yahoo!, especially those who have lists running there. The adds underneath the each posting are becoming really huge, much bigger then most of the postings. A few lists that I know have recently take the courageous step to move their database to indepedendent servers. That's great. The issue often is that list owners often do not know reliable servers they can trust which could host their list. But the point is: there are so many! Maybe we post a list of servers, ready to receive former Yahoo! groups and make a wider public announcement, showing that there are viable alternatives to Yahoo! All the best, Geert) --- The Internet sells its soul Apr 16th 2002 >From The Economist Global Agenda http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1085967 A new hard-nosed commercialism is spreading over the Internet. Users are increasingly being asked to pay for information and services, while advertising is becoming more intrusive. The backlash has already begun WHEN times are tough, commercial realities bite hard. Internet users are increasingly being asked to pay for information, music and other services. Advertisers, too, have grown more demanding. As a result, the Internet is being transformed from a vast repository of mostly free content into a commercial cauldron where almost everything is for sale. Gone are the days of static banner ads tucked quietly away in the corner of a website. Now ads leap out from all over the place, obliterating the web page or lurking below a browser window ready to pounce when it is closed. Even Internet search terms are up for sale as advertisers bid to have their sites appear at the top of search-engine listings. As if to confirm the trend, Yahoo! has just told its millions of users that its revised privacy rules will now allow it to exploit users' personal information to market its own and business partners' products and services unless users take the trouble to opt out by ticking a long list of "preferences". In retrospect, more aggressive commercialisation of the Internet seemed bound to happen. As the thousands of dotcoms that have already gone to the wall discovered, making money on the Internet is not easy-especially from advertising. Yahoo! might be one of the biggest Internet portals with more than 230m users, but it is now desperately trying to reduce its reliance on ad revenues by providing new paid-for services and content. Last week, the firm posted its fifth consecutive quarterly loss. If users do not go to a special site in the next 60 days to change their "preferences", they are likely to be barraged by e-mails, telephone calls and other direct-marketing material. Yahoo! says that its sales pitches will be restrained: it plans to send e-mails and make calls on target groups of users on behalf of advertisers. But other portals have already gone further and are renting out their customer lists directly to advertisers. As Internet companies try to wring more revenue out of their operations, such business strategies are becoming more attractive. This has handed advertisers a bigger bargaining chip, which has resulted in ads becoming more intrusive. One of the most popular new forms of Internet advertising are "pop-up" ads which appear on the front of a web page whenever it is opened. To close them, users have to click in the correct place. But that can be hard-the pop-up ad for one major car producer dashes off across the screen as soon as a mouse-pointer comes near it. A more subtle version is "pop-under" advertising. Here the ads appear behind the browser, waiting for the user to close their browser before bursting forth. There are also many variations, such as "pop-over" ads which can cover the entire screen; pop-ups which delay their appearance until the user has spent a certain period of time looking at the site, and all sorts of animated ads, some with audio and video files which play without request. A more menacing variety are ads which attempt to "hijack" a browser and repeatedly direct it to a specific site, or automatically try to download a promotional file. Some of these techniques were pioneered by pornographic sites. Now they are becoming mainstream. This new flood of advertising is beginning to irritate many users. But the managers of websites argue that, with advertising revenue so hard to come by, they have little choice. And yet, enraged customers are not in anyone's interest. So some companies are trying to strike a balance between grabbing the attention of users, and infuriating them. For instance, Orbitz, a Chicago-based travel site, tries to set a limit on its pop-under ads so that users only see them once a day on the sites where they appear. A new business is also growing up to provide software that blocks Internet ads. A program called "Smasher", for instance, claims to stop pop-up ads and remove from PCs the "cookies" which advertisers and websites plant on to a user's machine in order to monitor the use of their ads. The cookie works like a small electronic name-tag. Each time a surfer visits a site or clicks on an ad, the cookie identifies that person as having visited the site before or as a newcomer. They can also be used to track what pages a user visits and any data entered. Such information can be aggregated into huge direct-marketing databases, creating a composite profile of an individual web-surfer's habits, often without their knowledge. If the Internet has a soul, it is the vast pool of information which people can explore, usually using one of the web's many free search engines. Now even search engines have become vehicles for marketing products and gathering information on individual surfers. Someone using the search term "digital cameras" to search the Internet, for instance, is probably interested in photography and may be on a shopping expedition. Many search-engine sites are now auctioning such search terms. The more money companies are prepared to pay, the higher their websites will appear in the results. The pioneer of paid listings is Overture, a Californian firm which has built a profitable business from a string of partnerships in which its search results appear on sites such as AltaVista, America Online and Yahoo!. These paid-for results are sometimes identified as "sponsored sites" or "featured sites". An advertiser bids an amount which they are prepared to pay each time a customer clicks on their listing. Those that bid the most appear closest to the top. Advertisers are presently paying around 60 cents to get towards the top of the listing for "digital cameras". The idea behind paid listings is rapidly spreading. Overture, however, is now suing Google, one of the Internet's most popular search engines, alleging that Google's own recently-launched system for auctioning keywords infringes an Overture patent. Google denies this. While the Internet's growing commercialisation is unlikely to slow down any time soon, the most effective strategies and business models are still far from clear. Aggressive, in-your-face advertising seems to be working, at least according to many advertisers. They say that their "click-through rates"-the percentage of visitors to a website who click on an ad-is greatly increased by the use of pop-ups. One music site claims 15% of visitors click on its pop-up ads, compared with just 0.3% who click on stationary banner ads. Other sites claim big increases too. And yet many people may be clicking on these ads accidentally as they desperately try to get rid of them. And some sites have become virtually unviewable because of the barrage of advertising directed at anyone who visits. A user backlash seems inevitable. But if users do not want to be hounded and harrassed by advertising, they may have to consider something which most have been loth to do-paying subscriptions for their favourite sites, just as they do for newspapers, magazines or cable-TV stations. The Internet may be a mould-breaking new medium but, like all the media that came before it, someone has to pay for it, and that usually means, one way or another, users. _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold