Why Ads won't work on Youtube
ET states it as a 'scepter haunting Youngistan — the scepter of YouTube', and I can only laugh.
The only scepter that haunts me is that I have to at times, be subject to Ad. ideas that are so hackneyed and devoid of originality, that it makes me wanna weep. Or maybe I just need to accept that the fact I have hit the other side of thirty and so maybe I am just that bit less stupid, (wiser, perhaps?) :)
It is be noted that the eyeballs such commercials garner on Youtube is nothing to write about. But ET predicts better times in the future, stating, 'Though guaranteed eyeballs will still be lower (on YouTube) than the conventional media plan, it’s only a matter of time when penetration leading to increased Internet usage poses a significant threat to established media.'
Really? Has Prahlad Kakkar stumbled on a 'eyeball goldmine' when he says, “YouTube is a brilliant idea. In three days, it hits a target audience which is relevant. And what’s more, the posting is free”? Sadly, I don't think so. Remember the 'germosaurus' fisaco? The Ad industry must come to accept the fact that most consumers don't want to watch their creations, on TV, anywhere. Now, I am not advocating commercials be done away with, especially since they bring in the revenue for a media vehicle to be in operation. The Admen get away with their creations on TV 'cause, the media in this case is 'externally paced'. Not so, when it comes to the Internet, which is 'self paced'. I can decide to watch what I want to on Youtube, on the Internet; and I can assure you its not any hackneyed Pepsi/Coke commercial. In fact the big Youtube winners, last year have been Britney Boy, Obama Girl and the Battle at Kruger.
Its time Admen realised that their game is up when the viewer has control over a media vehicle. In the case of broadcast media like Television, thankfully for them, they can still subject the viewer to their 'hackneyed' creations and get away with it.
The only scepter that haunts me is that I have to at times, be subject to Ad. ideas that are so hackneyed and devoid of originality, that it makes me wanna weep. Or maybe I just need to accept that the fact I have hit the other side of thirty and so maybe I am just that bit less stupid, (wiser, perhaps?) :)
It is be noted that the eyeballs such commercials garner on Youtube is nothing to write about. But ET predicts better times in the future, stating, 'Though guaranteed eyeballs will still be lower (on YouTube) than the conventional media plan, it’s only a matter of time when penetration leading to increased Internet usage poses a significant threat to established media.'
Really? Has Prahlad Kakkar stumbled on a 'eyeball goldmine' when he says, “YouTube is a brilliant idea. In three days, it hits a target audience which is relevant. And what’s more, the posting is free”? Sadly, I don't think so. Remember the 'germosaurus' fisaco? The Ad industry must come to accept the fact that most consumers don't want to watch their creations, on TV, anywhere. Now, I am not advocating commercials be done away with, especially since they bring in the revenue for a media vehicle to be in operation. The Admen get away with their creations on TV 'cause, the media in this case is 'externally paced'. Not so, when it comes to the Internet, which is 'self paced'. I can decide to watch what I want to on Youtube, on the Internet; and I can assure you its not any hackneyed Pepsi/Coke commercial. In fact the big Youtube winners, last year have been Britney Boy, Obama Girl and the Battle at Kruger.
Its time Admen realised that their game is up when the viewer has control over a media vehicle. In the case of broadcast media like Television, thankfully for them, they can still subject the viewer to their 'hackneyed' creations and get away with it.
Comments