Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Why Is Everyone Still Dumping Money Into Banner Ads?
blog.heavybagmedia.com — Ninety-nine percent of Web users do not click on ads on a monthly basis. Of the 1% that do, most only click once a month. Less than two tenths of one percent click more often. That tiny percentage makes up the vast majority of banner ad clicks.
thinkingserious- 151 diggs
- digg it
- campo, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4this is actually pretty interesting, It'd be cool to see more info on the vision studies
- citizensagainst, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1I agree that banner ads are stupid and probably a waste of money for the most part, but what about ads that take up the screen when you mouse over them? And how many of those click-throughs are accidental? I know I've done that.
One thing I don't like about this article is his use of "social web". For goodness sake, just say Web or Internet. It's useless trying to create a difference any more.- pixcom, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Agreed, it's just the internet, but we need context, and so specifying "social web" is meant to contrast "web 1.0" at least I don't call it "Web 2.0" and I'm not even a very big fan of the term "Social Media" oh, and I'm also not a guy, so it'd be "her use of..." But thanks for the digg and the comment!
- geekchic, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3People don't "click" on adverts in magazines either, but they still appear. Why is that?
We need to get away from this old-fashioned (in web terms) idea that banner adverts only work if people click on them there and then. An advert for McDonalds is not just about getting clicks onto the website but also about brand building and making people aware of their offers so that when out and about in the real world, they have a memory recall of the offers when thinking about lunch.- thinkingserious, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Great observation. Fortunately, in the case of online banner ads, you can measure these impressions with much finer detail than with print media.
- pixcom, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2You need to take the eye tracking into account, it's not just that they're not clicking, it's that they're not even looking, so where's the branding benefit if they're not even looking at the ad?
- thinkingserious, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Point taken.
Also, note that our brain takes in far more information that what is tracked by recording what the eyes are looking at.
There was a good documentary about this sort of thing on Google Video. If I can find it, I will link here.
- thinkingserious, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Great observation. Fortunately, in the case of online banner ads, you can measure these impressions with much finer detail than with print media.
- dcpfilm, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Many agencies can't see past the Direct Marketing school of thought and think of it as a numbers game. They cling to the lifeboat of metrics and what they know. Maybe it's time let go of the banner ad concept.
- pixcom, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3I like that the conversation here on Digg has more comments than the actual blog post
- JBravada, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Brands need to shift the pool of dollars they're spending on banner ads, blasting us with a one-directional message, and instead opt for more friendlier, useful opportunities like sponsoring features that usually cost users money or participating in a relevant way in a relevant space.
- spercival, on 07/08/2008, -1/+0great post
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by