Scott Porad

Dear Video Advertiser,

I am writing today to talk to you about the advertisements that are placed to fund all the amazing free video I watch online.

Let me start by saying that I have absolutely zero objection to advertising funded content.  In fact, that’s how I make my living.

Regarding advertising to fund video content, I do not object to ads that appear before videos (pre-roll) or ads that appear after (post-roll) or ads that interrupt the content (interstitial, just like on regular ‘ol TV).

Nor do I object to obvious product placement.  One of my favorite TV shows is Friday Night Lights and it is by no accident that two of the main characters have after-school jobs at Applebee’s.  The writers work it into the story reasonably well, or at least such that it completely lame.

Also, when I watch soccer with my Liverpool-obsessed friend Darrell it does not bug me that the players have ads on their uniforms, and there are ads on the field and around the field and basically everywhere.  Like Friday Night Lights, these’s aren’t so intrusive such as to ruin the game.

No, none of these things bother me.  I accept them as the small price I have to pay to get great, compelling entertainment for free.  I think that’s a fair bargain.

But, here’s something I think you should know about: when I’m watching a video on YouTube (or wherever) it is very, very unlikely that I am going to click on one of the video overlay ads.  In fact, I’d say the chances are somewhere between zero and none.

Take a look at the ad below, then I’ll explain why I’m not going to click on it.

Watching video is technically different than reading text.  By technically, I mean our bodies are doing different things.  When reading text, our eyes are scanning the page, so an advertisement may “catch our eye” with valuable information.  (This is the promise of Google Ads, right?)  In this respect, an ad on a page of text might actually add some value to the page (and, for me at least, does not harm).

On the other hand, when watching video our eyes are focusing on one specific thing.  As a result, the overlay ad is a distraction.  It is getting in my way.  It is making it is making it harder for me to consume the content which, in turn, makes me unhappy.  My unhappiness is not aimed at iJustine—it’s aimed at you, for ruining my experience of watching her video.

What I do in this situation close the ad.  Sometimes, if it’s a video I am focusing on closely I will have to stop and pause, then close which is even more aggravating.  It’s basically a lose-lose situation.  I lose because you’ve ruined my experience.  You lose because I didn’t click your ad.

Now, some people might complain that a pre-roll or post-roll or interstitial is a worse viewer experience, but I disagree.

• Pre-roll: I may be eager to get to the content, but at least I’m going to watch for that reason.  The key here is that the ad needs to be proportionate to the content.  A 30 second pre-roll on a 30 second video is annoying.
• Interstitital: somewhat more aggrivating than pre-roll because you’re disturbing the flow of my video, but at least your not ruining the content.
• Post-roll: maybe I’ll pay attention less because it’s easy to click away, but if you truly have relevant* advertising then this is  ripe opportunity…I am there, with nothing to do, waiting for you to fill my mind with your interesting advertising content.

A qualitative data point about pre-roll: I was watching Hulu the other night and they gave me the choice to have one long ad at the beginning of the show, or four short ads sprinkled throughout the show.  I chose one long ad at the beginning.

Watching an ad for 2 or 3 minutes was a small price to pay compared to having my show interrupeted four times.  In fact, I was pleased by having a choice and patiently watched the ad up front.  And, get this, I even recall the advertiser: Toyota Tundra!

On the other hand, some people might want the four ads…to get a break from the show for more popcorn or the bathroom.  Those people have different viewing habits, and that’s okay.  The point is that Hulu is giving its users a choice and that’s resulting in a happier viewing experience.

All that said, let me summarize my thoughts to you: I think advertising-funded content is great; the food I feed my family is a result of ad-supported content.  However, when it comes to advertising-funded video there is about infinity times more likelihood that I am going to pay attention to your pre-, post- or interstitial roll ad versus an overlay ad.  I am never, ever, ever going to click on an overlay.  Overlays reduce the quality of my viewing experience and make me unhappy.

Sincerely,

Scott

* -  That ad above, that I saw on iJustine: completely, 110% irrelevant to me.  With all the data Google has about me—multiple e-mail accounts, a gajillion chat sessions, Picasaweb, Google Docs, etc.—you’d think they could put something relevant on there…what a waste.  Seriously, no ad would be more profitable for them in this case because of the intangible goodwill cost.

I’m very excited about the changes in the media business right now. The Internet is just a wrecking ball to media’s old run, down building.

Okay, maybe that isn’t fair, but I can tell you this: in 5 years (on the outside, 10 years for 100% certain) every type of media we have now: books, newspapers, television and radio are going to be radically different. A lot, if not most of that content, is going to be delivered over the Internet. The technology—production, distribution, and devices—is finally getting good enough that this will be a reality soon as opposed to some time “in the future”.

A few weeks ago, I was in New York having dinner with Gary Vaynerchuck. One of the points Gary was making was that the next three years—the recession years—are going to be key…when the die is cast. In these tough times, we will start to see a real shakeout in the media business and the playing field will be shaped for the next era in media.

My sense of economics tells me the same thing, and this morning I was reminded of that conversation as I was reading James Surowiecki’s current New Yorker column. His column provides some historical evidence to support this idea.

Surowiecki’s column talks about how recessions shake up market share and the impact that different reactions to recession influence a company’s post-recession market position. History shows, he says, that some companies respond aggressively and strengthen their position in the long-run. Others hunker down and, while stabilizing in the short-term, often end up weaker post-recession.

This isn’t just any old recession for the media business. Of course, it’s not a normal recession for any industry, but for the media business it’s the perfect storm. Not only is the media business facing the same macro-economic issues that other businesses are facing, but structural changes in the business brought about by technology are a double-whammy.

So, what’s the moral of the story? The next three years are going to be ruinous and crushing and uncertain. Those who hunker down will survive in the short-term, and those who embrace this tidal wave of change are going to win in the end.

Micah Baldwin writes a brilliant essay where he states, “We are the Blog Poets; the Blogniks.” His essay expresses perfectly description of how I’ve been feeling lately, but have been unable to put into words until now.

At the end of his post, Micah quotes one of my favorite passages from Jack Kerouac’s On The Road. A passage that I will re-quote here:

The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn, like fabulous yellow roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars and in the middle you see the blue centerlight pop and everybody goes “Awww!”

At once, this expresses the bursting enthusiasm of the Beats, illustrates the eloquence and magic of Kerouac’s masterpiece, and hits the nail on the head so directly that my head nearly split open and melted with excitement!

For the last several months I have been completely inspired by the work that I am doing with I Can Has Cheezburger? More inspired, honestly, than I’ve felt about work for many, many years.

Through ICHC I have am seeing the revolutionary changes happening in the media business. I have been learning about it, and meeting people (like Micah) and talking about it, and spending a lot of my free time absorbed with attempting to digest just what’s going on.

The key point is this: The Media Business is a ginormous and powerful beast which means that for it to be threatened by revolution means that some equally and extremely powerful forces are at work.

What are these forces? The Internet—ever expanding broadband networks and continually improving technology for delivering content—that’s what. To anybody paying even a modest amount of attention, it is obvious that the Internet is disrupting the economics of the media business in a major, major way. The industry is going to change and there will be new winners and losers.

But—and the “but” is what makes it so exciting—is that it’s not clear how it’s going to shake out. Thinking about how it’s all going end up has had me in a grip lately. There are so many ways it could happen and nobody knows. Nobody. (In fact, the people who say they know are the ones who know the least!)

I am fascinated by learning and trying to understand the dynamics of what is going on. It’s literally like having a front row seat as motor coach operators flush out the buggy whip manufacturers, as the riders approach the watchtower while the princes keep the view…it’s awesome!

What’s especially wonderful is that what’s happening with media gives me the same feeling I had when I was first involved with the Internet back in 1994-1995. A feeling of knowing that I was part of a force that was larger than me or any one person; a force that was changing the world permanently and like nothing before. (Well, on that point, perhaps since movable type or, at least, television.)

That was an incredibly special time. Back then the “World Wide Web” hadn’t established its dominance. Services like AOL, Compuserve, MSN and AT&T Interchange were battling for “cyberspace”. The whole notion of an INTERconnetedNETwork was novel and new and nobody quite understood exactly what it would mean.

Yet everybody was just trying everything and anything, new ideas, and crazy ideas. And talking and pontificating and discussing and exploring. It was all new and nobody had a freaking clue how it was going to work out.

This, as Micah says, is exactly how Jack Kerouac and the other Beats felt in their time and probably why On the Road, as a novel, has resonated so deeply with me ever since I received it as a birthday gift when I was 19.