The most obtrusive advertisement yet?
Is this the most obtrusive advertisement yet for an inside news page? Or is it merely another cute idea to raise revenue?
It’s a quarter-page-plus ad for Green Mountain Coffee that ran in Wednesday’s Hartford Courant.
Our beef with ads like this: They hamper our ability to utilize the rest of the page to the benefit of the reader. And when the reader perceives the paper is weighted more toward the benefit of the advertiser than that of the reader, the reader will simply refuse to spend 50 cents or whatever for that paper.
The ad on the left — from a couple of years ago — strikes us as having a similar problem. The same, perhaps, for the more recent sample on the right:
So, what do you think?
October 8th, 2009 at 11:03 am
I think newspapers are going to continue selling whatever ads they can to keep their heads above water.
October 8th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Ads that go outside of the box can be interesting, but I agree that when a newspaper caters too much to the advertisers, it puts their news judgment into question. If you’re willing to completely twist an inside page to fit the whims of an advertiser, how big of a jump is it to slant a story? Newspapers are supposed to be the haven of the reliable source and legit news gathering. It’s hard to take that very seriously when and ad is interfering with news content.
October 8th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
I hate hate hate the coffee ad. We’ve run the exact same ad in our paper as recently as last week. I agree that it gives the reader the impression that we’d rather have ad revenue than their readership, but at least, AT LEAST, put some steam in that white space! Did I mention I hate this ad?
October 8th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
If they’d had the graphic artist spill some coffee in that white space . . . I think it might of worked. lol
How sad.(
Jacobson strategy at it’s best.
October 8th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
This comment is interesting:
“Our beef with ads like this: They hamper our ability to utilize the rest of the page to the benefit of the reader.”
I think once staff realizes that defining “what benefits the reader” and who gets to make that distinction is more or less an important part of what’s dragging down print today, and once correctly defined, newspapers might be back on the road to recovery.
The answers aren’t always to be found in the halls of the hallowed estab.
Let’s hope for a very speedy recovery.
October 8th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
My coffee ad concept for that spot would have
kept the story space unhampered and featured
the visual image of a previously-parked coffee
cup circle-stain, covered with the ad-copy
stating: “Our copy editors and pressroom staff
beat you to the surrounding news articles.
Bless them all.” Or, something to that effect.
October 9th, 2009 at 6:00 am
I’d like to see the recent research on what readers want, what advertisers want, and the best way to blend the two, rather than opinions. It’s easy to sit back and say “this works” or “that isn’t working.” Anyone have any links? Thanks in advance.
October 10th, 2009 at 5:48 am
Everyone I know outside of the business comments on the shrinking newshole. It doesn’t take much for readers to ditch the extra expense of a subscription and start gleaning their news for free off the web, especially younger readers who’ve not been dedicated consumers of our product. As for older readers, well, they’re not the targeted demographic of most advertising, and they’re literally dying off.