There was an attention drought for the
longest time. Marketers paid a fortune for TV ads (and in fact, network
ads sold out months in advance) because it was so difficult to find
enough attention. Ads worked, so the more ads you bought, the more
money you made, thus marketers took all they could get.
This attention shortage drove our economy.
The
internet has done something wacky to this situation. It has created a
surplus of attention. Ads go unsold. People are spending hours on
YouTube or Twitter or Facebook or other sites and not spending their
attention on ads, because the ads are either absent or not worth
watching.
When people talk about the problem with free online,
they’re missing the point. Free is creating lots of attention, but
marketers haven’t gotten smart enough to do something profitable with
that attention.
Hint: funny commercials with chimps won’t be the answer.
It
turns out that the almost infinitely long tail of attention varieties
is what will kick open the monetization of online attention. Yes,
I will give my attention to an ad, but only if it’s anticipated,
personal and relevant. We still give permission to marketers that earn
it, but so few marketers do.
Simple example: Ten years ago, there was nowhere for a company like Best Made Axe
to advertise. Today, with billions of tiny micromarkets, it’s not hard
to imagine many audiences of one or two or three or ten that would be
delighted to know about their products. Right now, there’s no easy way
for a marketer to conceptualize that effort, never mind execute it,
though it’s surely coming.
Big companies, non-profits and even
candidates will discover hyperlocal, hyperspecialized, hyperrelevant…
this is where we are going, and it turns out that this time, the media
is way ahead of the marketers.
(Image source: blog.oregonlive.com)
