Los Angeles Advertising Company Interactivity and Consumer Avoidance

Staff Writer: Carolyn Johnson
Date: 5.28.2012

The future of advertising has constantly been contemplated and written about by every Los Angeles advertising company ever since we’ve entered the Internet age just over a decade or so ago. One might agree that it the important thing is not where to go with advertising, but how to handle such challenges when they do arrive.
The dawn of the digital age raises all sorts of issues in any advertising company Los Angeles. Advertising firms have recognized that the new media age has brought about both fortune and challenges for advertising and marketing.
One paramount challenge to advertising has been the emergence of the DVR, which can pause, record, rewind, and fast-forward live television. Thus the consumer can effectively fast-forward through ads. On the other hand, the digital age has brought about new way to advertise to costumers: interactivity. Both interactivity and new possibilities to avert ad avoidance will be discussed here.
With the Internet growing as a popular medium, it has been assumed that more interactive an ad experience is, the more positive result will come from the consumer. Although interactivity has been studied, it still stands as little understood, and there still comes the question of at what threshold will interactivity breed positive results, and alternately, at what level of interactivity will the experience breed negative results. How a consumer will react to these varying levels of interaction has been studied in various marketing firm Los Angeles settings.
Marketing firms have also studied an important concept called expected interactivity, or how much a consumer should expect to interact with an ad. One study performed by Bobby Calder and associates and recorded in the article “The Effects of Media Context Experiences on Advertising Effectiveness,” (Journal of Advertising, 2007) generally showed that the subjects with low expected interactivity generally showed less favor towards sites than forced a high level in interactivity.
Conversely, subjects with high expected interactivity reacted favorably towards the higher levels of interactivity, but not so favorably towards ad with lower interactivity. This reveals a consumer’s more complex reactions towards different levels of interactivity in Internet ads, which teaches advertisers that consumer interactivity is generally a good thing, as long as the consumers you end up attracting know what to expect.
Although ad avoidance by consumers has always been the norm, especially as television watchers constantly channel surf to avoid ads, now the problem as been intensified thanks to the emergence of the DVR, which can allow viewers to outright skip ads. This is undoubtedly a huge blow to the advertising industry.
To avert the problem of ad avoidance, one proposed solution has been to introduce the ad experience as a split-screen during regular programming. This way, consumers are forced to watch advertisements, and the split-screen reduces the size of space that the program fills to favor the ad; however, testing has shown that this method of advertising weakens the viewer’s cognitive response to the ad, as their almost complete attention is on the program in question and not the ad. The exception to this rule would be ads that have weaker messages or weaker campaigns to begin with; in other words, ads that require less cognitive activity thrive more that the alternative using the split-screen.
Although much has been written about the future of advertising, the full story’s yet been told. By thoroughly studying consumer behaviors in an ever-expanding digital landscape, we can create better solutions for reaching the best audience possible for a brand’s product.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *