--- In [email protected], "Roxanne Darling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Thanks for stating that Enric.  I don't think much of anything is
> inherently evil. Life is about context, and in that sense, anything is
> possible. It is in the specifics that we find ourselves making
> choices.  I see so much opportunity for formerly disparate groups of
> people to reinvent business relationships, as I hope was obvious from
> my comments.
> 
> R


Advertising isn't evil in and of itself.  It definitely can be used
for evil or have evil intentions, such as getting the public to desire
to buy a car when tests have indicated that the airbags don't work
properly or the tires are prone to uncommonly high failure rates or
you know the car tips over if you change directions at high speed. 
That's choosing your $$$ over "what's right" or over the safety of
people that you don't know and will never meet and will never even
know existed unless they end up as a statistic in the news because of you.

> On 3/3/07, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From my response on the blog comments:
> >
> >  Since some on here and the videoblogging group have the view that
> >  "advertising is evil." I want to state I don't share that philosophy.
> >  Advertising is essential in informing on the talent and
capability one
> >  wants to exchange with someone else's products of talent. 

Sure.  By pure definition, advertising is "business".  Making people
aware of something in the hopes of achieving a particular outcome. 
Neither evil nor good is automatically attached.

I think the point was more that advertising has a goal and that goal
has nothing to do with the truth.  That's why you see all this "dirty
tricks" campaigning during election times.  Isn't it 'funny' how the
dirt all comes out near the elections?  How is it that this person has
been doing this job for 3 1/2 years and you never found out that he
dodged the draft, but NOW it's all over the media? :)  That's
effectively TWO lies.  The lie of bringing it up NOW as if it's
"news", and the lie of omission of having not said anything about it
until now.

Meanwhile, advertising could have the goal of making you aware that
you shouldn't litter or that you should know where your kids are @
10pm or announce the availability of battered women's shelters and
services.  Or, it could bring something very important to light,
changing the landscape of the American trailer park population
forever........ like the FLOWBEE!!!!! <http://www.flowbee.com/>

> >  It can be
> >  missused and my point is that putting ads in the main video stream is
> >  mainly a missuse.
> >
> >  -- Enric
> >  -======-
> >  http://www.cirne.com


I agree to the degree that at this point, there's no definite context
available for in-line advertising.  You get whatever the computer
serves, like google ads.  The way around this is to choose the ads
yourself and incorporate them in a way that you feel is palatable for
the viewers that you care about.  Wreck & Salvage
<http://wreckandsalvage.com/> would be an example of this.  They have
their own process of determining who the sponsor is going to be for
this week and they have their own process of integrating the
information about the advertiser into their show that makes it clearly
a part OF the show instead of something tacked on by someone hoping to
exploit the fact that your eyes are on the computer screen right now.

Philosophically, "I'm trying to sell you something now" is a departure
from the vibe of whatever the video you made was really trying to say.
 The only way it isn't is if your sponsor or advertiser happens to
have an ad that is in sync with what your video was about.  It takes
the viewer from being immersed in the show (if they ever were in the
first place) to the mental understanding that you see them watching
your video, and you've chosen to inform them that such-and-such movie
is in the theaters right now.  The question becomes "why did he/she
tell me that?", and the answer is "in the hopes that I click on it, in
the hopes that they get paid for it".  Now, the viewer's concentrating
on the fact that you just advertised to them instead of whatever the
focus of your video was.  Of course, it's even worse if you actually
know what you're doing with video and end it in a way that's intended
to leave the viewer with a certain feeling about what they just
watched, and then this video SLAMS onto the screen and just sits there
going "click me! :D click me! :D".

Unfortunately, I think it's even worse to have ads moving and changing
WHILE the video's running.  Personally, I don't watch television like
that and I don't want to watch videos on the internet like that
either.  There are many other people though that watch television
under similar circumstances.  They have their TV next to an open
window where they have cars passing by or neighbors.  They have radios
next to the TV with flashing LEDs for the equalizer display.  They
have a TV in every room and leave them on to the effect of the sound
from one channel being clearly heard while another is being watched. 
If you're used to watching videos with all those distractions, ads on
the page probably won't bother you.  For me, it pulls my attention
from what's going on in the video to whatever moved on the ad, causing
me to remember that this person is advertising things to me that I
didn't ask them about and pulling me out of experiencing their video
the way they intended me to.  Of course, the lack of context of the
rotated ads make it even worse, since I'm wondering why the hell the
content creator thinks I give a damn that there's a flowbee up for
auction on ebay right now. :/

--
Bill C.
http://ReelSolid.TV


> >  --- In [email protected], "Roxanne Darling" <okekai@>
> >  wrote:
> >  >
> >  > You summarized it beautifully Jan. Simple, if not easy. And
easier for
> >  > some than others. Beach Walks - as a show - was founded on the
> >  > principle of "don't get invested in the results of what you do." It
> >  > takes guts on some days, on other days it is utterly
liberating. Your
> >  > words are going on my bulletin board.
> >  >
> >  > When there is true peership among a producer and a sponsor
*and* the
> >  > audience, it is in everyone's best interest to tell and hear the
> >  > truth. We just don't have many examples of that yet, though
many are
> >  > in the works.
> >  >
> >  > >>> How do we pry ourselves off the dilemma's horns? Hmmm?
> >  >
> >  > >>> By committing to tell the truth at the risk of losing the
> >  > advertising client.
> >  > >>> By choosing clients carefully.
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Rox
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> 
> -- 
> Roxanne Darling
> "o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian
> 808-384-5554
> 
> http://www.beachwalks.tv
> http://www.barefeetshop.com
> http://www.barefeetstudios.com
> http://www.inthetransition.com
>


Reply via email to