Can ads be more exciting than content?

The effectiveness of ads are, evidently, going down rapidly. Nothing new there. There are many theories about it. I, for one, think it's because humans naturally avoid things that suck.

Every now and then, though, we see an ad that doesn't suck. Sometimes, an ad is down right riveting. This is rare, but when it happens, people pay attention.

From this simple insight, we can deduce two things:

1. Your ads need to be exciting. Yes, they also need to make a damn good sales pitch. But if the ads are boring, no one will pay attention and your pitch will go unheard.
2. Wherever possible, run your ads alongside content that is less interesting than the ads themselves. Direct response marketers have known for a long time that commercials are more effective when viewers are bored than when they are riveted. That's why you don't see alot of direct response commercials while watching Heroes, but you can't find anything other than "paid programming" at 2am. Conveniently, it's also cheaper.

In short, your biggest competitors in advertising aren't other advertisers. It's the very content producers you're paying to run your ad. This is true in print, on television, on the radio, and yes, on the web. People are more likely to notice and pay attention to your stuff when everything else being displayed bores them.

(Of course, if everything else is too boring, they might just leave. This is especially true on the web. The "trick" is to make your ad exciting enough that it can still effectively run alongside great content.)

Photo credit: GfxSally