We’re fine with contextual ads, but only when they’re placed next to softer news stories. That, essentially, is the conclusion of a study done by the Seattle Times, with a grant from the Ethics & Excellence in Journalism Foundation. The Seattle Times recruited 1,239 participants for the study, showing them 17 ads. According to Editor & Publisher:
The research found that 69% of those surveyed deemed advertising to have value when the online ads were relevant to the story or page content — while only 36% said that online advertising in general has value.
However, the type of story the ad appeared next to mattered greatly. The respondents’ tolerance of contextual ads increased with softer content, such as news that involved sports, entertainment and travel. When a relevant ad ran next to a hard news article, respondents’ eyebrows shot up. Too many contextual ads surrounding news stories also made readers suspicious.
Research on behaviorally targeted (BT) advertising is equally as enlightening. A study by the University of Pennsylvania and USC School of Law at Berkeley “…found that 66% of those polled did not want advertisements tailored to their personal interests.”
It should be noted that contextual advertising is stil, far and away, the most successful form of advertising online. It is natural that someone would say they were opposed to it, just as people will say they are opposed to any type of advertising. Still, this is an excellent report from E&P. Kudos to The Seattle Times for undertaking the study – there are far too few of these in our industry.
