I think you're off base with reason #2.

“People do not trust advertising? Look at the ads surrounding your article. Is there one company or brand that you don’t recognize? No. So, what is so untrustworthy about any of these ads.”

Remember that advertising exists for the primary, overriding purpose of persuasion. Providing helpful, honest information about products and services is incidental to that goal. Consumers understand this. We might choose a product we've heard of over one we haven't, but that's because of *familiarity* — not necessarily trust.

I wrote a longer reaction to Clemons here:

http://www.whyweworry.com/blog/2009/06/29/why-a...

People looking to buy no longer have just the local options to buy something, now they can go into a store and look at what they are thinking about buying and then they can research it on the internet as well as look for better deals from companies with less overhead. TV wishes they could track transactions like you can on the internet, if they could, they would be making a LOT more money.

@Jason: Again, just because there may be a few companies that are doing “very well” does not mean it is the best solution and that it will still be here tomorrow. I want to see the statistics that show how many people actually purchase something after clicking those links. Just because Google and companies using its AdWords program are making money now doesn’t mean they will the next day. The clicking may be from accidental clicks or that an inexperienced user thinks its a search result or whatever. Obviously this system will be here till someone comes up with something better. I don’t agree with the statement that most internet advertising will be gone in 5 years. Actually, I think there will be more but in a better format that actually leads to transactions. Look at TV. Commercials are still here (better than ever) but companies have tried other ways to advertise such as product placement in shows. Look at 24. Driving around in Toyotas and then reinforce that with a Toyota commercial. I think this season Hyundai is the sponsor.

I don’t agree with everything he said but I do agree that the current system will not sustain. Just my thoughts.

Enough said.

The point I’m trying to make is that he is not the kind of demographic to be making such general statements about the status of advertising on the interent. I could name of a bunch of companies doing extremely well, just using Google AdWords.

Anyways, advertising does work to a point by getting the company name and brand out there. But I think this works best on TV and radio with print magazines/newspapers coming in a far second where you are casually browsing or reading. On the web, people are actually doing something whether it be searching for something, reading a blog, or whatever. This is different in the sense that when you are relaxing you may just listen to a commercial because it entertains you. When you are actively doing something, you don’t want any distractions and just want to complete the task on hand. This is simply why I have never clicked or even look at ads on the web.

And the argument that models like Google are working is not a good argument. Just because something may work in the meantime does not mean it is a great idea that will always work. There may just not be a better solution which is the current case. There are many companies trying to find this better solution because when you are doing a search for something on Google, how relevant are the ads on the side? Do you ever click on them? And if you do, does it lead to a transaction?

I think this professor knows exactly what he is talking about and is years ahead of his time. People like you either can’t or don’t want to see it. But years from now, you’ll realize just how wrong you were.