One Face or Many 1

Internet Advertising: One Face or Many?

By Sally J. McMillan

Manuscript prepared for

Internet Advertising: Theory and Research (2nd edition), David W. Schumann & Esther Thorson

March 12, 2004

Contact information:

Sally J. McMillan
476 Communication Building
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996

Phone: 865-974-5097

E-mail: sjmcmill@utk.edu
 One Face or Many 2

What is Internet advertising? Before the question can be answered, it must be broken

into parts. First, what is the Internet? It is the “network of networks” that operates on a set of

technical protocols that enables people from around the world to access and exchange

information using tools such as the World Wide Web, e-mail, chat rooms, etc. It began as a

project of the United States military establishment that wanted a communication system that was

robust and non-centralized. The communication protocol (TCP/IP) was in operation by the

1970s, but use was restricted to the government with the exception of a few academic

researchers. In 1993, the Internet burst into public consciousness with the development of the

tools that made the Web possible. This graphical interface made the Internet much more user

friendly and by the mid 1990s, many businesses and consumers began to use the technology

(Leiner et al., 2000).

The original question also begs for a definition of advertising. Recently, Richards and

Curran (2002) attempted to update the definition of advertising. After a series of interchanges

with advertising experts, they developed the following definition (p.74): “Advertising is a paid,

mediated form of communication from an identifiable source, designed to persuade the receiver

to take some action now or in the future.” By extension, it would seem quite logical to define

Internet advertising as any form of communication that meets the definition of advertising and

can be found on the Internet.

Sounds simple. But, of course, it is not. Internet advertising is a multi-faceted

phenomenon. True, the same could be said of many other kinds of advertising. Print advertising

comes in many colors, shapes, and sizes; television advertising might range from a simple 10-

second message to a long-format infomercial. Internet advertising has all those kinds of
 One Face or Many 3

variations, too. But it also spans time and space (unlike print which is space bound and

broadcast which is time bound) and seems different in other fundamental ways as well.

Internet Advertising Characteristics

Let’s review the four key elements of that definition of advertising: It’s a message that is

mediated (rather than being communicated directly as in personal selling), someone who can be

identified pays for that message, the primary purpose is to persuade, and the action that results

from that persuasion may take place now or in the future. On first glance, this seems to fairly

well describe things that we associate with Internet advertising such as on-site banners and pop-

up messages. But what about unwanted e-mail, which is known as spam? If the message is sent

directly to the consumer rather than being mediated through a content-based Website is it still

advertising or is it personal selling? What about optimizing a Website so that it comes up early

in a key-word search performed by a search engine? The developer didn’t pay the search engine

directly, but an agency might have been paid to make the changes to the Website code that gets it

top billing in a search engine. And if the site is easily accessible, it might lead to persuasion,

which is the primary purpose of advertising. What about corporate Websites – are they

advertising? They are definitely designed to communicate. They are often filled with

information that may not be directly targeted at immediate persuasion to act, but that might be

intended to improve the overall reputation of the company or some similar goal.

Perhaps the most perplexing question is whether sites that facilitate online buying are

advertising. In traditional terms, they are more like retail stores where we might find some on-

site messages, packaging, presentation, and other tools that help sell products. But because the

Internet is also somewhat like other communication media, definitions get a bit fuzzy when the

consumer sees a site at the top of a search engine list (because it has been optimized to appear
 One Face or Many 4

early in that listing), clicks on the link, reviews a wealth of information about the company and

the product, and makes a purchase – all at the same computer screen and within a matter of

minutes or even seconds.

Clearly, Internet advertising is different in some fundamental ways from other forms of

advertising. Researchers and practitioners seem to have identified four key differences. First, it

“compresses” the hierarchy of effects. Traditionally, marketers have talked about the need for

setting different kinds of objectives for advertising and marketing based on the notion that

advertising works on the communication aspects of the hierarchy (e.g. awareness, attitude) while

marketing works on the higher-level behavioral goals (e.g. purchase, brand loyalty). Advertising

traditionally took place in the media while the retail environment was the place to focus on

changing behaviors.

Of course, there have always been messages that exist in the “cracks” of this definition.

For example, direct mail does not use a traditional mass medium and is very much focused on

achieving a behavioral result. Nevertheless, it is often thought of as form of advertising – though

a very specialized one that uses different techniques than magazine or television advertising. But

on the Internet all the lines blur and compress. Banner ads might build awareness of a brand, but

they are most often also designed to encourage “click-through” to a Website that often sells the

products or services presented on the banner. Much of the early literature on Internet advertising

focused on the profit potential of this compression between message delivery and purchase (see

for example, Berthon, Pitt, & Watson, 1996; Bush, Bush, & Harris, 1998; Gugel, 1997; Li &

Coyle, 1997; Paul, 1996).

A second major difference between Internet advertising and other forms of advertising is

that the Internet was the first widely available consumer medium that enabled the sometimes-
 One Face or Many 5

elusive properties of interactivity. The trade and popular press widely heralded the benefits of

interactivity starting in the 1980s, often without any definition of what interactivity is

(McMillan, 1999a, 1999b). Scholars have begun to focus in on what it means for a medium to

be interactive. While many definitions abound and many perspectives are taken on the topic,

there seems to be some growing agreement that interactivity is a multi-faceted concept that

includes two-way communication, a high level of user engagement and/or control over messages,

and timeliness of communication (Liu & Shrum, 2002; McMillan & Hwang, 2002). Thus,

Internet advertising has more capacity than most other forms of advertising to develop two-way

communication with consumers, engage the consumer, and present timely messages quickly.

Researchers have also examined intrusiveness, or lack thereof, as a unique characteristic

of Internet advertising. As Internet advertising was first developing, some felt that it lacked

enough intrusiveness to be effective. For example, McDonald (1997) noted that most advertising

appears during the breaks of television watching or as an intrusion into the reading flow of a

magazine. But the Internet message that is intended to persuade often is positioned at least one

click away from the banner, hyperlink, or other Internet advertising. In essence, the consumer

has to request the ad rather than having it intrude upon his or her life. But advertisers have

become clever at making their ads intrusive with tools such as pop-up ads that appear on top of a

message, pop-under ads that stay on a screen after the target Website is closed, interstitial ads

that “take over” the screen and so forth. Recent research suggests that these more intrusive

forms can lead to irritation and ad avoidance (Edwards, Li, & Lee, 2002). Thus the medium

offers advertisers the interesting challenge of how to lure customers to a selling message or

purchasing opportunity without encouraging them to invest in tools such as pop-up blockers that

can make advertising completely invisible.

 One Face or Many 6

The fourth primary difference between Internet advertising and other advertising forms is

that the Internet has the capacity for highly personalized communication. This one-on-one

marketing potential was heralded as revolutionary in the 1990s (see for example Blattberg &

Deighton, 1991; Hoffman & Novak, 1996; Newell, 1997; Peppers & Rogers, 1993). Many

observers seemed to believe that both consumers and advertisers truly wanted to develop

personal relationships and that the medium would facilitate these relationships. The idea of

consumer relationship marketing is still strong, but the idea of personalization has broadened.

For example, Strauss and Frost (1999) point out that the Internet enables a new kind of

personalization that is built into the structure of the Internet use experience. For example, when

consumers create a customized “my.yahoo” page, they not only get personal news, weather, and

television listings, but also give the site owner insight into the personal preferences that might

lead to more targeted selling messages. Such personalization can also make sure that visitors to

online stores see the most appropriate and appealing messages (Kim, Lee, Shaw, Chang, &

Nelson, 2001) and have positive benefits ranging from improved attitude toward the Website

(Chen & Wells, 1999) to purchase (Chakraborty, Lala, & Warren, 2003).

Developing a Typology

In an effort to more clearly define Internet advertising, two research steps were taken.

First, the author reviewed articles related to Internet advertising that appeared in the scholarly

advertising literature from 1995 (the first articles were found in that year) to 2003. Key

advertising journals and proceedings (Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research,

Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, Journal of Interactive Advertising, and

the Proceedings of the American Advertising Association) were systematically scanned for any

articles related to Internet advertising. Additionally, databases were used to search for the key
 One Face or Many 7

words “Internet advertising” in peer-reviewed journals. This search led to articles in other

related journals such as Journal of Consumer Marketing, European Journal of Marketing,

International Marketing Review, and Journal of Marketing Communication. A total of 207

articles were reviewed.

The second research step was to conduct interviews with persons who are actively

working in the Internet advertising business. Agencies were identified from the American

Association of Advertising Agencies Website. A total of 222 agencies were found in the AAAA

listings that provide interactive services. An e-mail message was sent to all of those agencies

(see appendix 1) requesting that they provide a definition of Internet advertising and answer

related questions. Despite the fact that these agencies supposedly provide interactive services, e-

mail messages sent to 34 agencies “bounced” resulting in a valid sample size of 188. Of those,

33 (or about 18%) responded either by e-mail or by telephone and provided interesting insights

into how Internet advertising is evolving in the agency world. In most cases the respondent was

the person who is responsible for managing Internet advertising for the contacted agency. While

the response rate is relatively small, the author did not attempt to get more responses because it

became clear that a point of redundancy had been reached.

Table 1 provides a summary of the different types of Internet advertising that were

identified from both the academic literature and the practitioner interviews. The typology is

based on two primary dimensions. The first is location. Some advertising is placed in an

external environment (e.g. a news Website) while other advertising is in a context that is

controlled primarily by the advertiser. The second dimension is the purpose of the advertising:

some is designed primarily for communication (consistent with what are traditionally called

indirect objectives) while other Internet advertising is focused primarily on transactions (more
 One Face or Many 8

consistent with direct objectives). Research suggests that there are four primary types of Internet

advertising based on intersections of these dimensions: brand-building messages, corporate

communication, direct-response messages, and electronic transactions. However, as the

following discussion illustrates, there may often be overlap among these types.

Table 1 about here.

Brand-Building Messages

Brand-building messages are probably what most people first think of when they hear the

term Internet advertising. They appear on the computer screen in “external” content such as

Websites and their purpose is primarily communication. Advertisers have proved that there are

many potential formats for these messages. They may be small buttons, or simple hyperlinks

from one site to another. These are most like outdoor advertising in the traditional media sense.

They provide a very brief message about the brand.

The ubiquitous banner ad has been the subject of many of the scholarly articles written

about Internet advertising (for a sampling, see Bhatnagar & Papatla, 2001; Chang, 1999; Chang,

Jung-Gyo, & Tharp, 2001; Dalhen, 2001; Hofacker & Murphy, 1998; Mitchell & Valenzuela,

2002; Shen, 2002). In many ways the banner is most like traditional magazine and newspaper

advertising in that it appears in the context of another message but it can be easily ignored

because it does not force exposure to the ad at a specific time. Both scholars and practitioners

have begun to examine ways to move beyond the simple banner to make ads more visible and

memorable (Brown, 2002; Dou, Linn, & Sixian, 2001). One approach is to make ads more like

television as they block out other content until they are attended to. Unfortunately, researchers

have also found that as advertising placed at Websites becomes more intrusive, it also becomes

less effective (Edwards et al., 2002).

 One Face or Many 9

Practitioners frequently identified banners as a dominant form of Internet advertising.

But many indicated that the industry must move away from these formats that do little more than

transfer print and broadcast concepts to the Internet. For example one said: “with more than

20% of households in the United States now subscribing to broadband, cable services digitizing,

and the explosion of wireless devices, paid messaging via digital channels will continue to

expand, though they may have to evolve from the still-prevalent banner ad mentality.” Some of

that evolution was predicted to take place in terms of richer media. Full screen ads often enable

richer media such as interstitial messages that may seem like a broadcast advertisement that

interrupts the content.

Listings, which are often like directory advertising, were identified by practitioners as a

major component of marketing communication plans – especially for business-to-business

companies. Purchased placement, which is like traditional sponsorship and/or promotion, was

also seen as a key component of Internet advertising. This may take the form of sponsored links

from a Website to a shopping venue, such as Amazon.com, that result in a commission paid to

the sponsoring site for all sales originating from the hyperlink. Another emerging form of

purchased placement is “advergaming” in which a sponsor’s name is embedded in games (Youn

& Lee, 2003; Youn, Lee, & Doyle, 2003).

Finally, practitioners also identified several forms of externally validated content as part

of the brand-building potential of Internet advertising. These techniques often seem to be closely

related to offline practices that fall under the domain of public relations. Scholars, too, have

begun to realize that traditional definitions of the advertising and public relations functions are

blurring online and the Web also has the potential to change the relationships between
 One Face or Many 10

advertising and public relations agencies and their clients (Bush & Bush, 2000; Daugherty &

Reece, 2002; Rodgers & Chen, 2002).

Corporate Communication

While the list of brand-building tools in Table 1 is extensive, brand-building is not the

only form of Internet advertising. Both scholars and practitioners are often adamant in declaring

that messages do not have to be “placed” in external content to be part of the Internet advertising

mix. Corporate communication messages are sometimes “pushed” to the client through channels

such as e-newsletters, electronic greeting cards, and opt-in e-mail messages. However, many

practitioners noted that great care must be taken to keep such tactics relevant to the user and thus

avoid being treated like spam. One practitioner observed: “We are not huge supporters of e-

mail marketing unless it is to the client’s customer list. Cold e-mail (not permission-based) is

spam in our opinion and we advise our clients to avoid it.” Scholars have given some attention

to these push techniques, primarily in the context of maintaining two-way communication with

customers (Martin, Van Durme, Raulas, & Merisavo, 2003; Park & Cropp, 2002).

It is the Internet’s ability to host large volumes of data that can be “pulled” at will that is

one of the biggest boons to the corporate communication type of Internet advertising. One

practitioner wrote: “The users of the Internet are actively seeking information. They are

‘pulling’ our advertising messages vs. the ‘push’ method advertising of most offline media.

When users are online they are usually seeking the information that the Internet has to offer.

This is the main reason why Internet advertising is different.” Singh and Dalal (1999) have

made a strong argument that the corporate Website is a form of advertising. Other studies have

also explored the Website as a form of advertising (Bruner II & Kumar, 2000; Doren, Van
 One Face or Many 11

Fechner, & Green-Adelsberger, 2000; McMillan, Hwang, & Lee, 2003) and begun developing

advertising-like measures such as attitude toward the Website (Chen & Wells, 1999).

Corporate communications that are “pulled” by consumers are not limited to Websites.

Other forms include chat rooms, blogs, consumer reviews, bulletin boards, fantasy communities,

brand-related games, and Web casts. All of these forms of Internet advertising have the potential

to build relationships between consumers and brands.

Direct-Response Messages

Direct-response messages are summarized in the bottom left quadrant of Table 1. This

form of Internet advertising illustrates the sometimes-problematic nature of trying to categorize

advertising in a medium that is interactive, intrusive, personalized, and in which the traditional

hierarchy of effects is compressed. In essence, any brand-building message can become a direct-

response message if it includes a call to action. The old distinction between brand advertising

and direct response advertising becomes almost meaningless on the Internet where a simple Web

address can become a call to action. One Internet advertising executive noted that at his agency

Internet advertising is organizationally structured as part of direct operations: “Even though it’s

part of our direct operations, it also involves a lot of brand advertising. The notion of ‘above the

line’ and ‘below the line’ marketing communication investment is just plain going away.”

Scholars also often make little or no distinction between the ability of messages placed in

online media to build brands and to generate actions such as click through (Broussard, 2000;

Chang et al., 2001; Choi & Rifon, 2002; Dahlen, Rasch, & Rosengren, 2003; Yoon, 2001).

Furthermore, researchers no longer have to question consumers about intent to purchase or take

some other action – instead they can actually observe and measure relationships between brand-

building messages and direct-response actions (Ahn & Edwards, 2002; Gong & Maddox, 2003).
 One Face or Many 12

Electronic Transactions

For many marketers, the electronic transaction capability of the Internet is the ultimate

goal of Internet advertising. The potential for conducting transactions directly with consumers in

an environment with very little physical overhead is one of the factors that led to the boom of

dot.com companies, and also the subsequent bust when entrepreneurs with little sense of

consumer behavior realized that they had to do more than build a pretty Website to achieve

success in the e-marketplace (White, McMillan, & Hwang, 2003).

E-commerce may seem more closely kin to retailing than to advertising, but the nature of

the Internet forces new definitions of both retailing and advertising. One practitioner provided

some interesting observations on the evolution of both standard Internet advertising units and e-

commerce: “While rich media adoption has been challenged (e.g. the invasiveness of the ad

units, non-broadband user frustration, higher development and production costs), many clients

are embracing rich media as an effective branding-building and brand-awareness vehicle. There

is little question that rich media will only grow in importance as these ad units begin supporting

additional functionality including but not limited to the ability to provide data collection, lead

generation, surveys, sweepstakes, couponing, gaming, streaming audio/video and commerce – all

within the confines of a standard rich media ad unit.” Indeed, transactions can occur within a

banner ad – no link to a Website is required. So when does a message become a transaction?

The research on e-commerce is more often found outside of the traditional advertising

literature (e.g. in journals that focus more on retailing and brand marketing), but much of the

literature on e-commerce points to the need to consider e-commerce as part of the Internet

advertising mix (Bellizzi, 2000; Ind & Riondino, 2001; Ling & Lawler, 2001). Scholars are also

examining how the unique characteristics of the Internet, such as compression of the hierarchy of
 One Face or Many 13

effects, interactivity, intrusiveness, and personalization, help move the consumer from any of the

other forms of Internet advertising to electronic transactions (Coyle & Thorson, 2001; Kim et al.,

2001; Saeed, Yujong, & Grover, 2002).

E-transactions are not always e-commerce in the traditional sense of visiting a shopping

site, loading up a shopping cart, checking out with a credit card, and then waiting for delivery of

goods and services (either electronically or by snail mail). Other forms of transactions can also

be performed online and are often advertising-related. For example, job boards can allow both

job seekers and employers to transact a review of credentials and an initial interview. Coupons

and sweepstakes can be delivered online for use in a bricks and mortar retail environment.

Summary of Typology

Are the lists of “types” of Internet advertising presented in Table 1 all-inclusive? No.

Variants on the banner ad and other brand-building messages are in a constant state of evolution.

Organizations are creatively designing new ways to communicate to key audiences through

relatively controlled content environments. Clever programmers are constantly developing new

tools that make it easy for consumers to respond to a call to action – whether that be clicking on

a hyperlink for more information or transacting a purchase on an e-commerce Website.

The typology presented in Table 1 provides a framework for thinking about Internet

advertising. Some purist might argue that only messages placed in an outside medium (e.g.

brand-building and direct-response messages) meet the classical definition of advertising. But

because many of those messages lead seamlessly to controlled communication environments

such as organizational Websites and e-commerce sites, it is impossible to ignore corporate

communication and electronic transaction functions when considering Internet advertising.

 One Face or Many 14

The Typology and the Future

As new methods of advertising on the Internet are developed, advertising practitioners

need to realize that Internet advertising is diverse. It includes all of the aspects of traditional

advertising (e.g. media buying, copy testing) as well as many functions that were previously

relegated to specialists (e.g. direct marketing, retail marketing). Researchers need to be clear

about what they are exploring when they study Internet advertising. While the bulk of the

advertising literature focuses primarily on Internet-based brand-building messages, advertising

scholars are also recognizing the importance of exploring all the quadrants of Table 1.

When asked to use their working knowledge of current Internet advertising to predict the

future, practitioners were not unanimous in their vision. Some envisioned revolutionary and

almost constant change: “I see a bright future, but I see one of constant change. We will not

only evolve within our interactive industry (and thus have to deal with the difficulties of change),

but also it seems as we evolve further, we cause a ripple effect in the traditional channels that we

also have to deal with. I think the phrases ‘for every action, there is an equal and opposite

reaction’ is false in our industry...rather, ‘for every action, there is double the reaction, and no

telling if it is opposite or not.’” But others saw the future as one of smaller and more incremental

change: “Honestly, nothing revolutionary. It will blend more and more with television. TV will

become more like the computer and the computer more like TV.” But regardless of their vision

for the future, many practitioners tended to focus their comments on the four key characteristics

of Internet advertising identified earlier in this chapter: compression of the hierarchy of effects,

interactivity, intrusiveness, and personalization.

 One Face or Many 15

Compression

The notion that the traditional hierarchy of effects is compressed on the Internet was seen

as an ongoing trend. Practitioners also often discussed this concept in the context of

“convergence.” Not only is the distance from message to action being shortened, but also all the

channels of communication and transaction are becoming so similar that they are almost

impossible to differentiate. The evolution of both broadband connectivity and mobile

communication devices were often portrayed as central to this trend. One practitioner predicted

a future in which: “near-broadcast quality and personally-relevant content (including both

advertising and programming) will be delivered over nearly universal high-speed wireless

networks to handheld and/or wearable devices designed to enable viewers to customize their

interface, actively engage with the content whenever they want to do so, and customize,

configure, and purchase products from wherever they might be.”

Compression and convergence will make new demands on advertising practitioners. One

wrote: “I believe that advertising media will continue to converge and that ultimately advertising

professionals will be required to develop strategies that are truly integrated and customized to

reach their most lucrative targeted customers.” Convergence will make new demands on

advertising teachers and researchers as well. Integrated marketing communication can no longer

be taught simply as a way of building synergy by using one voice to communicate an

organization’s message. Instead, teachers and students will have to explore what it means to

move from awareness to purchase in a single environment in a very abbreviated space/time.

As several practitioners pointed out, it is today’s students who will probably take the lead

in the future compression and convergence of advertising. One practitioner wrote: “The future

of Internet advertising probably involves an opportunity for integration with traditional

 One Face or Many 16

advertising (cross referencing print ads with Web addresses, etc.) until today’s twenty-

somethings take over marketing directorships in major corporations. From that point on, I

believe Internet advertising will take the lead against what we now know as traditional

advertising media.”

This trend toward compression and convergence will result in blurring the lines in the

typology presented in Table 1. Corporate communication, which may currently be viewed as a

separate public relations function, must work more closely with both brand-building and direct-

response messages. All the compressed and converging functions and features will be ultimately

accountable to the bottom line regardless of whether the transaction happens online or offline

Interactivity

As noted earlier, interactivity is a multi-faceted concept that involves two-way

communication, control or engagement, and timely information. Practitioners see the future of

Internet advertising as being more interactive with increases on all of these dimensions.

One of the keys to successful Internet advertising will be the ability to enable and

encourage consumer interaction with brands. One practitioner predicted: “I believe that as

maturing, ‘raised on digital technology’ consumers gain larger disposable income, they will

demand more interactivity with the brands they patronize.” Another expressed a similar concern

by focusing on the time dimension of interactivity: “Internet advertising will become more and

more ‘real time.’ Response rates and interaction with the consumer will take on a complete one-

to-one experience with the user. When you go online, you will determine exactly what your

experience is and advertising will conform to your needs.”

Interactive marketing gives the consumer new levels of control. A practitioner observed:

“In the online world users control the messages they engage. Marketers are not in control.
 One Face or Many 17

Therefore, successful online marketers communicate and demonstrate value to the consumer to

capture their interests and develop ongoing two-way relationships.” But interactivity is a two-

way street. Consumers may demand it, but someone has to rise to the challenge of supplying

that demand. Many practitioners noted that building more interactivity into Internet advertising

is critical for the future. But, as one practitioner observed, it won’t be easy: “The power of

interactivity has yet to be realized. At our current stage, most people still think of the Internet as

an information source. This next step will take a major dose of creativity, but once we break out

of our traditional ‘electronic brochure’ mode of thinking, the benefits will be beyond compare.”

Interactivity was also seen as part of the compression and convergence trend. Several

respondents indicated that the demand for interactivity was already expanding beyond the

Internet into other media. That trend is expected to continue and, as one practitioner wrote, “as

television becomes more interactive, professionals from the Internet advertising industry will be

asked to expand their areas of responsibility to include this emerging technology as well.”

The future of Internet advertising will demand an increase in interactivity in all quadrants

of the typology of interactive advertising presented in Table 1. Simple static banners will give

way to brand-building messages that enable more user control, two-way communication with the

advertiser, and timely information. Corporate communication must increase interactivity by

moving away from simple online brochures to communication that allows consumers to engage

and build relationships with brands. Direct response must lead directly to transaction and those

transactions must allow for full-featured consumer interactions.

Intrusiveness

Practitioners predicted that Internet advertising of the future would be both more and less

intrusive. One said simply that it must become “Less intrusive, more informative.” Those who
 One Face or Many 18

focused on the need for reducing intrusion often wrote about the need to reduce unwanted

commercial e-mail. One wrote: “Regulation will increase making it much more difficult – if not

impossible – to send unsolicited messages. This is not necessarily a bad thing - just a reality that

will require senders to be more strategic and knowledgeable in their efforts.” Another

practitioner wrote: “With the proliferation of Ad Blockers and spam laws, permission-based

marketing will be key in the future. Online Advertising’s pervasiveness will be reined in but not

curtailed completely. Hopefully a balance will be achieved whereby people online will be

tolerant of advertising (like they are with TV) and advertisers will be more respectful and less

intrusive toward their online audiences.”

For those who saw Internet advertising becoming more intrusive, they often focused on

how convergence will bring digital technology into every aspect of people’s lives. Marketers

will have opportunities to reach consumers in many more ways. But whether consumers view

those multiple points of contact as intrusive or informative depends largely on how sensitive the

marketers are to individual needs. One practitioner wrote: “In 10 years or less, I believe the

computer as you know it will morph into a server for home networks. Its primary responsibility

will be to manage the inflow/outflow of all video, audio and data. This stream of information

will no longer appear strictly as Web pages, emails, videos and mp3s that must be viewed, read

or listened to on a computer. Instead, wireless options and new compression technology will

make it possible to manage and interact with this information from a variety of locations,

including your phone, handheld organizer, television, car data management center, home TV,

office laptop, etc.”

Several practitioners pointed out the need for better creativity to make these omnipresent

commercial messages more welcomed. One practitioner observed: “We are just at the very
 One Face or Many 19

beginning of the potential for this medium. As broadband access continues to expand and more

businesses transact online, advertising creative will need to be notched up a level or two. That

means better, richer, more engaging, more entertaining creative. It’s getting there but still has a

long way to go.” Another practitioner wrote: “In the future, I hope that Internet advertising

becomes more creative, less irritating, more informative.”

Several practitioners shared the belief that the best way to overcome perceptions of

intrusiveness is by showing consumers respect. One wrote: “We have to be careful not to

intrude on people to the point where as marketers or companies we offend them and hurt our

brands. The brands that have succeeded are the ones that, on the Web and in the real world, treat

their customers with respect.”

The four quadrants in Table 1 carry inherent differences in intrusiveness. Brand-building

and direct-response messages by definition “intrude” in content that users are accessing – usually

for a reason other than seeing the ads that might appear. As messages become richer and are

carried via broad-band technologies, the likelihood is that they may also become more intrusive

– unless the marketers seek to balance the need to get consumers’ attention with the need to treat

consumers with their respect. For corporate communication and electronic transactions,

intrusiveness is less likely to be an issue. Consumers seek out these types of Internet advertising

and thus are less likely to perceive the content as intruding on them.

Personalization

Practitioners predicted that the trend to personalized Internet advertising would continue.

For many, this personalization was a counterpoint to intrusiveness. The more personalized the

content, the less likely it is to be perceived as intrusive. A practitioner predicted: “I think the

future of Internet advertising will bring even more personalized and relevant advertising to
 One Face or Many 20

individuals. The success of keyword advertising on search engines has already led to content

targeting where search engines place ads next to areas they deem relevant to a keyword’s

content. I also think that pop ups and traditional banners will decrease, while sponsored

content/sponsored links will increase.”

Practitioners predicted that consumers would demand more personalization. Consumer

demand has the potential to raise privacy concerns that must be addressed by marketers, but as a

practitioner observed the trade off in terms of consumer loyalty is worth the effort: “There has

been hype out there about the Internet being an intelligent arena that can make highly personal

and effective communications with target customers based on previously captured data. Despite

the privacy concerns this raises, I still believe the hype is achievable. Whether that’s through

your PC, a wireless handheld, a phone, your TV or your OnStar-enabled car, we’re closer to this

achievement than ever. Smart product developers and marketers, who know which unique target

audiences will embrace (rather than be offended by) this type of personalized communications,

will recognize that this can be a cost-efficient, loyalty-driving proposition.”

Tracking and measurement is key to being able to build personalized communication.

Customers must be aware of the fact that the tracking is occurring and be willing to make the

trade off to balance personalization and privacy. But many marketers believe that consumers

will not only accept, but also demand that kind of personalization. “Consumers will place more

value on those brands that leverage technology to learn more about the consumers’ personal

needs and deliver more relevant products and services when and where they need them.”

Advertising agency personnel also believe that this demand for personalization will be

reflected in an increased demand for measurement and tracking by client organizations.

“Consumers will continue to demand more value from brands they chose to engage with. In
 One Face or Many 21

addition, I expect clients to demand more measurement (online and offline) and for

personalization to grow in importance.”

One practitioner summed up the potential for personalization by nothing the importance

of thinking in terms of the customer instead of the advertising campaign: “Internet advertising is

evolving into more of a one-to-one medium. Many of the bold promises that one heard several

years ago about the Web being a customer management medium never got off the ground.

However, a few marketers have patiently tested and improved upon online campaigns that target

users at the segment level (e.g., Prospect, Shopper, Buyer). To the degree that these customer-

level techniques generate better performance than campaign-level approaches, I believe that the

Internet will evolve more and more toward a customer-level messaging medium. Also, as more

and more media become digital (e.g., TV, newspaper, radio, etc.) there will be an increasing

value for marketers to develop consistent messaging logic across digital media.”

Personalization can occur across all of the quadrants in Table 1. Brand-building and

direct-response messages can easily be personalized if marketers buy advertising based on

specific viewers in specific situations rather than simply buying time and/or space on a content

provider’s Website. And if the messages based in external content environments are more

personalized, they may be not only less intrusive but also more effective. When the marketer has

more control over the location, personalization becomes even more important. Corporate

communication tactics can be customized so that consumers consistently see the information that

is most valuable to them. Electronic transactions can present offers that are customized to past

purchases and current search behaviors.

 One Face or Many 22

Conclusion

What is Internet advertising? Clearly, there is not a simple answer to that question. It is

evolving and expanding. By the time this book is published, there will undoubtedly be new

forms of advertising that don’t appear in the typology on Table 1. But both the academic

literature and the experience of practitioners suggest that it should be possible to place those new

forms in one or more of the quadrants in the typology.

There is no one best form of Internet advertising. Sometimes a simple brand-building

message is suited for the marketing objectives of a given organization. At other times, that

message may need to add a direct-response component. And sometimes the organization may

need to take more control over the content environment through forms of corporate

communication and/or electronic transactions.

Regardless of where a specific advertising format might appear in the typology of

Internet advertising, it should to be sensitive to the unique characteristics of the Internet:

compression of the hierarchy of effects, interactivity, intrusiveness, and personalization. Many

practitioners suggested it is quite possible that these same characteristics are now extending

beyond the Internet to other media. As Negroponte (1995) posited in his pioneering treatise on

Being Digital, the job of the communicator is no longer about moving atoms from one place to

another but rather it is about the transmission of digital bits. Internet advertising may very well

be just the first manifestation of the shift to digital advertising that extends across many different

media forms. A future question might well be: what is digital advertising?
 One Face or Many 23

Table 1. Typology of Internet Advertising

Location: External Location: Controlled

Purpose: Brand-building messages Corporate communication
Communication Small format Push messages
Buttons Opt-in client e-mail
Tiles E-newsletters
Hyperlinks Newsgroups
Audio-only E-cards
Banner ads Pull messages
Rich media (e.g. flash) Brand Websites
Contextual Chat
Expandable Blogs
Floating Consumer endoresements
Frames Bulletin boards
Full screen Fantasy communities
Pop-ups Online games
Pop-unders Webcasts
Interstitials
Rich media (e.g. streaming video)
Site takeovers
Listing
Keyword buying
Online directory listings
Search engine optimization
Purchased placement
Paid placement in Websites
Content sponsorship
Online game sponsorship
Paid link to retail site
Externally validated content
Reviews
Rankings
News articles
Purpose: Call to Direct-response messages Electronic transactions
Action All formats above that have a call to E-commerce
action typically with links to e-commerce Shopping sites
opportunities and often purchases on a Micro-sites
pay-per-click basis Controlled direct marketing
Job boards
Other forms of embedded content Online coupons
designed to obtain customers (e.g. co- Online sweepstakes
registration) Shopping cart promotions
 One Face or Many 24

Appendix 1 – Copy of e-mail survey sent to AAAA member agencies

that provide interactive services

In the AAAA member roster, “interactive” was listed as one of your agency’s special

service areas. I’d like to know more about your interactive services. Let me tell you why.

I am an advertising professor at the University of Tennessee. I am conducting research

for a chapter in a book about Internet advertising. Your answers will help me understand how

agencies like yours are really using the Internet for advertising. I am NOT working for any

commercial enterprise. I have no desire to obtain proprietary information from you.

Following are five simple questions you can answer by return e-mail. If you are not the

best person to answer, feel free to forward to the appropriate person in your agency.

Your time is valuable; this survey should take only a few minutes. I’d appreciate your

response by January 15, 2004.

1. Does your agency provide any kind of Internet advertising services to clients?

2. What is Internet advertising? Be as specific as possible (e.g. banner ads, brand Websites, e-

mail promotions, etc.) and include all types of Internet advertising that you know of.

3. How is Internet advertising similar to other forms of advertising?

4. How is Internet advertising different from other forms of advertising?

5. What do you see as the future of Internet advertising?

Thank you for your time!

 One Face or Many 25

References

Ahn, E., & Edwards, S. M. (2002). Brand attitude versus click-through response to banner ads.

Paper presented at the American Academy of Advertising.

Bellizzi, J. A. (2000). Drawing prospects to e-commerce Webs. Journal of Advertising Research,

40(1), 43-53.

Berthon, P., Pitt, L. F., & Watson, R. T. (1996). The World Wide Web as an advertising

medium: Toward an understanding of conversion efficiency. Journal of Advertising

Research, 36(1), 43-54.

Bhatnagar, A., & Papatla, P. (2001). Identifying locations for targeted advertising on the Internet.

International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 5(3), 23-45.

Blattberg, R. C., & Deighton, J. (1991). Interactive marketing: Exploiting the age of

addressability. Sloan Management Review, 32(1), 5-14.

Broussard, G. (2000). How advertising frequency can work to build online advertising

effectiveness. International Journal of Market Research, 42(4), 439-458.

Brown, M. (2002). The use of banner advertisements with pull-down menus: A copy testing

approach. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 2(2), Available online at http://jiad.org.

Bruner II, G. C., & Kumar, A. (2000). Web commercials and advertising hierarchy-of-effects.

Journal of Advertising Research, 40(1/2), 35-42.

Bush, A. J., Bush, V., & Harris, S. (1998). Advertiser perceptions of the Internet as a marketing

communications tool. Journal of Advertising Research, 38(2), 17-27.

Bush, A. J., & Bush, V. D. (2000). Potential challenges the Internet brings to the agency-

advertiser relationship. Journal of Advertising Research, 40(4), 7-16.

 One Face or Many 26

Chakraborty, G., Lala, V., & Warren, D. (2003). What do customers consider important in B2B

Websites? Journal of Advertising Research, 43(1), 50-61.

Chang, H. C. (1999). How advertising works on the WWW: Modified elaboration likelihood

model. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 21(1), 33-51.

Chang, H. C., Jung-Gyo, L., & Tharp, M. (2001). Different forced-exposure levels to banner

advertisements. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(4), 45-56.

Chen, Q., & Wells, W. D. (1999). Attitude toward the site. Journal of Advertising Research,

39(5), 27-37.

Choi, S. M., & Rifon, N. J. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of Web advertising

credibility: A study of consumer response to banner ads. Journal of Interactive

Advertising, 3(1), Available online at: http://jiad.org.

Coyle, J. R., & Thorson, E. (2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and

vividness in Web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65-77.

Dahlen, M., Rasch, A., & Rosengren, S. (2003). Love at first site? A study of Website

advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(1), 25-33.

Dalhen, M. (2001). Banner advertisements through a new lens. Journal of Advertising Research,

41(4), 23-30.

Daugherty, T., & Reece, B. B. (2002). The adoption of persuasive Internet communication in

advertising and public relations curricula. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 3(1),

Available online at: http://jiad.org.

Doren, D. C., Van Fechner, D. L., & Green-Adelsberger, K. (2000). Promotional strategies on

the World Wide Web. Journal of Marketing Communications, 6(1).

 One Face or Many 27

Dou, W., Linn, R., & Sixian, Y. (2001). How smart are “smart banners”? Journal of Advertising

Research, 41(4), 31-43.

Edwards, S. M., Li, H., & Lee, J.-H. (2002). Forced exposure and psychological reactance:

Antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. Journal of

Advertising, 31(3), 83-96.

Gong, W., & Maddox, L. M. (2003). Measuring Web advertising effectiveness in China. Journal

of Advertising Research, 43(1), 34-49.

Gugel, C. (1997). The interactive telemedia index: An Internet/iTV impact model. Journal of

Advertising Research, 37(2), 29-32.

Hofacker, C. F., & Murphy, J. (1998). World Wide Web banner advertisement copy testing.

European Journal of Marketing, 32(7/8), 703-712.

Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated

environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50-68.

Ind, N., & Riondino, M. C. (2001). Branding on the Web: A real revolution? Journal of Brand

Management, 9(1), 8-20.

Kim, J. W., Lee, B. S., Shaw, M. J., Chang, H.-L., & Nelson, M. (2001). Application of decision-

tree induction techniques to personalized advertisements on Internet storefronts.

International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 5(3), 45-62.

Leiner, B. M., Cerf, V. G., Clark, D. D., Kahn, R. E., Kleinrock, L., Lynch, D. C., Postel, J.,

Roberts, L. G., & Wolff, S. (2000). A brief history of the Internet. Available online at:

http://www.isoc.org/internet-history/brief.html

Li, H., & Coyle, J. R. (1997). Determinants of purchases on the World Wide Web. Paper

presented at the American Academy of Advertising.

 One Face or Many 28

Ling, M. C., & Lawler, K. (2001). Internet advertising, game theory and consumer welfare.

Electronic Commerce Research, 1(1), 169-181.

Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2002). What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing:

Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of interactivity on

advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 53-64.

Martin, B. A. S., Van Durme, j., Raulas, M., & Merisavo, M. (2003). Email advertising:

Exploratory insights from Finland. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(3), 293-300.

McDonald, S. C. (1997). The once and future Web: Scenarios for advertisers. Journal of

Advertising Research, 37(2), 21-28.

McMillan, S. J. (1999a). Advertising age and interactivity: Tracing media evolution through the

advertising trade press. In M. S. Roberts (Ed.), Proceedings of the American Academy of

advertising (pp. 107-114). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.

McMillan, S. J. (1999b, August). Tracing the evolution of interactive media and funding models

through the trade press. Paper presented at the Association for Education in Journalism

and Mass Communication Conference, New Orleans, LA.

McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J.-S. (2002). Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of

communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity. Journal of

Advertising, 31(3), 41-54.

McMillan, S. J., Hwang, J.-S., & Lee, G. (2003). Effects of structural and perceptual factors on

attitudes toward the Website. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(4), 400-409.

Mitchell, A. A., & Valenzuela, A. (2002). The effect of banner advertisements on judgment and

choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 29(1), 257-259.

Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

 One Face or Many 29

Newell, F. (1997). The new rules of marketing : How to use one-to-one relationship marketing to

be the leader in your industry. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Park, J.-J., & Cropp, F. (2002). An exploratory study of marketers’ perception of Internet

reciprocal communication forms as marketing communication tools. Paper presented at

the American Academy of Advertising.

Paul, P. (1996). Marketing on the Internet. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 13(4), 27-39.

Peppers, D., & Rogers, M. (1993). The one to one future: Building relationships one customer at

a time. New York: Currency Doubleday.

Richards, J. I., & Curran, C. M. (2002). Oracles on “advertising”: Searching for a definition.

Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 63-77.

Rodgers, S., & Chen, Q. (2002). Post-adoption attitudes to advertising on the Internet. Journal of

Advertising Research, 42(5), 95-104.

Saeed, K. A., Yujong, H., & Grover, V. (2002). Investigating the impact of Web site value and

advertising on firm performance in electronic commerce. International Journal of

Electronic Commerce, 7(2), 119-142.

Shen, F. (2002). Banner advertisement pricing, measurement, and pretesting practices:

Perspectives from interactive agencies. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 59-67.

Singh, S. N., & Dalal, N. P. (1999). Web pages as advertisements. Communications of the ACM,

42(8), 91-98.

Strauss, J., & Frost, R. (1999). Marketing on the Internet: Principles of online marketing. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

 One Face or Many 30

White, C., McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J.-S. (2003, May). Dot.Com fever: Deconstructing the

boom and the bust. Paper presented at the International Communication Association, San

Diego, CA.

Yoon, S.-J. (2001). The effects of perceived consumer characteristics on the choice and use of

Internet ads. Journal of Brand Management, 8(4/5), 346-364.

Youn, S., & Lee, M. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of attitude toward the advergame in

commercial Web sites. Paper presented at the American Academy of Advertising.

Youn, S., Lee, M., & Doyle, K. O. (2003). Understanding adult online game players. Paper

presented at the American Academy of Advertising.