• E-mail this page
• |  Print this page
• | 
• | 
• | 

We Now Pause For A Message From Our Sponsor

Last night, intrigued by the idea of a "new" (actually, revamped) Microsoft social networking site, I wandered over to Windows Live Spaces, registered under a fictitious name (no, you don't get to find out what it is), and checked it out. Since this isn't a review, I won't go into the design of the site (reasonable, but not revolutionary), the themes available (hideous), or the gadgets available (limited). I'm not even going to comment on the artificiality of a highly corporate entity trying desperately to create a "cool new Windows Live look & feel." What I will mention is the one feature of the page that jumped out at me immediately: the banner ad.

Now, I'm not part of the intended market for Windows Live Spaces--I'm a couple of generations beyond that. In fact, I'm old enough to remember when the Internet was a playground mainly for academics and tech geeks, most of whom swore up and down that they would fight to keep cyberspace free from the evil specter of commercialism. Then the Web hit, with all its pretty and seductive graphics, and the idea of keeping advertisers off the Internet became as likely as keeping programmers away from the latte machine.

These days, Web advertising is everywhere. If you're lucky, it's just there to be read. If you're not as lucky, it moves, sings, or dances around the page in a Flash-generated attempt to get your attention.

I freely concede that Web companies have to earn their keep in order to remain alive, and that short of asking users to pay to visit sites (which was proved long ago to be largely futile), advertising is the only way to keep the virtual wolf from the door. In fact, this opinion is being brought to you courtesy of InformationWeek.com, which is published online with a healthy serving of advertising, the proceeds of which help pay my salary.

However, there's an inherent conflict with sites such as Windows Live Spaces. Social networking sites are commercial, but they're also places where people--mostly, but not exclusively, young people--are exercising their creativity. They're gathering together photos, art, ideas, opinions, and interesting digital objects and using these to both express themselves and to link up with others out there. Making themselves heard. Using the Web to poke a hole in political and corporate complacency.

So how can they express their individuality with a large ad for dog food sitting above their entries? Especially if that ad moves, sings, or jumps directly in front of the text?

One way they can get around it is to pay for the privilege. Windows Live Spaces will get rid of graphical ads and include more space for file storage and attachments for $19.95 annually. But MySpace, the gathering place of thousands of teens, displays several graphical ads on their home pages--and there's no current pay-to-play option.

Another way is to ignore the ads--or get rid of them. The tech-savvy use utilities or extensions such as AdsGone or, for Firefox users, Adblock to blank them out--which is something like taping your favorite TV show and then fast-forwarding past the commercials. (Yes, I've heard the warnings that if everyone did it, our advertising-based economy would collapse in a smoking heap.)

Perhaps some enterprising Web genius will come up with a new paradigm for these sites. In the meantime, social networking fans who don't have either the desire or the capacity to pay for the privilege will just have to put up with increasingly intrusive advertising. I hope whatever message they're trying to send--whether it's political, social, or simply I-want-a-friend emotional--won't get diluted in the process.

What do you think? How do you deal with advertising on your favorite sites? Or do you feel that the more advertising the better? Your comments are welcome.

« Net Neutrality Hyperbole Stumbles On | Main | Daily News Podcast For Friday, August 4 »