Back in October, I wrote about the possibility of Google using data pulled from mobile internet devices to create context-specific advertisements in the real world. We’re still a ways off from there, but it’s still a topic that holds my attention.
I started thinking about it again this morning while walking through Union Station in Chicago. Union is always a fascinating place to be to experience advertising. Currently, the Jacob Leienkugel Company has a strong presence there, promoting its beers as well as the Leinie Lodge (a resort owned by the Company). Every day there are promoters handing out samples and literature from a faux-cabin set up inside the station.
To add to this, Leinenkugel has ads all around the station. At each of the displays, the company owns at least a share of the dynamic ads and all of the static ones. Most importantly, on escalators and certain hallways, commuters are literally immersed in the brand. Look up, and you’ll see a banner ad. Look down, and there are even ads along the middle of the escalators. Ditto for the sides. It’s unavoidable.
The way I’m describing it sounds pretty crass, but the experience is actually fairly unobtrusive and organic. The station has this sort of integrated marketing year-round, and I can vividly remember a particularly effective campaign by HSBC bank a few months ago.
This all ties into interactive advertising because it will soon be possible to recreate this experience (to some degree) virtually anywhere. Because GPS can give precise coordinates of any consumer at any time, brands could feasibly ‘follow’ individuals for any period of time. As an individual walked down the street, or drove down a highway, a company could purchase the maximum period of exposure to any location, for just seconds at a time.
I’m not really sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it’s obviously very attractive to both advertisers and sign owners, as it would approach peak efficiency as much as is conceivably possible. On the other, there is something unsettling about giving individual companies that much power over one’s sensory experience. At what point should we seriously begin to consider questions of brainwashing?
In other words, this is ethically troubling to say the least.
Yet the technology will develop quickly, and it’s hard to imagine companies won’t want to utilize it. To some extent, it probably won’t be worth it to target all displays to one individual, so it’s not going to be complete overload. But a system will probably develop that maximizes one’s exposure to certain ads; some weighted algorithm that says you may not see X ad every time, but it’s far more likely to be displayed than others when you’re around.
Any thoughts?
