Without a doubt, the ‘pay to be uninterrupted’ argument can reinforce the idea that advertising has low added value
The user enters their preferred application. Start using it and soon messages will appear asking if the person really wants to continue seeing ads. From social networks to streaming, the same advertising that anchors business models becomes a reason to avoid interrupting the experience and sell subscription packages. What are the limits of this love-hate relationship?
“Undoubtedly, the ‘pay to be uninterrupted’ argument can reinforce the idea that advertising has low added value”, analyzes Patrícia Moura, founder and CEO of Pride Content, Entertainment judge at Cannes Lions 2024, held between June 17th and 21st, in France.
The marketing professor at Trevisan Escola de Negócios, Fernando A. Fleury, agrees. “Certainly, the practice of digital platforms using advertising as a dissuasive factor to boost adherence to paid packages is a cunning strategy, which has significant implications for consumer perception in relation to advertising”, assesses Fleury.
By offering a seamless experience as a premium benefit, platforms “are not only monetizing the absence of ads, but also positioning advertising as an inconvenience, something that harms the experience”, adds the expert.
According to Fleury, advertising can come to be perceived as an interruptive element, eliminated upon payment. Ads are not seen as part of the digital experience, but rather an obstacle that must be removed in order to fully enjoy the service. “Advertising is implicitly devalued,” she warns.
The complexity of this relationship requires reinvention. One of the alternatives is the development of informative and entertainment content, capable of ensuring relevance and integrating with users’ interests. “To balance this scale, platforms must explore innovative forms of advertising, making it increasingly native, so that it integrates fluidly with the content already consumed”, advises Patrícia.
Read the full article in the June 3rd edition
