Here’s a case where an advertiser did something impressive: they grabbed my attention with a simple white headline on black background. No video, no animation, no strong call to action. Just an intriguing headline and logo. This was in a newsletter from AdAge, so theoretically it was contextually targeted.

But it just clicks through to the MTV homepage:

I was disappointed. I was expecting something cool from MTV ad sales. Maybe they just wanted to re-introduce me to MTV.com and get me experiencing it as a consumer, but I spent about 10 seconds on the site and left, because it didn’t meet my expectations.

As I reflected on what this meant, it reminded me of the importance of context. Nothing in the ad suggested that there was information forthcoming about MTV’s ad opportunities. I inferred that entirely because of the media placement. Even simple copy and headlines can take on new meaning and set new expectations in certain contexts. Which leads me to this: the importance of synchronicity between media and creative in the new digital landscape cannot be overstated.

Or am I missing something?

Yesterday, I published this ClickZ column providing a quick overview of some of the stuff that caught my eye at CES 2010. Having digested the craziness a bit further, I wanted to share some additional thinking, bullet-point style.

3D

• I commented in ClickZ that I thought the requirement to wear glasses might be a barrier to adoption. Manufacturers are trying hard to make the glasses look somewhat cool, with varying levels of success, but overall they still look goofy (I submit this YouTube video as evidence). And most of them must be powered - they work by rapidly closing one lens at a time (something like 120x per second). The power requirement adds bulk. I'm just not sure that'll become a mainstream, every day way to watch TV. Sports, movies, special events, maybe. But beyond that, I'm skeptical that it's anything more than a gimmick - until they can do away with the glasses. Yes, there were a few companies demoing, um, "glasses-less" 3D TVs, but they all gave me a headache.  
• AdAge has a great write up on how to tell when you need a 3D spot.
• This MacWorld piece also provides some great additional insight. Estimates on 3D-capable units to be shipped in 2010 range from 4.3 million (CEA) to under 1 million (Forrester). Forrester also points out that it took HD 10 years to reach more than half of the U.S., and there's no reason to believe 3D will happen any faster, especially given the glasses AND the fact that everyone just shelled out a couple of grand for new HDTVs.

Readers, Tablets and Slates, oh my!

• I also noted this in ClickZ, but e-readers were everywhere. Some of the most interesting to me were innovations like flexible screens, and various methods to try and bring color to screens that maintain e-ink's paper-like appearance. 
• Tablets/slates also got a ton of attention, but the general response from crowds and experts alike seemed to be "Meh. Let's see what Apple does."
• Also, as these devices add color and video, they become obvious platforms for magazine publishers. But, what will the ad formats look like? Will we take interactive web standards or do we need entirely new formats? Will mobile standards work? I'll be watching this evolution carefully.

App Proliferation

• I didn't specifically flag this one in ClickZ, but in reviewing the video and photos I took, it became clear that the iTunes App Store is impacting other platforms.
• Last year at CES, we saw the launch of Yahoo! TV Widgets, or apps for your TV. That continues to grow and evolve, and DiVX launched their web-on-TV platform, which will no doubt begin to host apps/widgets.
• Also, check out this multimedia IP phone from OpenPeak. It was on display at the Intel booth (powered by ATOM processor). It has a very familiar iPhone-like interface, and the platform includes an app store for customizing and personalizing the available features on the phone.

Goggle’s recent purchase of AdMob for $750 million sent a clear signal that big players are getting serious about mobile advertising. As I wrote recently in ClickZ, despite the beginnings of mobile consolidation and the rich investment the giant made, it may be premature to declare 2009 “the year of mobile.”

Google bought AdMob for a lot of reasons. AdMob is a clear leader in the mobile ad space, which is projected to finish 2009 at $416 million, a growth rate of 30% YOY according to eMarketer. The purchase fits in to what seems to be Google’s expansion plans for both CPC text link media and display inventory. Etc., etc. The investment makes sense from a bunch of different angles.

But here’s one that I haven’t seen many people talk about: as of August 2009 the iPhone made up 40% of the ad requests across AdMob’s network. They serve ads into a bunch of popular iPhone applications as well as a wide variety of mobile web sites. That is a treasure trove of consumer behavior data that Google can use to fuel future developments in Android, the Android Market, AND with the rumored Google-branded phone. Combine AdMob’s iPhone data with Google’s own application data and insights from Google services like Google Analytics, Google Maps, and many other popular Google web services accessed heavily by iPhone users, and suddenly Google has perhaps the clearest vision into what iPhone users are doing outside of Apple and AT&T.

Not a bad way for Google to keep an eye on what it likely views as the #1 competitor for it’s own mobile offerings.