Mobile ads will be as annoying as TV ads

It was only a matter of time before smartphones started to get irritating, and we mean more irritating than the novelty alarm which wakes you up before the morning slog to work. TV ad irritating, Go Compare irritating, Compare the Meerkat irritating. 

Marketers are increasingly looking to expand on full screen rich-media adverts which will take up the entire phone screen. Advertisers, reports the Wall Street Journal, have been hesitant to put money into mobile ad space as they tend to take up a shoddy share of the screen. Now they’re looking to full screen ads which will feature video and interactive content in an effort to drive traffic and revenues.

Until this year, video ads only made up $12 million of the whole $220 million spent on mobile advertising in the US, but in 2010 video spot advertising will grow to $90 million out of a total $498 million expected for mobile marketing. Rivals Google and Apple have both bought up networks to feed ads through, with Google buying AdMob and Quattro Wireless respectively, and of course Apple kick starting its own iAds.

Which according to the Jobsian ethos will presumably only feed through family-friendly ads, ignoring the number one rule of advertising: sex sells.

One of the biggest mobile ad campaigns for smartphones so far has been the True Blood third season campaign, says the WSJ, which was drummed up by mobile agency Medialets. It appeared on the Variety and Flixster apps and commanded an entire screen, making sure you take notice. One thousand banner ad  impressions can rate between $8 and $15, while a thousand impressions on a rich media ad can go from $15 all the way up to $50. 

Commanding presence and making sure you’ve got the attention of a potential customer will surely appeal to brands – whether an advert is annoying or not, it’s household recognition that counts. And as with unskippable TV ads, save for some on-demand services, a full screen rich media advert is going to do just that.