CONSUMERS HATE INTERNET ADVERTISING

Ari Rosenberg writes:

...when prompted, most can name their favorite ad, while many can articulate its purpose relative to the exchange for content. However, place the word "Internet" in front of "advertising" and watch the contempt "pop up."

That's because televisions do not get viruses, magazines do not crash, and ads do not appear out of nowhere to cover the article consumers are reading in their daily newspaper. These Internet-advertising-inflicted mishaps fuel consumer backlash. Factor in a healthy suspicion of cookies, the annoyance of pop-unders, sound without consent, spam from here to eternity, ads that expand beyond their boundaries and spyware practices that occur under the radar, and you have to be living under a pile of revenue not to see how poorly we as an industry treat the consumer attention we profit from.

Rosenberg suggests that online publishers need to start to build trust with their audience by doing what's right (i.e. no more pop up ads) and forming a network of publishers willing to "certify" their sites.

It sounds good, but the rational part of my brain keeps asking, what if it works? What if agressive creative techiques that get attention deliver results to advertisers? Sure we need guidelines and ethics on which to opperate, but don't we also owe our shareholders / stakeholders results for the money we marketers spend to try and sell and position their products?