Apparently the answer is yes, and no.
While very useful to create direct contact with people, and much more effective than older and more traditional methods, it still isn’t able to compete with television ads – at least this is the opinion of the article linked above.
I beg to differ. While I by no means think that internet advertisement is very effective, I certainly don’t think that TV commercials are any better. To put it simple (and as you may already have guessed by reading the previous posts) I don’t really believe in advertising at all.
Sure, it can work, sometimes, with some people. But TV ads are better than internet publicity in which way? People are kinda watching TV still, but I sincerely predict that that has numbered days, just like the radio. Sure, there are still people listening to the radio, and 20 years from now there will be probably people watching TV, but they won’t be the majority of the market, and they won’t be important.
I simply speak for myself. I don’t watch TV at all. Why watch it? I can download everything that has ever appeared on a television screen in a couple of minutes, and watch it when I want, where I want, and without ads. And I can even do it for free if I want to.
Online publicity has quite an advantage here: there is nothing capable of replacing the online medium, as it has replaced TV (at least for a lot of people). So maybe no one will click on the ads, and maybe no one will buy anything based on that, but at least they will get seen, which is way more than we can say about TV (that, while not the case today, will certainly be the case sometime in the future).
So to put it simple: people don’t want to watch disruptive commercials, they want control, and they don’t care about publicity. Online serves that purpose, TV doesn’t. Both suck more and more as a means of advertising as people get more aware and more critical.
The TV may have the advantage for now, as the article is quick to point out. But TV is a zombie, already dead and not knowing it.