I've mentioned in the past how much I hate the idea that some people have about cell phones that they're just a conduit to push marketing material to a person wherever they are. I don't want content from a communications provider. I want connectivity to the network. That holds true for voice and data.
So Verizon decides that they're going to push banner ads in addition to the web content that their customers are downloading with their cell phones next year according to a NY Times article (Verizon to Allow Ads on Its Mobile Phones). Nice. I wonder if the bits that those ads take up count with the limited data plans.
Have I mentioned that that I'm in the market for a new phone and carrier? (number portability is a wonderful thing).
I was kinda considering Verizon even with their bad selection of phones because of their recent Consumer Reports ratings. Not anymore. The article mentions Sprint is already doing this...Margo's been on Sprint for many years and hates it, so I never really considered them.
Yesterday, Seth Godin posts a message on his blog for John Harrobin, VP of marketing and digital media for Verizon because apparently you can't just contact the guy directly. Seth asks a couple of questions that everyone in marketing should ask themselves before they decide to add more advertising to something out here in the digital world:
Here are the two questions I hope you'll ask yourself:
a. what does the money we make from this effort do to the long-term profitability of our relationship with customers and
b. is this something consumers want? How many calls a day does Verizon get asking for more spam/advertising on their cell phones?
Now, the only relationship I'm interested in with my cell carrier is that they give me connectivity and stay out of my way if I keep paying the bill. Dumping more advertising down that connection isn't a good way to maintain even those minimal requirements for a relationship.
Anyone over at Verizon listening?