Member Avatar for InsightsDigital

I read on a blog about the lack of rich media ads and not many ads that are considered rich media are not rich at all. If the Flash ad does not contain video nor animation, then it recommended, not to bother. So what do you think about that?
An excerpt:
# There's a lot of rich media being served – but most of it's not very rich. DoubleClick says that in 2008, less than 40% of the impressions it served were GIFs or JPEGs. So does that mean the other 60% were rich media? Not according to DoubleClick: it says 55% of its 2008 impressions were "simple Flash" ads. Just 6% of the impressions served in 2008 were rich enough to be labeled "rich media."

  • 3 Contributors
  • 3 Replies
  • 193 Views
  • 1 Week Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by InsightsDigital

Dani AI

Generated

A concise, practical primer to the thread: a “rich” ad is not simply a Flash file or a looping animation — it’s an ad that provides meaningful interaction or an immersive media experience (expand-on-click/hover, in-unit video, surveys, playable elements, social hooks, data-driven personalization). This matches ’s wording and the IAB’s definition of rich media. (iab.com)

On performance: measured industry research shows that when a creative actually delivers video or genuine interaction it tends to produce stronger brand lift (awareness, favorability, purchase intent) than simple animated banners. That said, higher engagement doesn’t automatically convert to direct-response sales; impressions or interactions are not the same as conversion. ’s caution about “Flash impressions” not equaling conversion is well founded — pick the format that fits the campaign goal and instrument the right KPIs (interaction rate, time-in-ad, view‑through conversions, and brand‑lift studies). (agency.googleblog.com)

Production and technical rules that matter today: do not build new rich creatives in Flash — Flash Player was retired and is no longer supported in modern browsers; HTML5/JS (with graceful degradation) is now the standard. Keep the user experience fast by limiting the initial file weight and using “sub‑load” (polite download) for heavier assets; use the IAB Tech Lab guidance for lightweight creatives and use MRAID for in‑app rich units. Also make audio user‑initiated and always include obvious close controls. (adobe.com)

Quick, actionable checklist:

  • Define objective first (brand vs direct response) and choose format to match it.
  • Prefer HTML5, keep initial load small, lazy-load rich assets.
  • A/B test a rich-media variant vs a lightweight image/video variant and measure with viewability and brand-lift metrics.
  • Use an MRC/IAB‑accredited viewability vendor and report interaction/time metrics, not only CTRs.

For practical planning this approach avoids wasted production cost on “fake” rich media and ensures creatives are measured against the outcomes they’re meant to deliver. (prnewswire.com)

Recommended Answers

All 3 Replies

Member Avatar for bobchrist

I don't think good impression for "Flash" would help for good conversion.

Member Avatar for shubh09

Rich Media is now defined as: advertisements with which users can interact (as opposed to solely animation and excluding click-through functionality) in a web page format. These advertisements can be used either singularly or in combination with various technologies, including but not limited to sound, video, or Flash, and with programming languages such as Java, Javascript, and DHTML. These Guidelines cover standard Web applications including e-mail, static (e.g. html) and dynamic (e.g. asp) Web pages, and may appear in ad formats such as banners and buttons as well as transitionals and various over-the-page units such as floating ads, page take-overs, and tear-backs.

Member Avatar for InsightsDigital

Thanks for explaining what is rich media ads.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.