Web3 and Advertising: Fit & Friction
Web3 and Advertising: Why the Fit Is Awkward
1. Premises of the Web2 Ad Model
- Centralized user data: Platforms like Google and Meta aggregate user behavior and optimize ad delivery with algorithms.
- “Free service” in exchange for data: Users effectively provide their personal data to use services at no monetary cost.
- Revenue comes from advertisers: Ad spend ultimately flows to the service providers.
2. The Web3 Ethos
- Decentralization & ownership: Users directly control their data and assets via wallets.
- Transparency: On‑chain transactions and histories are public, making black‑box targeting harder.
- Direct value transfer: Tokens and NFTs enable direct rewards to users and creators.
3. Why the Mismatch
- Targeting is harder: Without centralized personal data, ultra‑precise Web2‑style ad targeting is difficult.
- User mindset: Many Web3 users resist data capture and prefer direct rewards, so ad viewing faces more friction.
- Different revenue logic: Instead of relying on advertisers, communities favor direct payments, tipping, and governance‑driven funding.
4. Where Ad‑like Elements May Survive
- Rewarded ads: Opt‑in viewing in exchange for tokens (e.g., Brave’s BAT model).
- On‑chain sponsorships: DAOs or NFT projects acting as sponsors.
- Brand collaborations: Sponsored billboards or avatar items inside metaverse spaces.
In short, Web2 ads as data‑extraction clash with Web3. But consent‑based, value‑sharing ad models can still work.
Comments
Post a Comment