Looking to make your internet ad effective? A new study reveals that time is of the essence.

Internet advertising firm Lotame determined that 40 seconds is the ideal length for internet spots. This is a valuable piece of information that will allow production companies to convey their point without exhausting their viewers’ interest.

The study used a series of tune- in ads for TV programs. Participants were then asked which TV shows they were interested in viewing. “The study showed that a measurable increase in a person’s intent to view begins after 17 seconds of exposure to an ad, peaks at 76 seconds, and significantly degrades after 225 seconds, Lotame said.”

The study, however, does not take into consideration the content of the ad. Whether ad content impacts viewers’ tolerance for brand discussion, etc. is a question worthy of attention especially amidst today’s partisan political climate. Answering this question would assist in consistently delivering robust messages.

Here’s a solid web video from California US Senate candidate Chuck DeVore, currently making the rounds.

The effectiveness of this piece is attributed to it’s ability to draw the viewer into a virtual reality dictated by Pelosi’s actual words.

It’s presented in a believable and realistic way, setting the foundation for a true emotional appeal, which only becomes more poignant when the viewer is reminded that these are in fact Pelosi’s true words.

I’m back – after a few days hiatus.  This one will be of interest to all you Facebook friends.

You know a communication medium has officially made it when you begin to see political attack ads being sponsored and purchased within it’s purview.

EMILY STEEL reports in an article for the Wall Street Journal, titled FACEBOOK POLITICAL ADS TEST LIMITS, that the notorious Moveon.org has started the practice of purchasing ad links on Facebook made to appear as legitimate news story posts.

Read below:

“AP Says: Palin Lied,” reads one ad, accompanied by an unflattering photo of the vice presidential candidate. Another ad — accompanied by the same photo — reads, “Washington Post breaks ANOTHER Palin scandal. Charging tax payers for her sleeping at home.” Another with a picture of John McCain grimacing reads, “Time’s Joe Klein has had enough of McCain’s dishonorable campaign lies. A must read.”

Clicking on the ads takes visitors straight to a story on the Web sites of those publications. People who click on the ad that reads “WSJ Says: Palin Lied,” for instance, are directed to a story on The Wall Street Journal Web site about the contradictions in Gov. Palin’s record regarding the “Bridge to Nowhere.”

But none of the publications cited in the ads bought them — or even was aware of them. The buyer — though never identified anywhere on the ads or on the pages that you land on after clicking on them — is the liberal group MoveOn.org. It’s the latest example of fuzziness about who’s behind what when it comes to political ads online.

I support political communications on social networking sites. Where there is speech there is debate and that is good for a democracy.  If we limit speech in budding communication mediums, we will be forever doomed to mediocrity and meaningless chatter.

However, this form of misleading communication is dangerous and wrong.

Proper and reasonable notification of whom is responsible for any political communication is absolutely necessary.  Any medium where mass communication is accepted, and paid political communication is present there must be proper disclosure.

Otherwise, people and will be subjected to harmful, misleading and slanderous claims that are irreversible.

Faceless groups and movements can appear to morph into any halfway legitimate entity and lay false claims intended to mislead people – This is exactly what Moveon.org is doing.  

They are hiding behind the tiny legal exception given to groups or candidate committees so that they do not have place a long silly disclaimer on pens and other small knick knacks.

They are also heading down a path, which will open up a Pandora’s box of veiled Facebook attacks, undoubtedly leading to an FEC ruling or some other government action to limit it or force disclosure.  This is what happened with mail and television commercials that were sponsored by smear groups in the ’80’s and ’90’s, which led to forced strict disclosure giving us the awkward disclaimers you see and hear at the beginning and end of TV spots.

Groups like Moveon.org always test the limits of political messaging, in attempt to mask their identity.

Why? Because their identity is meaningless, and in some cases, very negative in the minds of average Americans. They don’t represent businesses, union members, or people with one legislative agenda.  They are a group that was created on fighting Republicans.

They have a right to exist and communicate, but they continue to force needless action against other groups in the political arena because of their hidden agenda.