Keeping the mobile advertising demon at bay

In politics, getting paid twice for the same thing is called double-dipping and it considered unethical. But cellular operators apparently think that double dipping is OK for them.

One way operators double dip is with their walled garden approach to providing content, in which you only get the online content that the carriers want you to have. That way, they not only charge you for the content, but they also get paid by content providers who want to be inside the wall.

Mobile advertising is similar. It's one thing for advertising to subsidize free services, as has long been the case with radio, television and free Web sites. But cellular operators have long drooled at the prospect of forcing paying customers to endure ads on the little screens of their cell phones and smart phones. And, according to a recent story, some cellular subscribers even like the idea.

A survey by The Nielsen Co. indicates that the number of mobile phone users who have seen ads on their mobile phones rose to 58 million in the fourth quarter of last year. So the risk is rising that cellular carriers will be increasingly emboldened to charge not twice but three times for content: In addition to subscribes and content providers, they'll be charging advertisers.

My objection go away if ads result in a significant (and not a token) decrease in fees. And that certainly could be part of the mix. But do you really believe that the same folks who brought you, say, "unlimited" 3G access with some significant limits don't have their eyes on imposing ads on you no matter what your service plan?

Generic ads are just the first threat. Location-based marketing has been the pipedream of phone companies and many advertisers for years. This uses the location capabilities inherent in all cell phones -- even those that don't have built-in GPS -- to know where you are and deliver relevant ads. So, for instance, you could be walking past a pizza parlor when your phone vibrates and an ad for that establishment appears on your screen.

Marketers have always insisted that you could opt out of receiving such ads. But, again, don't be surprised if this long-failed scheme that benefits everybody but the end user is implemented with only slight decreases in the cost of your service and without the ability to opt-out.

So, to paraphrase a former First Lady, just say no to mobile advertising. But expect more and more pressure to submit yourself to mobile advertising.