Recall those obtrusive pop-up advertisements that appeared on websites? In the last ten years, the majority of websites removed them. That being said, it is still widely used in China.

Online marketing in China still primarily consists of shoving banners in people’s faces. Sometimes some find it so annoying that they are unable to click it away.

The Chinese government is aware of the continual barrage of pop-up advertisements that users face. By releasing new internet regulations, they are taking some action, and the user experience will benefit somewhat from it.

A handful of these new rules were reported by our friends at Wall Street Journal:

No willfully preventing customers from using services provided by other online businesses
No deceiving consumers into downloading applications
No stopping the services to users without of justification
Pop-up advertisements must have a clear mechanism to close them.
The government has a valid justification for not outlawing pop-up advertisements. The Chinese government claims that since pop-up advertisements are the foundation of the internet industry’s income, their outlawing would drastically alter the sector’s current business strategy. It will ultimately harm users’ interests and have an impact on the advancements of the internet sector.

While it is simple to blame the government, that is not where the real issue lies.


Many Chinese advertisers are still stuck in the 1.0 era and are accustomed to pushing ads. Although purchasing media ensures views, clicks, and other interactions, the audience is unlikely to share it and, worse yet, may not like your

reputation for constantly promoting advertisements. This is still where much media is spent, even in western nations, yet certain brands are able to capture consumers’ attention and interact with them.

While there aren’t always pop-up advertisements on the Chinese internet, consider spending a few minutes on video portals like Youku or Tudou. Before you can watch a video, they first play a pre-roll, and then they show you an advertisement when you pause a video.


Of course, Chinese consumers are also at fault, so the issue isn’t all with the advertising industry. Customers are spoilt since everything is available for free. With apps like Funshion, they can stream entire films or television series.
It’s also simple to find music. Downloads are managed by Tencent’s QQ Music platform. Thus, many marketers are choosing the simple route and forcing their advertisements into people’s faces.

Brands can perform even better than that in China, where there are more than 500 million internet users. Do you know of any effective Chinese campaign examples? Or could you offer some advice? Tell us in the comments section below.

From a broadcaster’s or media agencies’ perspective I feel that many companies would rather call Google a disruptive and disintermediating force. But I do understand that “fremeny” sounds much better than “DADF”.

which has been a topic of discussion for years in newspapers, compels stations to assess whether YouTube is a friend or a foe. Some have already labelled Google as a “frenemy,” including my employer Martin Sorrell.

From the standpoint of media organisations or broadcasters, I believe that many businesses would prefer to refer to Google as a disruptive and disintermediating force. However, I acknowledge that “fremeny” sounds far more appealing than “DADF.”

Despite the fact that I think the word “enemy” is a little too subtle? But isn’t that a little excessive—a digital vampire?

Some, like my boss Martin Sorrell, have deemed Google a “frenemy” before.

From a broadcaster’s or media agencies’ perspective I feel that many companies would rather call Google a disruptive and disintermediating force. But I do understand that “fremeny” sounds much better than “DADF”.

Although I feel that frenemy is a pretty soft understatement? But a digital vampire, isn’t that a bit over the edge?!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *