I can remember a time when Facebook was not trying to sell me anything, but it is nothing but a distant memory now. For me, the most memorable dialogue exchange from “The Social Network” was between Sean Parker and Mark Zuckerberg about how putting ads on Facebook would ruin the best thing it had going for it, that it was cool. Today, with advancement in data collection and direct marketing, Facebook knows that I’ve been shopping on my cousin’s wedding registry and the sidebar now has suggestions for gifts. This has definitely been a major factor in my accessing Facebook largely through my mobile phone now, as the mobile version of Facebook that I get through my carrier is still ad free. Although I’m sure this ad free viewing will be fleeting, I’m cashing in on it now. I like that my phone is largely one of the few places where only those with what Wilken and Sinclair call “permission based marketing” can advertise to me (2009).

I prefer what many of this week’s readings talk about, the pull model of mobile advertising. I do not want unsolicited advertising on my phone because I think of it as part of my personal space (Kolsaker and Drakatos, 2009). However, while reviewing this week’s readings to prepare for this writing, I did contemplate how strange it is that I would be so intolerant of advertising on my phone when I’m so tolerant of it in the other spaces in my life. Commercials are a part of the radio I listen to in the car and stream music online with Pandora, the television I watch on TV and stream online, and all of the print media that I access, whether actual print or online. I manage to tolerate all of these without the kind of censure I give to advertising on my mobile.

The article I found most interesting this week was Peer or Expert? The persuasive impact of YouTube public service announcement producers by Paek, Hove, Jeong, and Kim. I was intrigued by the aspect of persuasion in the study and the two routes, central and peripheral, that were discussed. It was interesting, although not surprising, that those with less exposure to the topic participating in the experiment could be swayed so easily by only the likeability over the credibility of the presenter (Paek, Hove, Jeong, Kim, 2011). Particularly with public service announcements, one would hope that only the experts are sending out the message, but with so many people taking the peripheral route, it looks like NBC had the right idea by hiring celebrities to do their PSAs.

Lastly, the passage that struck me most from this week’s reading was from Waiting For The Kiss of Life by Wilken and Sinclair on location based services. The idea that an automated system would be in place to send me advertising at the point of sale is both exciting and creepy. On the one hand, I’ve gotten used to the idea that my phone is a GPS system, and I’ve taken advantage of that technology for personal navigation and especially while traveling to find food and entertainment. On the other hand, it is terrifying that very soon marketers will be able to tell when I’ve walked into a particular store so they can message me the daily specials and coupons. How is this different that signing up for a Kroger card and having coupons mailed to my home address based on my frequency of shopping and previous purchases? I guess it isn’t different fundamentally, but as discussed, to those that consider their phones as part of their personal space are going to feel spied upon. But then again, maybe it would only be a matter of time before it all became background noise to us in the way that radio and television advertising has.