The Washington Post V Aljazeera: Sneaky versus Obvious

Ding ding! Its the battle of the websites. The Washington Post versus Aljazeera. The rules are simple folks, this fight will be won or lost on advertising.

First to the blue corner, The washington Post. The home page, upon first appraisal is relatively advertisement free. There are no banner ads and the headlines section is unobstructed. There is a big advertisement on the right hand side of the page but it is relatively ‘quiet’ in that there are no flashing lights or other bells and whistles. Also, this ad is for the upmarket Mariott Hotels group. Whether this is indicative of the market The Post attracts or a reason why the ad refrains from tacky tactics is irrelevant. As pages go, this is dominated by news and editorial content.

As one scrolls down the page there is a surprising lack of advertising. Once one gets to the very bottom there is a small ad on the right hand side but doesn’t seem to be more than that. There is, however, a list of ‘Featured Advertiser links’. There are no images or graphics associated with this list but it is laid out in a similar fashion to the other lists surrounding it. There is also a small panel, on the same side of the page, which has links to travel articles on the website and next to this is a link for Budget Travel.

Now to the red corner, home of Aljazeera. This home page has a huge banner ad across the verytop of the page, a search bar underneath and then another banner ad of roughly the same size. Along with these two rather large advertisements there is an imposing ad running down the right hand side of the page, similar to the Post. Also similar to the Post, it is mostly editorial content for the rest of the page until the end where it is interrupted by another banner ad.

PROMINENCE OF ADS

With regard to the prominence of the ads then Aljazeera wins, hands down. the huge banner ads are imposing and rather loud. They break up the news section of the page in an unhelpful way and imply a reliance, ont the part of the website, on advertising revenue. The Washington Post, in contrast, declines to place advertising at the top of its page and prefers to use the right hand side of the page. This, in a way, frames the news section and almost makes it more accesible. The advertising further down the Post page is not obvious and could be seen as less intrusive as the advertising on Aljazeera’s page.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN ADS AND EDITORIAL

The distinction on the Post page is relatively clear for the ad down the right hand side of the page. Its a colourful ad whereas all the other content is headlines. As one scrolls down, however, there is less of a distinction. The ad for Budget Travel looks like it could be content about certain destinations and it is in a panel with actual articles on the website about similar destinations. The list of featured Advertiser links could just as easily be a list of related stories and the links themselves are written like headlines.

Aljazeera, on the other hand, have these huge imposing banner ads which, although they compromise the news ethis of the page, couldn’t be confused with editorial content. Granted the position of these is intrusive and they look rather garish, but there is a clear distinction between them and the content of the website.

THE VERDICT

The Washington Post aims to maintain the quality of its product by not placing tacky or expressive ads on its page. They do, however, attempt to minimalise the impact of the advertising by dressing it up as editorial content. Visitors to the Aljazeera site do not run the risk of inadvertantly clicking on ads thinking they are editorial content but must put up with the compromised look of the page.

In trying to give a clean, clear news home page, The Post fails to distinguish clearly between content and  advertising thereby failing the reader. Aljazeera, by detracting from the visual appeal of their page, show the reader clearly what is advertising and what is news content.

WINNER (by virtue of ethical knockout): Aljazeera