<rss version="2.0"
					xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
					xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
					xmlns:opensearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/"
					xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
				  >
<channel>
<atom:link href="http://adage.com/article/digitalnext/viewability-noticeability-counts/238334/#comments" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><title><![CDATA[Comments on: 'Viewable' Ads Are Worthless If Your Website Is a Cluttered Mess]]></title>
<link>http://adage.com/article/digitalnext/viewability-noticeability-counts/238334/#comments</link>
<language>en-us</language>
<ttl>120</ttl>
<description><![CDATA[What advertisers really want is a measure of how well their ads have stood out.]]></description>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Vox Usi]]></title>
<link>http://adage.com/article/digitalnext/viewability-noticeability-counts/238334/#comments-106589</link>
<description><![CDATA[A viewable impression is like an edible steak in a restaurant! Only in online media will some question such an obvious fact, or even DARE to serve an inedible meal. Only the day &quot;viewable&quot; is as obvious as &quot;edible&quot; will we be able to focus on &quot;tasty&quot;, ie &quot;noticeable&quot;.]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 14:07 EST</pubDate>
<author>Vox Usi</author>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Ken Dardis]]></title>
<link>http://adage.com/article/digitalnext/viewability-noticeability-counts/238334/#comments-106540</link>
<description><![CDATA[Viewability is a luxury that appears to be chased only online; there is a horrific lack of it in the broadcast TV, cable, and (its audio-cousin) radio worlds. Given that a new media is being built before our eyes (ears?), this is the time to hold back the errors advertising presents in traditional media. Too many ads ill-fitted within too much content, and everyone loses.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:19 EST</pubDate>
<author>Ken Dardis</author>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>