Yet lots of sites still do this on a regular basis – and it’s not just “spammy” or low quality sites – I’ve seen several popular news and technology websites doing the same thing.

These ads take many guises with one of the most frustrating being the overlay advertisement. This is where the ad intentionally obscures the content you’re trying to read to show you a video or some “great” offer you’re missing out on.

The most irritating thing with overlay ads is that it’s always so difficult to find the damn “close” button. As a result you often end up clicking on the ad and being directed to a site you had no intention of ever visiting.

Another similar example to the overlay technique are those annoying ads (usually stored in a sidebar) that pop out whenever you accidentally hover over them. They again end up covering up the text you’re trying to read and normally hang around for several seconds.

Misleading links in articles are also particularly frustrating – you go to click on a link and as soon as you hover over it an advertisement appears. These ads are typically displayed for at least a few seconds and can be really distracting.

Is displaying advertisements in this way good for these brands (both the site serving the ad and the company who is promoting something)? I tend to avoid sites that regularly use intrusive advertising techniques and I’m sure others are the same.

So why do site owners and advertisers still continue to use approaches like these?

Some advertisers will argue that overlays and the other techniques touched on above are significantly more effective than traditional “static” ads as they get clicked on more often.

But simply measuring the number of clicks an ad gets is not a good measure of how effective it is – especially when intrusive techniques are used and people are sent to sites that they never had any intention of visiting.

Attempting to force or trick users into viewing and clicking on advertisements is counter productive – you’ll simply end up irritating and annoying them. Are the extra pennies you earn in ad revenue really worth that?

The problem is that this skill and knowledge can be abused – interactions can be designed for unethical purposes to trick and manipulate users into doing things they’d prefer not to.

You see examples of this all the time – one common technique is the use of radio buttons at the bottom of a form which aim to confuse you – “YES, I’d prefer not to go on the mailing list” or “NO, I do want to be contacted by other companies”.

There are also those irritating “download” sites – the ones that offer freeware software and have large download buttons. You click the link only to find that you’ve been taken to an advertisement – the “real” download button was below the one the designer wanted you to click.

The issue with these types of examples (and there are many more) is that the designers of these interactions are trying to trick and manipulate you into a certain type of action that benefits them and not you.

This manipulation can take many forms – I experienced it myself recently when trying to book a flight to Edinburgh. One particular airline had a low advertised cost that seemed a good deal – you know that taxes will be added to the final cost, but it seemed reasonable.

However, as you go through the booking process you’re then charged for baggage, choosing your seats, and then a final transaction fee is charged (on top of the original ticket price and tax). You’re also strongly “encouraged” to purchase the insurance they offer – to the point where it’s hard to proceed without buying it.

The design of this interaction is actually quite clever – there’s no doubt that it will increase sales and get more money through door. The cost is slowly and subtly built up until you’ve put in so much effort to book the tickets that it’s not worth the hassle to look elsewhere.

But whilst this sort of approach does help businesses make more money, it can leave customers feeling cheated – you don’t feel pleased with the service you’ve received, you’re not happy with the amount you had to pay, and you’re highly unlikely to recommend them to anyone else.

It’s important to note that there’s a thin line here – obviously sites need to be optimised for high conversion – that’s just a part of doing business. But at what cost?

You might win in the short-term by cheating and tricking users, but they’re unlikely to do business with you again in the future and will probably share their experiences with others.

Try to always be open and honest. Present what you have to offer and make it easy for people to decide either way.

But is this a good trend?

There are endless articles and list posts around that showcase the “xx Most Astonishingly Beautiful Website Footer Designs” – all of which seem to state how great it is that we now have such creative and original footers.

For example, take this article which discusses the Components of a Great Website Footer – check it out and look at the range of things it suggests can be included in a footer.

There’s 17 different items in total! I wont list them all, but they include a site map, a contact form, social media buttons, a search box, a newsletter sign up form, recent news, your latest tweets, a language selector, and a tag cloud.

If you check the comments on this post you’ll see a common trend – there seems to be agreement on the importance of using creative footers to enhance user experience and to ensure that visitors are exposed to everything on a site.

But is this actually a good thing? Is having a huge footer a legitimate use of screen real estate and does it really enhance user experience?

There seem to be a few primary motivations for having large and creative footers – one is that your footer should be a work of art – that it should look original and help your site stand out from the crowd.

Another is that designers want to ensure users are aware of all of the different pages on a site – normally through the use of a site map.

Many site owners also see the footer as an opportunity to include multiple calls to action – you can follow along on Twitter, get in touch via the contact form, sign up to the newsletter, and subscribe to the site’s RSS feed.

This is too much information! It’s going to overload users and reduce the effectiveness of each of those calls to action.

Any why include a site map? If a visitor has to scroll to the bottom of a page to look for a link some work probably needs to be done on the information architecture and navigation design.

Throwing lots of links and calls to action into a footer section is a lazy approach. By “spamming” visitors in this way the effectiveness of a page as a whole is reduced.

Take a look at the footer on your site. What is its PRIMARY goal? Are you overloading users with too much information? Do you really need everything that’s currently there?

Don’t simply follow the trend of having a huge and artistic footer – take the time to really consider what you need to include and only add what’s absolutely necessary.

The problem, however, with many sites that have been “optimized” is that the design of the site is focused on pleasing the search engines. High-traffic keyphrases are “forced” into poorly written articles that exist only to try and drive more traffic to the site.

Site owners typically write articles and content based around keyphrases that have decent daily traffic and little competition – of course, there’s potential to get traffic from these phrases, but is it really worth it if it’s affecting the quality of your site?

It’s not uncommon to see articles where phrases that aren’t even grammatically correct (e.g. “best websites templates”) are included because the primary focus is to try and rank well for that particular phrase.

Whilst this might get you some additional traffic, it’s pointless if the quality of the content is not of a high standard. Are visitors really going to buy your products or hire your services if you have lots of “keyword-stuffed” articles on your site?

Designing and running a site for the search engines is completely the wrong focus! You should be designing for what your users want and need – not the other way round.

You’re in a dangerous position when you have a site where 90% of the traffic comes via the search engines. A subtle change in a search engine’s ranking algorithm could make your site disappear overnight.

Why not try a different approach? Instead of focusing on SEO, commit to writing high quality articles on a regular basis over a 12 month period.

Write with passion and engage your audience with articles and topics they’re interested in. Don’t even consider the keyphrases you’re looking to target – simply focus on producing great content.

You might not see traffic immediately, but soon people will start to notice – they’ll start to share your content because it’s interesting, entertaining, and useful. Word will spread and you’ll start to pick up authoritative backlinks and exposure.

As a result, you’ll start to get traffic from a number of different sources – not just the search engines. You’ll gain more credibility and enhance the chances that visitors will want to do business with you.

Taking this approach is certainly hard work and time consuming, but by focusing on producing quality content on a regular basis you’ll create a site that you, your users, AND the search engines will love.