Rich Media. A term coined around 1999 by the agency world. Initially is described “animated banner ads” with a larger file size, and the majority of people online (90%+) were using dial-up. The along came Broadband, LCD technology and flat-panel screens at 20″ grew to become almost standard and Flash burst forth along with a host of other technologies. Anything that leveraged other “sensory elements” such as video and audio on a Website became tagged as “Rich Media”. That’s when it all fell apart.

Rich Media was (and often still is) pitched by agencies as Wow Factor that you’d pay a lot more for. If the agency provides good creative, then you should. But so much “Rich Media” can be done and implemented at very low cost, quickly and easily. The term “Rich Media” may have sufficed until 2002 or so, but it really is wholly inadequate today. Mobile devices (the Extended Web) can today deliver similar “Rich Media” experiences as found on a Website. Consumers generate their own video and audio compilations without cost and upload them for viewing - Rich Media has become a catch-all that has diluted the meaning. It may be better for marketers to think in terms of Digital Media or Interactive Media, even Engagement Media; for the medium is either the Web or Extended Web, but each channel provides different opportunities and solutions to meet different segment needs. Each of these digital medias elicits different results because the message varies in interpretation and engagement.

Even the industry has generally found Rich Media to be as passe as faxed press releases. This was seen in a March 2008 survey by EyeWonder ( a leading interactive agency):

• 62% of the survey respondents agree the term “Rich Media” is too “generic and meaningless.”
• 66% of industry executives surveyed did not believe that “Rich Media” accurately defined today’s online video ads.
• 76% of agency executives did not believe it to be an adequate term to cover “emerging platforms” — mobile, IPTV, etc.
• 68% of respondents agreed that a new category name for “rich media” is needed (term “rich media” doesn’t capture where digital advertising is headed in the next five years; it is too generic/meaningless).
• 92% of agency “influencers” had a positive to neutral opinion of the term “Interactive Digital Advertising,” finding it more accurate than “rich media.”

This pretty much sums up the fact that the term Rich Media has become destitute and is now deserving to be placed in the annals of Web history alongside Boom 1.0 and Web 1.0 we believe. There may not be a catch-all new name to replace Rich Media, so much is happening across multiple platforms. But just as we have New Media, Social Media and Traditional Media, so will a new term evolve. The market, as always, will decide.