There have been times when I’ve been so annoyed by unwanted ads that the only reason I wanted to remember the company was so that I could intentionally avoid it even if I did want the kind of product they sell. I’m wondering if I’m alone in these feelings, or if aggressive/unwanted/annoying ads can and do produce a backlash and end up having the opposite effect desired.
I’ve never heard or read about any study being done regarding that, but perhaps someone here has more insight on the subject.
I will never donate a car to 1-800 Cars For Kids, so I think you’re on to something. I suppose it could be studies, and probably has been in the industry. They focus group everything. They must have concluded being obnoxious is a net gain.
That’s a depressing thought. 
There is a heavily advertised car dealership in the Chicago area that will never, if I can help it, get my business. Their obnoxious ads piss me off that much.
Oh yes, I avoid a lot of products and companies because of obnoxious ads. I go out of my way to remember them just so I make sure I don’t accidentally buy something with an obnoxious ad.
That was exactly what came to mind when I read the title of this thread.
Seems to me that the problem stems from forcing the kids into a script. Same with the Shriners.
Pretty much anyone who advertises on the local evening news will never get my business. It’s like each one is trying to out-obnoxious the other!
Maybe I’m drifting into “get off my lawn” territory here, but really, making an ad memorable is one thing, but being an ass to do it is going the lazy effortless route.
The effects of advertising are pretty hard to research. Not even the effects of “good” ads are supported by top shelf evidence. It’s fairly clear people tend to chose a brand they have heard of over one they haven’t, unless they have information giving them good reason not to. And people’s tastes are different, so an add that is annoying to someone is just “memorable” to someone else.
Someone could spend a ton of money and do a big research project on “bad ads”, but it’s not like the advertiser intended their add to annoy you in the first place, so it seems unlikely that will happen.
But is the OP asking about “obnoxious” ads or “unwanted” ads? The two words are not the same.
The problem with the Kars for Kids ad is that damned song. It is the Obnoxious Earworm from Hell.
Back in the day when I was on satellite TV there was a boat dealership that I swore to never buy from even if the forecast was rain for 40 days and 40 nights.
I still get twitchy remembering them now. So thanks for that, asshole. 
Surely, somebody handed them a script and told them to sing that.
Someone drove around the neighborhood tossing little clear plastic bags with little rocks inside and a flyer advertising their pressure wash business - with what appeared to be a hand-written note on the back stating we have algae and moss on our roof and outside walls (we don’t). Of course, every house received the same little ad. I went to the business’ website and their “Contact us” form and wrote them a little nastygram to stop littering. Probably not the action they wanted.
Well, yeah. But not all scripts are created equal. And that song is pure hell.
This thread reminds me of a dystopian future envisioned by the webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cartoon, where people pay to skip ads and companies respond by making their ads as obnoxious as possible to rake in the ad-skip revenue.
Future? I do that now. When I got my plethora of premium movie channels, it was with the idea that they would be pristine and uninterrupted by commercial breaks. I record everything I watch on commercial television, even the ten o’clock news. I’ve discovered that, if I start watching the recording at 10:10 pm and fast forwards through the commercials, it ends at virtually the same time.
I still won’t consider X-10 type home automation products because they got their launch partly through the heavy use of pop-ups, which were new at the time.
There’s a saying in the ad business, that if people hate your ad, it means they’ve noticed you.
I interpret this to mean that the industry actually intentionally endorses mass production of annoyance.
Of course there’s sparse data to support the idea that ads work. The entire industry claims to be able to talk people into buying your product over and above whatever merits you may have. If you believe them, you have to think they’re lying.
I think you’re OK there; hasn’t X10 largely been replaced by Bluetooth and other technologies?