The people who make the ads know we are ignoring them and have traditionally used photos of nice looking women to get our attention. I don't expect that to stop anytime soon. I also don't find that offensive.
A phenomenon I've noticed in the last year or two is the use of gruesome photos, photos that appear to be some sort of ugly sore, wound or infestation. These are used as ways to break through our indifference and get us wondering what is that ugly thing? What does it have to do with whatever the ad is selling?
In a couple of cases I've clicked through to see if the photo had any relevance to what they were selling. It didn't.
The ads doing this take advantage of our "can't look away from something gruesome" instinct. I do hate it when people use our relatively few vestigial instincts against us, especially when my reaction is one of revulsion.
I can't imagine it will convince many people to buy whatever produce or service is advertised. The gruesome probably does drive "clicks" which is what the agency gets paid for in the weird world of online advertising.
Afterthought: I wouldn't want products or services I was offering associated in potential customers' minds with gruesome images, would you?
