3 ms·

This site promotes a new feature of the "Visual Website Optimizer" software. On the one hand, this is a beautiful advertisement in the style of a blog entry. B

by vog 16y ago

This site promotes a new feature of the "Visual Website Optimizer" software. On the one hand, this is a beautiful advertisement in the style of a blog entry. But on the other hand, this unity between blog entry and ad is a bit scary.

synnik 16y ago
Not scary to me -- I believe that advertising should be exactly like this: Inform you of a product, tell you what value it can offer you, then allow you to make an informed choice. Advertising is only evil when it is deceptive.
- vog 16y ago
  > Advertising is only evil when it is deceptive. ... or when it isn't clearly visible as such. However, this one indeed seems to be labeled clearly enough. Still it looks like a personal user report at a first glance, and that's kind of scary.
  - patio11 16y ago
    It is a personal user report, because the guy trying to sell folks an A/B testing service uses it to A/B test his own site. That doesn't strike me as abnormal. In fact, if hypothetically a multi-billion dollar multinational advertising firm did not routinely dogfood its own A/B testing service, I would consider that a strike against them.
    - vog 16y ago
      > It is a personal user report No, it is a corporate usage report. It is just the writing style that makes it look "personal". This difference may be subtle, but it is important, because it has a huge impact on how trustworthy the information is. And finding the right level of trust for various information is exactly what makes the difference between an informed user and a persuaded user. (BTW, it is of course very positive that they make use of their own product, and this is certainly not what I'm criticizing.)
paraschopra 16y ago
I am curious! Of course, you are right that my primary aim is to promote my software. But why do you think it is evil?
- vog 16y ago
  In its current form it isn't evil, it's just scary. I'll try to explain: It is socially accepted that companies may speak about their products in a onesided, strongly biased way, called "advertisement". This is in contrast to balanced, objective reports as expected from e.g. journalists and scientists. And it is also in contrast to honest, uninfluenced personal opinions as expected from e.g. friends and blogs. In return, those "advertisements" are expected to be explicitly labeled as such, or to be so exaggerated that they are obviously visible as such. That's how we try to ensure fairness. In a sense this is the case here, because the "blog entry" is shown under your website's domain. On the other hand, it is a user report of someone (i.e. you) who is using and testing your software, where one usually expects the honest and uninfluenced personal opinion of a user. It is okay as it is. But if you changed one detail, it wouldn't be okay anymore. (e.g. write about another website rather than your own, or put it into another blog at another domain, or remove the exaggeration in the title as well as the text.) So it is scary, because it is close to the border. But I think it is still on the "good" side of the border, not on the "evil side".
  - btilly 16y ago
    Huh. There are so many companies that spend so much time far, far beyond the bad side of the border that my expectations are entirely different than yours.
    - vog 16y ago
      Just because there are rogue firms doesn't mean we should lower our standards ... especially on a site like Hacker News which emphasizes quality of the submissions. However, I agree that this is complaining on a high level.

by vog 16y ago

synnik 16y ago

Not scary to me -- I believe that advertising should be exactly like this: Inform you of a product, tell you what value it can offer you, then allow you to make an informed choice. Advertising is only evil when it is deceptive.

vog 16y ago
> Advertising is only evil when it is deceptive. ... or when it isn't clearly visible as such. However, this one indeed seems to be labeled clearly enough. Still it looks like a personal user report at a first glance, and that's kind of scary.
- patio11 16y ago
  It is a personal user report, because the guy trying to sell folks an A/B testing service uses it to A/B test his own site. That doesn't strike me as abnormal. In fact, if hypothetically a multi-billion dollar multinational advertising firm did not routinely dogfood its own A/B testing service, I would consider that a strike against them.
  - vog 16y ago
    > It is a personal user report No, it is a corporate usage report. It is just the writing style that makes it look "personal". This difference may be subtle, but it is important, because it has a huge impact on how trustworthy the information is. And finding the right level of trust for various information is exactly what makes the difference between an informed user and a persuaded user. (BTW, it is of course very positive that they make use of their own product, and this is certainly not what I'm criticizing.)

paraschopra 16y ago

I am curious! Of course, you are right that my primary aim is to promote my software. But why do you think it is evil?

vog 16y ago
In its current form it isn't evil, it's just scary. I'll try to explain: It is socially accepted that companies may speak about their products in a onesided, strongly biased way, called "advertisement". This is in contrast to balanced, objective reports as expected from e.g. journalists and scientists. And it is also in contrast to honest, uninfluenced personal opinions as expected from e.g. friends and blogs. In return, those "advertisements" are expected to be explicitly labeled as such, or to be so exaggerated that they are obviously visible as such. That's how we try to ensure fairness. In a sense this is the case here, because the "blog entry" is shown under your website's domain. On the other hand, it is a user report of someone (i.e. you) who is using and testing your software, where one usually expects the honest and uninfluenced personal opinion of a user. It is okay as it is. But if you changed one detail, it wouldn't be okay anymore. (e.g. write about another website rather than your own, or put it into another blog at another domain, or remove the exaggeration in the title as well as the text.) So it is scary, because it is close to the border. But I think it is still on the "good" side of the border, not on the "evil side".
- btilly 16y ago
  Huh. There are so many companies that spend so much time far, far beyond the bad side of the border that my expectations are entirely different than yours.
  - vog 16y ago
    Just because there are rogue firms doesn't mean we should lower our standards ... especially on a site like Hacker News which emphasizes quality of the submissions. However, I agree that this is complaining on a high level.