3 ms·
The problem here is that marketers are only measuring click through. If they measured other metrics in addition I wouldn't be surprised if these ads had negati
by CuriouslyC 9y ago
The problem here is that marketers are only measuring click through. If they measured other metrics in addition I wouldn't be surprised if these ads had negative value. I personally put any company that engages in annoying advertising on my mental shitlist, and avoid purchasing anything by them whenever possible. Unfortunately, that behavior doesn't show up clearly on analytics.
- joshuamorton 9y ago>The problem here is that marketers are only measuring click through. I'm curious, do you really think this is the case? Like, do you really, honestly think that no advertising company has had this thought before?
- cpeterso 9y agoAdvertisers don't just care about clicks. "Impressions" are also an important metric. Much of the jank caused by ads is caused by JavaScript or Flash code that is inefficiently polling the DOM to see if more than 50% of the at is within the browser viewport. This situation should improve with the introduction of the Intersection Observer API which lets the browser call you back when your ad (or other lazily loaded content) is in or near the viewport.
- manigandham 9y agoThey're not, as I mentioned in my comment. Clicks are common but not the only metric. Plain old impressions are still widely used and with video it's usually time played or views (completed play through). Annoying advertising shows up great in metrics because it gets so much attention (which is what makes it annoying in the first place). It's a self fulfilling prophecy for advertisers and agencies and a result of a major lack of proper oversight, incentives or regulation in this industry.