4 ms·

Yeah, but it's not like traditional advertising is free of fraud either. You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. And ther

by 0xbear 9y ago

Yeah, but it's not like traditional advertising is free of fraud either. You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. And there's much more money in it.

red_admiral 9y ago
> You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. I disagree - for something at the scale of P&G, you can bet that they're doing a LOT of measuring for every campaign they run. The article reads to me as if they're applying the same metrics to their online ads that they use already for traditional campaigns, and finding little impact.
- sgt101 9y ago
  Agree that they are measuring, but determining the cause and effect of each campaign is very hard. Sometimes ads have a clear impact, but those are cases that no one argues with. Mostly advertisers simply say (in effect) we got your message out, and there was an impact. If the low/high uptake was due to the ad or to the quality of the product or to the weakness of competitors - well no one can say.
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    >well no one can say. // P&G must have the most and best data on the planet. By now they can probably say with a pretty high confidence interval.
    - halflings 9y ago
      That's not a real argument though. Just assuming that they have a magical way to solve attribution for traditional ads because they're a bit corporation. If they did have that, they could just use the same tools on digital and report fake clicks and bots to Facebook and Google to get reimbursed. (Google at least refunds all impressions and clicks that were later detected as being fraudulent)
      - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
        The sort of data they have would macro-, that's not telling you if any particular click is fake.
        shostack 9y ago
        Correct. We're likely talking econometric/MMM modeling which likely tells them at the channel level what is or is not working, but they may not have enough data for that at the campaign level or lower.
walshemj 9y ago
a while back I saw a traditional display ad for KFC it was on a site heading out of town where the next KFC would have been 20 miles away - not sure they where getting much value out of that advert,

by 0xbear 9y ago

Yeah, but it's not like traditional advertising is free of fraud either. You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. And there's much more money in it.

red_admiral 9y ago

> You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. I disagree - for something at the scale of P&G, you can bet that they're doing a LOT of measuring for every campaign they run. The article reads to me as if they're applying the same metrics to their online ads that they use already for traditional campaigns, and finding little impact.

sgt101 9y ago
Agree that they are measuring, but determining the cause and effect of each campaign is very hard. Sometimes ads have a clear impact, but those are cases that no one argues with. Mostly advertisers simply say (in effect) we got your message out, and there was an impact. If the low/high uptake was due to the ad or to the quality of the product or to the weakness of competitors - well no one can say.
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  >well no one can say. // P&G must have the most and best data on the planet. By now they can probably say with a pretty high confidence interval.
  - halflings 9y ago
    That's not a real argument though. Just assuming that they have a magical way to solve attribution for traditional ads because they're a bit corporation. If they did have that, they could just use the same tools on digital and report fake clicks and bots to Facebook and Google to get reimbursed. (Google at least refunds all impressions and clicks that were later detected as being fraudulent)
    - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
      The sort of data they have would macro-, that's not telling you if any particular click is fake.
      - shostack 9y ago
        Correct. We're likely talking econometric/MMM modeling which likely tells them at the channel level what is or is not working, but they may not have enough data for that at the campaign level or lower.

walshemj 9y ago

a while back I saw a traditional display ad for KFC it was on a site heading out of town where the next KFC would have been 20 miles away - not sure they where getting much value out of that advert,