3 ms·
>Annoying people have always been annoying. But it increases engagement!!! I'm happy to see these changes coming.
by wlesieutre 9y ago
>Annoying people have always been annoying.
But it increases engagement!!!
I'm happy to see these changes coming.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago"Engagement" is one of those words, like "value-add", that mean someone is trying to fuck you over.
- msla 9y agoAd tech is indistinguishable from toddlers who haven't learned the difference between good attention and bad attention.
- wlesieutre 9y agoIs not that they haven't learned, it's that even if you're pissed at an advertisement or whatever other annoying thing they did, at least you're looking at it. And will probably remember it. That's what's important!
- nhtaoe78th2 9y agoHence ad blockers and advertisers crying over browser makers reducing the ability to track users.[0] [0]http://www.adweek.com/digital/every-major-advertising-group-is-blasting-apple-for-blocking-cookies-in-the-safari-browser/ http://www.adweek.com/digital/every-major-advertising-group-...
- danso 9y agoI agree that it's possible that annoying ads do work for advertisers. Just like super-expensive Super Bowl ads bring in a good return on investment even if I think I already like Coca-Cola enough to not need to see another commercial. But the ads could be both beneficial for one party (the advertiser, and/or the brand) while being hugely terrible for the host. I'm a news junkie but I actively do not go to CNN.com. Not just I don't visit its front page, but will just ignore any content that's being shared from that domain because I know the ad/video-junk consistently ruins my ability to consume (and enjoy) the content, no matter how great or important it might be.