3 ms·

> I'm telling you why you don't see that research as official papers. Which is a strange thing to claim since what you claim never happens, happens all the tim

by gwern 8y ago

> I'm telling you why you don't see that research as official papers. Which is a strange thing to claim since what you claim never happens, happens all the time with some of the largest media publishers in the world. Think of how many pages Google serves via AMP, or Yahoo's front page, or Google News, quite aside from their companies literally being based on advertising. If they are not media publishers who are doing experiments of the relevant sort, no one is and you are blatantly no-true-Scotsmanning. There are large entities, better positioned than anyone else in the world to know, who run experiments constantly, and publish the results constantly. So. Where are they? > they do not reveal their research because there's no time or incentive to reveal things like yield management, which is complex, audience specific, and contains competitive intel. Congratulations, you have disproved the existence of hundreds or thousands of papers and blog posts. I must be hallucinating them all. > That's why it can't be officially found, but you can get details if you talk to their dev teams. Really? Then why, when I talk to them, I never hear any specifics, I always get told either they don't know or no one's checked, and only once in a blue moon do I hear something relevant (always without details)? Since you apparently talk to so many dev teams and they tell you all about the effects of ads on user retention and total traffic from the many experiments they run but never ever publish on, perhaps you could summarize them and provide the details for the rest of us.

manigandham 8y ago
>> If they are not media publishers... no one is No, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo are not considered media publishers by any actual media publisher; because they are ad networks that do some news aggregation at best and do not produce original content. There absolutely is a definition that you are refusing to recognize for some reason. >> There are large entities..., who run experiments constantly, and publish the results constantly. So. Where are they? Again, what are you referring to here? The big companies are not publishers and what they do is closer to Amazon.com testing page speed rather than NYT testing ad load. Actual media publishers do not publish results constantly, if ever. >> Congratulations, you have disproved the existence of hundreds or thousands of papers and blog posts. I must be hallucinating them all. What? How are you asking about the lack of research and then saying there's research everywhere? Again, what are you talking about here? What media publisher* is printing heavy insights into their ad yield management? >> ...when I talk to them, I never hear any specifics, I always get told either they don't know or no one's checked... Because it's internal intel. Do you know anyone on the revenue team? They might be more open to details but won't know the technical background. You can look at trade publications like Digiday, Adweek, Mediapost, Adexchanger and others to find details and some rare whitepapers. >> perhaps you could summarize them and provide the details for the rest of us. You need to have specific questions, but here are some details: Top sites are focused on revenue over UX. Sites have found equilibrium between ad load and retention with maximum time spent. Users rarely stop visiting sites, they just come back with adblockers instead, which has led to strategies like free articles per month and increased direct-sold campaigns and native ads from brand studios (for pubs that can afford a team). WSJ and other pubs have stopped the google-search free entry workaround as well. UX changes include never-ending feeds and auto-changing articles to minimize bounces, along with less ad slots but more ad refreshes to increase total impressions. Tech-forward pubs like WaPo have built their own adtech stacks to show users different formats and ad frequencies depending on how they respond. Subscribers get less ads until churn is minimized. No ads for subs just leaves money on the table and even FT.com runs plenty of campaigns. Video has also invaded everything with 5x higher prices than banners. Overall pubs have managed to squeeze out the same number of impressions from just the non-adblocked market, while optimizing paid conversions for adblockers and capitalizing on their uninterrupted attention to show more high-touch direct campaigns. Readership is up all around and both segments make more money than before.

by gwern 8y ago

manigandham 8y ago

>> If they are not media publishers... no one is No, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo are not considered media publishers by any actual media publisher; because they are ad networks that do some news aggregation at best and do not produce original content. There absolutely is a definition that you are refusing to recognize for some reason. >> There are large entities..., who run experiments constantly, and publish the results constantly. So. Where are they? Again, what are you referring to here? The big companies are not publishers and what they do is closer to Amazon.com testing page speed rather than NYT testing ad load. Actual media publishers do not publish results constantly, if ever. >> Congratulations, you have disproved the existence of hundreds or thousands of papers and blog posts. I must be hallucinating them all. What? How are you asking about the lack of research and then saying there's research everywhere? Again, what are you talking about here? What media publisher* is printing heavy insights into their ad yield management? >> ...when I talk to them, I never hear any specifics, I always get told either they don't know or no one's checked... Because it's internal intel. Do you know anyone on the revenue team? They might be more open to details but won't know the technical background. You can look at trade publications like Digiday, Adweek, Mediapost, Adexchanger and others to find details and some rare whitepapers. >> perhaps you could summarize them and provide the details for the rest of us. You need to have specific questions, but here are some details: Top sites are focused on revenue over UX. Sites have found equilibrium between ad load and retention with maximum time spent. Users rarely stop visiting sites, they just come back with adblockers instead, which has led to strategies like free articles per month and increased direct-sold campaigns and native ads from brand studios (for pubs that can afford a team). WSJ and other pubs have stopped the google-search free entry workaround as well. UX changes include never-ending feeds and auto-changing articles to minimize bounces, along with less ad slots but more ad refreshes to increase total impressions. Tech-forward pubs like WaPo have built their own adtech stacks to show users different formats and ad frequencies depending on how they respond. Subscribers get less ads until churn is minimized. No ads for subs just leaves money on the table and even FT.com runs plenty of campaigns. Video has also invaded everything with 5x higher prices than banners. Overall pubs have managed to squeeze out the same number of impressions from just the non-adblocked market, while optimizing paid conversions for adblockers and capitalizing on their uninterrupted attention to show more high-touch direct campaigns. Readership is up all around and both segments make more money than before.