9 ms·

I am personally hoping this change will generate more evidence that targeted advertising is not as valuable as everyone believes. _I believe_ contextual adverti

I am personally hoping this change will generate more evidence that targeted advertising is not as valuable as everyone believes. _I believe_ contextual advertising is effective and doesn't come with all the privacy nightmares and ethical issues like allowing targeting alcoholics with alcohol ads. Of course, that is just my own personal opinion. I've seen some articles agreeing with what I just said - but not being a statistician or even in the advertising industry I'm not qualified to say one way or the other.

shripadk 6y ago
> targeted advertising is not as valuable as everyone believes > privacy nightmares and ethical issues like allowing targeting alcoholics with alcohol ads These two statements are diametrically opposing each other. Either targeted advertising works or it doesn't. You can't say that it isn't valuable and then raise concerns about how it causes privacy nightmares and alcoholics to buy more alcohol. Alcoholics will buy more alcohol either ways. Targeting makes no difference to their behavior really. But your argument holds no ground because alcohol ads are highly regulated. You can read more about why here: [1]. More often than not advertising companies reject alcohol ads as it hurts their business more than it helps (due to stringent regulations in most parts of the World). It is not as easy as you make it out to be. Else your social media pages should be inundated with alcohol ads. It is not. I strongly believe that there should be regulations on the content of the ads that are pushed out (just like the alcohol ads). There should be regulation on how often an ad can be retargeted and to ensure that the placements don't hamper user productivity. Blanket bans on advertising methods just for sake of privacy is going to do more harm than good. There has to be some sort of a balance. For people who want privacy they can opt for privacy focused social networks. But if entire platforms move towards privacy then the advertising industry will collapse completely. Targeted advertising is the cheapest way for small and medium businesses to get new customers. It levels the playing field with corporations with big pockets. If you move towards privacy as a focus point with no proper alternatives to advertising it will cause a major shakeup. Many businesses will shutdown. You'll have more consolidation and less competition. Only those with big pockets can advertise their products/services. And in the post-Corona World, this is a lifeline to many small businesses. [1]: https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6012382?hl=en https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6012382?hl=en
- Rebelgecko 6y ago
  As a disclaimer, I work at a different company that makes a lot of revenue from advertising. However, I think people should try turning off Personalized Ads on Youtube and watching a few videos (without adblock!). IMO it's fucking awful, even compared to regular targeted ads. You'll get the same crappy Trump "socialism survey" 6 times in a row because there's no tracking of ad viewer fatigue.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - gav 6y ago
    When I do that that I get political adverts mixed in with meal-kits, diets (I'm not sure what they're trying to sell), and exercise equipment. It's pretty awful and I'm waiting down the seconds to hit skip. It's like going back in time to pop-ups and animated horrors of the 90s and early 00s but with vlog-style ads instead--I guess this style tests well, they all look the same to me. Instagram does a great job of personalizing ads to both products and the type of companies I like. I don't mind seeing these kinds of ads at all. I'm happy (in this case) for them to track me because it's much much, better than the alternative.
    - na85 6y ago
      >I'm happy (in this case) for them to track me because it's much much, better than the alternative. You're acting like there is only one alternative, but what about blocking ads? That's win-win for everyone but the advertiser. And really that makes it win-win-win, unless you work in advertising or for Facebook/Google.
      - shripadk 6y ago
        > You're acting like there is only one alternative, but what about blocking ads? That's win-win for everyone but the advertiser. And really that makes it win-win-win, unless you work in advertising or for Facebook/Google. Win-win for who? If everyone uses adblockers you will have major unemployment. All small and medium businesses will shutdown as advertising is the cheapest mechanism to reach customers. Without advertising these businesses will have to rely on billboard advertising and TV ads. Both are extremely expensive in comparison to internet advertising. Don't bite the hand that feeds you. As simple as that!
ijidak 6y ago
I am an advertiser that uses targeted advertising and contextual advertising. There are some products and services that absolutely require targeting by preferences to maximize profit. I'm running such a campaign now and getting wildly high ROI's in the 14X range. If I couldn't target by audience interest, I'd be happy to get an ROI that is a tenth of that.
- icedistilled 6y ago
  > I'm running such a campaign now and getting wildly high ROI's in the 14X range. Are you able to prove they wouldn't have bought anyway?
  - smachiz 6y ago
    "50% of my marketing dollars are wasted, the problem is, I don't know which 50%"
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  > There are some products and services that absolutely require targeting by preferences to maximize profit. As a normal person who just wants to use his phone without creepy crap going on, I don't care—and see zero benefit if your profits are maximized. Your profit seeking wishes are not my concern.
  - corin_ 6y ago
    They were replying on the subject of whether targeted ads are effective or not. Whether they should be allowed is a different matter, but while companies are collecting your data it's not reasonable to ask advertisers to disadvantage themselves against competition by not using the marketing options with the highest ROI. Send your complaints to politicians, not ad buyers. (Disclaimer: I've spent millions - not my own money - on ads in my career. I'd support better privacy regulations to prevent some of the targeting I've been able to use.)
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
cblconfederate 6y ago
The implication of that would be nothing less than a collapse of multiple tech giants. Ad money, redirected from old media, subsidizes a content economy from which all of them, even apple benefits.
- philipov 6y ago
  Good. Capitalism decrees that a company founded on a faulty or unsustainable business model should collapse and be replaced by better alternatives. The sooner the market realizes an error and corrects itself the better.
- scarface74 6y ago
  If Google and Facebook died or changed their business model, why should I care? I pay for Apple devices because the transaction is clean - I give them money and they give me stuff. The same for Microsoft with O365 and subscriptions streaming services.
  - cblconfederate 6y ago
    apple's bestselling devices though are content consumption devices, and people spend most of their times in social apps there. That entire ecosystem is dependent on ads, and in particular on the advantage of having targeted ads, which is what made G & FB rich

shripadk 6y ago

> targeted advertising is not as valuable as everyone believes > privacy nightmares and ethical issues like allowing targeting alcoholics with alcohol ads These two statements are diametrically opposing each other. Either targeted advertising works or it doesn't. You can't say that it isn't valuable and then raise concerns about how it causes privacy nightmares and alcoholics to buy more alcohol. Alcoholics will buy more alcohol either ways. Targeting makes no difference to their behavior really. But your argument holds no ground because alcohol ads are highly regulated. You can read more about why here: [1]. More often than not advertising companies reject alcohol ads as it hurts their business more than it helps (due to stringent regulations in most parts of the World). It is not as easy as you make it out to be. Else your social media pages should be inundated with alcohol ads. It is not. I strongly believe that there should be regulations on the content of the ads that are pushed out (just like the alcohol ads). There should be regulation on how often an ad can be retargeted and to ensure that the placements don't hamper user productivity. Blanket bans on advertising methods just for sake of privacy is going to do more harm than good. There has to be some sort of a balance. For people who want privacy they can opt for privacy focused social networks. But if entire platforms move towards privacy then the advertising industry will collapse completely. Targeted advertising is the cheapest way for small and medium businesses to get new customers. It levels the playing field with corporations with big pockets. If you move towards privacy as a focus point with no proper alternatives to advertising it will cause a major shakeup. Many businesses will shutdown. You'll have more consolidation and less competition. Only those with big pockets can advertise their products/services. And in the post-Corona World, this is a lifeline to many small businesses. [1]: https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6012382?hl=en https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6012382?hl=en

Rebelgecko 6y ago
As a disclaimer, I work at a different company that makes a lot of revenue from advertising. However, I think people should try turning off Personalized Ads on Youtube and watching a few videos (without adblock!). IMO it's fucking awful, even compared to regular targeted ads. You'll get the same crappy Trump "socialism survey" 6 times in a row because there's no tracking of ad viewer fatigue.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gav 6y ago
  When I do that that I get political adverts mixed in with meal-kits, diets (I'm not sure what they're trying to sell), and exercise equipment. It's pretty awful and I'm waiting down the seconds to hit skip. It's like going back in time to pop-ups and animated horrors of the 90s and early 00s but with vlog-style ads instead--I guess this style tests well, they all look the same to me. Instagram does a great job of personalizing ads to both products and the type of companies I like. I don't mind seeing these kinds of ads at all. I'm happy (in this case) for them to track me because it's much much, better than the alternative.
  - na85 6y ago
    >I'm happy (in this case) for them to track me because it's much much, better than the alternative. You're acting like there is only one alternative, but what about blocking ads? That's win-win for everyone but the advertiser. And really that makes it win-win-win, unless you work in advertising or for Facebook/Google.
    - shripadk 6y ago
      > You're acting like there is only one alternative, but what about blocking ads? That's win-win for everyone but the advertiser. And really that makes it win-win-win, unless you work in advertising or for Facebook/Google. Win-win for who? If everyone uses adblockers you will have major unemployment. All small and medium businesses will shutdown as advertising is the cheapest mechanism to reach customers. Without advertising these businesses will have to rely on billboard advertising and TV ads. Both are extremely expensive in comparison to internet advertising. Don't bite the hand that feeds you. As simple as that!

ijidak 6y ago

I am an advertiser that uses targeted advertising and contextual advertising. There are some products and services that absolutely require targeting by preferences to maximize profit. I'm running such a campaign now and getting wildly high ROI's in the 14X range. If I couldn't target by audience interest, I'd be happy to get an ROI that is a tenth of that.

icedistilled 6y ago
> I'm running such a campaign now and getting wildly high ROI's in the 14X range. Are you able to prove they wouldn't have bought anyway?
- smachiz 6y ago
  "50% of my marketing dollars are wasted, the problem is, I don't know which 50%"
ogre_codes 6y ago
> There are some products and services that absolutely require targeting by preferences to maximize profit. As a normal person who just wants to use his phone without creepy crap going on, I don't care—and see zero benefit if your profits are maximized. Your profit seeking wishes are not my concern.
- corin_ 6y ago
  They were replying on the subject of whether targeted ads are effective or not. Whether they should be allowed is a different matter, but while companies are collecting your data it's not reasonable to ask advertisers to disadvantage themselves against competition by not using the marketing options with the highest ROI. Send your complaints to politicians, not ad buyers. (Disclaimer: I've spent millions - not my own money - on ads in my career. I'd support better privacy regulations to prevent some of the targeting I've been able to use.)
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

cblconfederate 6y ago

The implication of that would be nothing less than a collapse of multiple tech giants. Ad money, redirected from old media, subsidizes a content economy from which all of them, even apple benefits.

philipov 6y ago
Good. Capitalism decrees that a company founded on a faulty or unsustainable business model should collapse and be replaced by better alternatives. The sooner the market realizes an error and corrects itself the better.
scarface74 6y ago
If Google and Facebook died or changed their business model, why should I care? I pay for Apple devices because the transaction is clean - I give them money and they give me stuff. The same for Microsoft with O365 and subscriptions streaming services.
- cblconfederate 6y ago
  apple's bestselling devices though are content consumption devices, and people spend most of their times in social apps there. That entire ecosystem is dependent on ads, and in particular on the advantage of having targeted ads, which is what made G & FB rich