4 ms·
There was a report that targeting article contents yielded better revenue than targeting the audience for some European company, but I can’t find a link right
by failuser 6y ago
There was a report that targeting article contents yielded better revenue than targeting the audience for some European company, but I can’t find a link right away.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- failuser 6y agoThis is not what I was looking for, but NYT had a similar experience: https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2019/01/20/dont-be-creepy/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2019/01/20/dont-...
- samatman 6y agoSubjectively, that makes sense to me. I might be into archery and photography, but if I'm browsing an article about lenses and I see an ad for arrows, that's just creepy. But if I see an ad for lenses, or even gimbals, I might go and buy one on the spot. Or put it in the cart and sleep on it, whatever. At this point it's worse than that (for advertisers), because I'll never see the targeted arrow ad, since I block as much surveillance tech as I can without disabling Javascript entirely. But if a blog serves same-site content which happens to be an ad, and some of them are smart enough to do that, I'll see it.
- pabs3 6y agohttps://www.theregister.com/2020/07/03/stop_tracking_increase_revenue_effectiveness/ https://www.theregister.com/2020/07/03/stop_tracking_increas... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23737352 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23737352