4 ms·

I think this viewpoint doesn't get enough credence on HN. As a consumer, I started doing ~all searches and browsing in Firefox with uBlock, and I never log in

I think this viewpoint doesn't get enough credence on HN. As a consumer, I started doing ~all searches and browsing in Firefox with uBlock, and I never log in to FB on Firefox. The ads I've gotten have, indeed, become a lot less relevant. Honestly, it's not great! Lowest-common-denominator ads feel really gross. As an entrepreneur selling a consumer product I created on Shopify, access to well-targeted ads would make a huge difference to my business. (I can't use FB to advertise since I sell a pandemic-related product, long story). It's a niche product, so non-targeted ads like "local newspaper ads" would probably perform far too poorly to justify their expense. People who buy my product tend to be very grateful for it, but not many know it exists! It's crazy how much your perspective on personalized ads change once you're on the other side – I really wish I could use them!

quantified 6y ago
For those of us who don’t want the ads at all, oh well. When I want ads I can go to Amazon.
burkaman 6y ago
It seems like this is yet another problem caused by Facebook's dominance. You should be able to target ads without using ubiquitous tracking, by looking for forums, newsletters, podcasts, shows, meetups, etc. related to your target audience or product area. But if everybody uses Facebook for everything, you can't do any targeting, you have to just describe your audience to Facebook and ask them to please find people for you. The internet should have made targeted marketing easier, because people would effectively target themselves by visiting sites devoted to topics and communities they care about, instead of everyone watching the same four TV channels. But Facebook wants to become the only "internet channel", monopolizing the ability to target and forcing you to go through them.
- rattray 6y ago
  Maybe... but I'm not sure that's right. My impression from talking to people who run ads for a living is that FB's ML-driven targeting is just orders of magnitude more effective than traditional "put an ad in a relevant forum" kind of thing. I don't have personal insight into how true that is. As an individual, I really don't like having monopolies in ads, especially ones that _also_ have monopolies on personal data (FB and Google know everyone I talk to, everywhere I go, etc - yikes). But as a business, I really like the idea of having one platform to buy ads that can put them everywhere, and do a good job deciding where to show them. I don't know what the solution is but I don't think I've seen it proposed anywhere yet. It's hard.
  - cm2012 6y ago
    Your point on FBs targeting is correct. I've extensively tested ads in forums and the reach, targeting and click quality are much lower than FB, esp at any scale.
  - burkaman 6y ago
    Oh obviously it's more effective, but as we're seeing, that efficiency requires a tradeoff that many people are not willing to make. And in the long run, it's not more effective if it drives everyone to ad blockers and privacy-oriented operating systems. It's like saying dictatorships are more effective than democracies, which is true until people decide they want to get rid of the dictator. My point was that this doesn't have to be a choice between ultra-targeted Facebook ads and non-targeted billboards. We can imagine a compromise with semi-targeted ads that most consumers can tolerate and most marketers can live with, but it just isn't viable if Facebook maintains its dominance. The solution I'm suggesting is to either break up Facebook or legislate away their business model. I know that would make your life as a business owner more difficult, but wouldn't you also feel a little bit better knowing your business couldn't be wiped out by a broken algorithm disabling your ad account?
    - rattray 6y ago
      My business already can't run fb ads because of a broken algorithm ;) Yeah, I definitely agree with your main thrust that a different business model, probably spurred by legislation, is needed. I just don't know what that business model (or the legislation) should be exactly - and I think the obvious things will have bad unintended consequences.

quantified 6y ago

For those of us who don’t want the ads at all, oh well. When I want ads I can go to Amazon.

burkaman 6y ago

It seems like this is yet another problem caused by Facebook's dominance. You should be able to target ads without using ubiquitous tracking, by looking for forums, newsletters, podcasts, shows, meetups, etc. related to your target audience or product area. But if everybody uses Facebook for everything, you can't do any targeting, you have to just describe your audience to Facebook and ask them to please find people for you. The internet should have made targeted marketing easier, because people would effectively target themselves by visiting sites devoted to topics and communities they care about, instead of everyone watching the same four TV channels. But Facebook wants to become the only "internet channel", monopolizing the ability to target and forcing you to go through them.

rattray 6y ago
Maybe... but I'm not sure that's right. My impression from talking to people who run ads for a living is that FB's ML-driven targeting is just orders of magnitude more effective than traditional "put an ad in a relevant forum" kind of thing. I don't have personal insight into how true that is. As an individual, I really don't like having monopolies in ads, especially ones that _also_ have monopolies on personal data (FB and Google know everyone I talk to, everywhere I go, etc - yikes). But as a business, I really like the idea of having one platform to buy ads that can put them everywhere, and do a good job deciding where to show them. I don't know what the solution is but I don't think I've seen it proposed anywhere yet. It's hard.
- cm2012 6y ago
  Your point on FBs targeting is correct. I've extensively tested ads in forums and the reach, targeting and click quality are much lower than FB, esp at any scale.
- burkaman 6y ago
  Oh obviously it's more effective, but as we're seeing, that efficiency requires a tradeoff that many people are not willing to make. And in the long run, it's not more effective if it drives everyone to ad blockers and privacy-oriented operating systems. It's like saying dictatorships are more effective than democracies, which is true until people decide they want to get rid of the dictator. My point was that this doesn't have to be a choice between ultra-targeted Facebook ads and non-targeted billboards. We can imagine a compromise with semi-targeted ads that most consumers can tolerate and most marketers can live with, but it just isn't viable if Facebook maintains its dominance. The solution I'm suggesting is to either break up Facebook or legislate away their business model. I know that would make your life as a business owner more difficult, but wouldn't you also feel a little bit better knowing your business couldn't be wiped out by a broken algorithm disabling your ad account?
  - rattray 6y ago
    My business already can't run fb ads because of a broken algorithm ;) Yeah, I definitely agree with your main thrust that a different business model, probably spurred by legislation, is needed. I just don't know what that business model (or the legislation) should be exactly - and I think the obvious things will have bad unintended consequences.