5 ms·

Why does facebook do this rather than let third party advertisers advertise? I thought they got most of their money from third party advertisers, not selling th

Why does facebook do this rather than let third party advertisers advertise? I thought they got most of their money from third party advertisers, not selling their own products. Note - gun sales are very strong in the US. Antifa / BLM / Armed protestors.

filoleg 6y ago
>Why does facebook do this rather than let third party advertisers advertise? I think that's exactly what FB is doing, to be honest. They are simply letting third party advertisers advertise. Historically, dem president in power has always been an indicator of increased spending on guns (because hardcore gun people become afraid that the dems will make guns more difficult to purchase, so they stock up). And increase in gun sales means increased budget (including ad budget) for gun-related businesses. Higher ad budget for gun-related businesses means more ads for gun-related businesses popping up on everyone's feed, as they keep outbidding other ads. Combine that with the fact that a lot more people in your social network graph became more interested in guns for various reasons over the past year (protests on both sides, covid, dem president, etc.), and you have just massively increased the probability of seeing an ad for a gun-related business.
- notacoward 6y ago
  > They are simply letting third party advertisers advertise. I don't think it's quite that simple. Facebook controls the juxtaposition of ads with content, and with each other. This can reinforce the power of the individual ads, or attenuate it. In this case, it's pretty clearly creating a "caravan" of ads because that's more effective than letting each stand alone. Disclaimer: I used to work at Facebook, but I was in storage. It gave me no particular insight into how the ad system works. This is just based on general knowledge of how human psychology and ML work.
  - filoleg 6y ago
    >Facebook controls the juxtaposition of ads with content, and with each other. This can reinforce the power of the individual ads, or attenuate it. In this case, it's pretty clearly creating a "caravan" of ads because that's more effective than letting each stand alone. Oh, totally agreed on this one. FB fully controls the layout and where ads are displayed. When I said that FB doesn't control things, I meant that they don't control and decide which ads get shown to you, it is all down to what advertisers advertise, and whether you fall under those specific target audiences.
    - gnu8 6y ago
      So what is the argument here? Facebook should manipulate their advertising marketplace to prevent this? You can buy ads to sell your gun supplies and body armor but when it comes to targeting the ads, you can't choose the demographic groups that are buying this stuff up like it is going out of style? I think Facebook is awful, but this how their business works. I can't see them going out of their way to not serve their customers and not make money, outside of public outcry or government regulation forcing them to.
      - notacoward 6y ago
        > So what is the argument here? I'm not sure GP is suggesting anything, and I know I'm not. These are just observations about how things actually work. The fact that certain groups of users get "bombarded" with ads for certain categories does not indicate intent or interference, as some here have suggested. It just means the system is doing what it's designed to do, which is to optimize the effectiveness and efficiency of serving billions of ads to billions of people.
      - filoleg 6y ago
        Oh, I think you misunderstood, I am fully in agreement with you here, I wasn't proposing a change. I was just answering to a comment to clarify an earlier point. The specifics I mentioned are not something that I am proposing as a target for a change, because, as you said, this is how their ad business works, and it seems pretty fair.
        gnu8 6y ago
        Sorry, that was an awkward way to phrase that. I was addressing the thread as a whole, not your specific comment. What I mean is that this is the predictable and proven behavior of Facebook, so is this a target for change now that we don't like this particular result? Or should Facebook be somehow regulated to prevent this type of behavior generally?
- tartoran 6y ago
  How much can one stock up on guns? Every 4-8 years when the political cycle changes they stock up but after a few cycles the demand should grind to a halt. It's not like guns are advancing a lot either. So I really wonder if republicans are scared when a democrat is in office and subsequently buy guns because of that or whether they are scared into buying more guns by mere marketing.
  - filoleg 6y ago
    >How much can one stock up on guns? Every 4-8 years when the political cycle changes they stock up but after a few cycles the demand should grind to a halt. It's not like guns are advancing a lot either. A lot of people who own guns also collect them. It is kind of a hobby. Guns might not be advancing, but people like having multiple different kinds, swap attachments, get some rare handgun from WW2 era from Czechoslovakia, etc. Plus, it isn't all just about guns themselves. A lot of it is in the adjacent stuff, like ammo (which inevitably runs out, if you go to a gun range on a regular basis). I prefer to think of it similarly to an audio gear enthusiast hobby. How many headphones/amps/synths/keyboards/guitars/etc. one might need? People spend enormous amounts of money on audio gear for decades, without actually "needing" most of it, and it isn't like the actual acoustics or technology in audio changes that much (with exception of a few specific categories, like midi controllers). >So I really wonder if republicans are scared when a democrat is in office and subsequently buy guns because of that or whether they are scared into buying more guns by mere marketing. I don't know about you, but I have plenty of politically left-leaning friends who bought their first firearms this year. So, I think, covid and protests are, at least partially, definitely fueling that increase in sales all across the political spectrum.
herbst 6y ago
Not sure what antifa in the us is like, but are they really actually armed? Ours for sure arent.
- temp667 6y ago
  I think what's been seen is after videos of the protests and buildings burning etc there is a crush of non-protestors running to get guns. Locally there may be also a sense that at least in some jurisdictions policing has decreased and/or crime has increased - ie, you are more on your own now - faith in govt is maybe a bit diminished. And now of course some of the right wing protestors are showing up heavily armed - but I think they always bought guns because they often seem like gun nuts.
SixDouble5321 6y ago
Antifa is not real, BLM is peaceful, and the majority of armed protesters are white supremacist and/or Trump supporters.

filoleg 6y ago

>Why does facebook do this rather than let third party advertisers advertise? I think that's exactly what FB is doing, to be honest. They are simply letting third party advertisers advertise. Historically, dem president in power has always been an indicator of increased spending on guns (because hardcore gun people become afraid that the dems will make guns more difficult to purchase, so they stock up). And increase in gun sales means increased budget (including ad budget) for gun-related businesses. Higher ad budget for gun-related businesses means more ads for gun-related businesses popping up on everyone's feed, as they keep outbidding other ads. Combine that with the fact that a lot more people in your social network graph became more interested in guns for various reasons over the past year (protests on both sides, covid, dem president, etc.), and you have just massively increased the probability of seeing an ad for a gun-related business.

notacoward 6y ago
> They are simply letting third party advertisers advertise. I don't think it's quite that simple. Facebook controls the juxtaposition of ads with content, and with each other. This can reinforce the power of the individual ads, or attenuate it. In this case, it's pretty clearly creating a "caravan" of ads because that's more effective than letting each stand alone. Disclaimer: I used to work at Facebook, but I was in storage. It gave me no particular insight into how the ad system works. This is just based on general knowledge of how human psychology and ML work.
- filoleg 6y ago
  >Facebook controls the juxtaposition of ads with content, and with each other. This can reinforce the power of the individual ads, or attenuate it. In this case, it's pretty clearly creating a "caravan" of ads because that's more effective than letting each stand alone. Oh, totally agreed on this one. FB fully controls the layout and where ads are displayed. When I said that FB doesn't control things, I meant that they don't control and decide which ads get shown to you, it is all down to what advertisers advertise, and whether you fall under those specific target audiences.
  - gnu8 6y ago
    So what is the argument here? Facebook should manipulate their advertising marketplace to prevent this? You can buy ads to sell your gun supplies and body armor but when it comes to targeting the ads, you can't choose the demographic groups that are buying this stuff up like it is going out of style? I think Facebook is awful, but this how their business works. I can't see them going out of their way to not serve their customers and not make money, outside of public outcry or government regulation forcing them to.
    - notacoward 6y ago
      > So what is the argument here? I'm not sure GP is suggesting anything, and I know I'm not. These are just observations about how things actually work. The fact that certain groups of users get "bombarded" with ads for certain categories does not indicate intent or interference, as some here have suggested. It just means the system is doing what it's designed to do, which is to optimize the effectiveness and efficiency of serving billions of ads to billions of people.
    - filoleg 6y ago
      Oh, I think you misunderstood, I am fully in agreement with you here, I wasn't proposing a change. I was just answering to a comment to clarify an earlier point. The specifics I mentioned are not something that I am proposing as a target for a change, because, as you said, this is how their ad business works, and it seems pretty fair.
      - gnu8 6y ago
        Sorry, that was an awkward way to phrase that. I was addressing the thread as a whole, not your specific comment. What I mean is that this is the predictable and proven behavior of Facebook, so is this a target for change now that we don't like this particular result? Or should Facebook be somehow regulated to prevent this type of behavior generally?
tartoran 6y ago
How much can one stock up on guns? Every 4-8 years when the political cycle changes they stock up but after a few cycles the demand should grind to a halt. It's not like guns are advancing a lot either. So I really wonder if republicans are scared when a democrat is in office and subsequently buy guns because of that or whether they are scared into buying more guns by mere marketing.
- filoleg 6y ago
  >How much can one stock up on guns? Every 4-8 years when the political cycle changes they stock up but after a few cycles the demand should grind to a halt. It's not like guns are advancing a lot either. A lot of people who own guns also collect them. It is kind of a hobby. Guns might not be advancing, but people like having multiple different kinds, swap attachments, get some rare handgun from WW2 era from Czechoslovakia, etc. Plus, it isn't all just about guns themselves. A lot of it is in the adjacent stuff, like ammo (which inevitably runs out, if you go to a gun range on a regular basis). I prefer to think of it similarly to an audio gear enthusiast hobby. How many headphones/amps/synths/keyboards/guitars/etc. one might need? People spend enormous amounts of money on audio gear for decades, without actually "needing" most of it, and it isn't like the actual acoustics or technology in audio changes that much (with exception of a few specific categories, like midi controllers). >So I really wonder if republicans are scared when a democrat is in office and subsequently buy guns because of that or whether they are scared into buying more guns by mere marketing. I don't know about you, but I have plenty of politically left-leaning friends who bought their first firearms this year. So, I think, covid and protests are, at least partially, definitely fueling that increase in sales all across the political spectrum.

herbst 6y ago

Not sure what antifa in the us is like, but are they really actually armed? Ours for sure arent.

temp667 6y ago
I think what's been seen is after videos of the protests and buildings burning etc there is a crush of non-protestors running to get guns. Locally there may be also a sense that at least in some jurisdictions policing has decreased and/or crime has increased - ie, you are more on your own now - faith in govt is maybe a bit diminished. And now of course some of the right wing protestors are showing up heavily armed - but I think they always bought guns because they often seem like gun nuts.

SixDouble5321 6y ago

Antifa is not real, BLM is peaceful, and the majority of armed protesters are white supremacist and/or Trump supporters.