4 ms·
... but if you can't collect data on them, you can't target ads to them or sell their data elsewhere, and therefore they're worth nothing to you. At the end of
by turtletontine 5y ago
... but if you can't collect data on them, you can't target ads to them or sell their data elsewhere, and therefore they're worth nothing to you.
At the end of the day every company wants to make money, or will be bought out by cutthroats who think it's all there is, and this kind of thinking will take hold. Users you can't profit from = leeches.
- Groxx 5y agoYou can still collect (a lot) more information than classical advertising in print or on TV gets, and that seems to work alright.
- Traster 5y agoActually I think it's the opposite - online advertising is so ineffective all this micro-targetting is the minimum required to persuade people to throw their money away. In reality how do I target someone in New York? I buy an ad in the NYT.
- Groxx 5y agoIt's frequently ineffective because it's frequently done mindlessly, because it's possible to do so at enormous scale for low cost. The equivalent in the online world would be to pay site X to show ad Y at times Q-Z. And then you just trust that they'll do so, like you have to do for print/TV ads, and pay the site. That does happen, and you can find quite a lot of company blog posts out there saying that it works, but it's much more manual so yeah. It isn't the majority.