4 ms·
I don't necessarily think you're experiencing an important flaw here. I'd wager that the vast majority of people interacting with content related to evangelica
by smt88 5y ago
I don't necessarily think you're experiencing an important flaw here.
I'd wager that the vast majority of people interacting with content related to evangelical Christianity are in the "pro" category, so people in the "anti" category are an acceptable false-positive.
For example, if I'm trying to sell something to evangelical Christians and 95% of my views are "pro" and 5% are "anti", that's still hugely valuable to me and something Facebook can charge a lot for.
Maybe FB could increase the price without the false positives, but neither they nor their advertisers care that much.
- dunnevens 5y agoYou're probably right and it isn't necessarily a huge flaw. But, the failures are interesting. Especially when it involves a subject where the for / against lines are so clearly drawn. If Facebook is failing at such an easy subject, then what else are they getting wrong?
- hectormalot 5y agoTheir definition of successful targeting is different than yours. Back in 2019(?) Google published average display ad click rates of 0.03% I think. If FBs targeting gets them to 3% (100x better), that’s hugely valuable to them, while you still see mostly non interesting ads.