3 ms·
> Untargeted ads on the other hand would need to more manipulative to be equally effective. I think that point is that untargeted ads _are_ less effective; the
by saghm 5y ago
> Untargeted ads on the other hand would need to more manipulative to be equally effective.
I think that point is that untargeted ads _are_ less effective; they can't be more manipulative precisely because they don't have knowledge about who they're being presented to, so they have to try to go for broad shallow appeal instead of deep and narrow.
- dsizzle 5y agoAll else equal, sure, but wouldn't advertisers change the content and style of the ad knowing if it will be targeted or not? Can't broad and shallow be manipulative--"keeping up with Joneses"--while deep and narrow is purely informational?
- saghm 5y agoIf that was the case, why bother doing targeting at all? It costs a lot of time and money to gather all those adds, so if it wasn't better, there'd be no point
- germinalphrase 5y agoWhy would an advertiser ever choose a “less manipulative” ad version because they know more about their potential client? “Good will” seems woefully idealistic.
- dsizzle 5y agoBecause people can sometimes detect when someone is trying to manipulate them (we're having this discussion after all), and it might backfire?