6 ms·

I'm going to disagree with that. It was when business plans from moved from letting users control what they consume to being in control of what users consume.

by mfer 4y ago

smeej 4y ago
Why did they want to do that, if not to be more effective, in the long run, for advertisers?
- mfer 4y ago
  There are a variety of motivations. These include... The biggest is that they are trying to maximize revenue/profits. In controlling the flow of information to people they are in better control of that. A lot has been studied about this. I didn't realize there were other motivations until FB started to publish studies they carried out on people. Some of those (which they published awhile ago) were around the manipulation of users emotions and their ability to target voting groups (to increase people going to vote in target groups) around elections.
  - hamburglar 4y ago
    Yeah I can think of a few. That sort of influence is one, benefiting advertisers is another, positioning themselves to get a cut of all transactions is another. Is there an alternate universe where in order to get your content in front of users, it has to be AMP and in order to be AMP, it has to meet a new requirement that all payments must be done through a payment framework that lets google control the user experience (“purely for the end users’ benefit” of course)? Probably.
    - smeej 4y ago
      I hear what you guys are saying, but "maximize revenue/profits" means "benefit advertisers so they come to us instead of anybody else." "Getting a cut of all transactions" means benefitting advertisers who sell anything through the site. It's all advertising all the time.
      - hamburglar 4y ago
        What? Getting a cut of transactions has nothing to do with advertisers. Are you saying apple forcing app payments through the App Store is about advertisers? Seems like you are trying to fit all scenarios to a predetermined narrative here.
sirmike_ 4y ago
YOU are 100 percent correct. Generally speaking when Google prevents and limits what end users can control -- the offending product gets worse and eventually dropped.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Gigachad 4y ago
This is exactly what users want. Tiktok is so successful because you don’t have to pick the content you consume. RSS on the other hand is far too manual and too much bad content gets mixed in with the good.

I'm going to disagree with that. It was when business plans from moved from letting users control what they consume to being in control of what users consume.

by mfer 4y ago

I'm going to disagree with that. It was when business plans from moved from letting users control what they consume to being in control of what users consume.

smeej 4y ago

Why did they want to do that, if not to be more effective, in the long run, for advertisers?

mfer 4y ago
There are a variety of motivations. These include... The biggest is that they are trying to maximize revenue/profits. In controlling the flow of information to people they are in better control of that. A lot has been studied about this. I didn't realize there were other motivations until FB started to publish studies they carried out on people. Some of those (which they published awhile ago) were around the manipulation of users emotions and their ability to target voting groups (to increase people going to vote in target groups) around elections.
- hamburglar 4y ago
  Yeah I can think of a few. That sort of influence is one, benefiting advertisers is another, positioning themselves to get a cut of all transactions is another. Is there an alternate universe where in order to get your content in front of users, it has to be AMP and in order to be AMP, it has to meet a new requirement that all payments must be done through a payment framework that lets google control the user experience (“purely for the end users’ benefit” of course)? Probably.
  - smeej 4y ago
    I hear what you guys are saying, but "maximize revenue/profits" means "benefit advertisers so they come to us instead of anybody else." "Getting a cut of all transactions" means benefitting advertisers who sell anything through the site. It's all advertising all the time.
    - hamburglar 4y ago
      What? Getting a cut of transactions has nothing to do with advertisers. Are you saying apple forcing app payments through the App Store is about advertisers? Seems like you are trying to fit all scenarios to a predetermined narrative here.

sirmike_ 4y ago

YOU are 100 percent correct. Generally speaking when Google prevents and limits what end users can control -- the offending product gets worse and eventually dropped.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Gigachad 4y ago

This is exactly what users want. Tiktok is so successful because you don’t have to pick the content you consume. RSS on the other hand is far too manual and too much bad content gets mixed in with the good.