3 ms·
The main problem with static ads is that the advertiser can't obtain any analytics as to whether their ads are effective, or whether the publisher is outright d
by supriyo-biswas 4y ago
The main problem with static ads is that the advertiser can't obtain any analytics as to whether their ads are effective, or whether the publisher is outright defrauding them by claiming to show ads but not actually displaying them to real users, faking the number of clicks, etc.
With newspapers and magazines, picking up a copy and estimating the distribution of the paper via a 3rd party (such as Nielsen) answers all these questions.
I'd like to hear about a solution that addresses that. It seems fundamentally incompatible with the conditions of "hosted locally" and "static images or text" (which means you can't run JS to verify whether the ad was actually displayed).
- lancesells 4y agoIt depends on the ad and what you're measuring. If it's eyeballs then yeah, you can be lied to. If it's a conversion happening on your own site then no, you can't fake that.
- supriyo-biswas 4y ago> If it's a conversion happening on your own site then no, you can't fake that. The problem with this approach is that it's a "he said, she said" situation where both parties can claim that the other is producing fraudulent numbers. It can only be resolved with litigation, which is not what anyone wants when all they wanted to do is get some sales numbers up. Also, if you're familiar with the state of advertising fraud, faking conversions with botnets and residential proxies are an absolutely real thing.