3 ms·
> With sensitivity settings, brands can mark their accounts as "conservative"—avoiding ad placements next to "targeted hate speech, explicit sexual content, gra
by barbazoo 3y ago
> With sensitivity settings, brands can mark their accounts as "conservative"—avoiding ad placements next to "targeted hate speech, explicit sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, drugs"—or "standard"—only avoiding placements next to "targeted hate speech, explicit sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity." Soon there will be a third tier, "relaxed," where brands can "show ads alongside some sensitive content to maximize reach" but still cannot monetize targeted hate speech or explicit sexual content.
Interesting, it sounds like they're able to reliably detect "targeted hate speech, explicit sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, drugs"
- mcdonje 3y agoNot sure it logically follows that they're able to reliably detect something simply because they have it categorized in a service level offering. Their model could still be reactive, relying on reports from users or even from those same brands. I don't know what the situation actually is. Just throwing that out there.
- barbazoo 3y agoWhatever they do, they must have a false negative rate that they think is low enough to make the gods, eh the advertisers feel good.
- Nextgrid 3y agoPlaying devil's advocate here, there's a major difference between not placing an ad and censoring the post or even ban the account. Their hate speech detector might have a 2% false-positive rate. No big deal if you just skip ads on those posts, but a massive deal if you censor those posts or ban their authors.
- barbazoo 3y ago> not placing an ad and censoring the post or even ban the account. I didn't even remotely suggest any of that