2 ms·

I think a lot of people think that bad targeting is a technology problem, but isn't it also an economic one? It doesn't matter how good your categories are if f

I think a lot of people think that bad targeting is a technology problem, but isn't it also an economic one? It doesn't matter how good your categories are if ftx.com pays for a massive ad buy across all demographics and annoys the shit out of everyone. The opposite is also true - products I might actually be interested in probably don't get enough budget for me to see an ad for them more than once.

londons_explore 2y ago
This is solvable too. If an ad is 'annoying' and makes a customer install an adblock or stop using a website, then the website should be compensated for all the future lost revenue. Thats easy for an ad exchange or publisher to enforce by simply subtracting a factor from all bids from an advertiser to 'pay' for the chance of future loss of revenue caused by said annoyance. That factor would be decided based on data of past customers who stopped using a site or installed an adblocker. There are plenty of other similar factors already in use - they're typically aggregated into a "quality factor". They also encompass ads which make a promise but don't deliver ("Everyone wins an iphone!"), or otherwise generally leave the user unhappy (which, in aggregate is quite easy to estimate using bounce rate, dwell time, conversion rate, etc)