2 ms·
> When a company puts up a billboard or an ad on the bus, they don't care if the ad is seen by dashcams and dogs. Billboards sell for flat rates, online advert
by lurk2 1y ago
> When a company puts up a billboard or an ad on the bus, they don't care if the ad is seen by dashcams and dogs.
Billboards sell for flat rates, online advertising is sold on the basis of impressions.
- criddell 1y agoBillboard rates are based on impressions too. A billboard along a busy road is more expensive than one out in the sticks.
- lurk2 1y agoThe pricing of a billboard is based on projected impressions but is decoupled from the billboard’s actual impressions. You pay the flat rate based on projected impressions. It doesn’t subsequently matter if an army of robots passes through and views the billboard 10,000 times, because the original projected audience should still see the billboard. You’re getting what you paid for. It’s also possible the projections are erroneous, fraudulent, or that the actual impressions just don’t follow the projected impressions for some other reason. This is the advantage of advertising online—if you pay for 10,000 views, the ad runs until you get them. Contrast the billboard with an online ad: If you pay for 10,000 impressions, and 9,000 of those impressions end up being automated traffic, then you’ve effectively lost 90% of your advertising budget. Like you mentioned, ad buyers can and do account for this, so it’s not clear that it’s as big of a problem as this thread is making it out to be. The theory I see thrown around is that Meta and Alphabet are tacitly allowing this bot traffic to continue (or even that they are responsible for it themselves) because it allows them to sell another round of ads, but if this is what is going on it isn’t clear why firms would keep buying ads that aren’t converting.