|
Still rolling with the dumb catered ads discussion, Facebook apparently only cares that my job has "compliance" in the title (ignoring that the rest of the title confirms I'm a wormy little pencil pusher) and so I'm constantly bombarded with ads for "Compliance Officer" shirts covered in skulls and flames, and from there ads that are convinced I am a burly biker. Facebook algorithms have crafted such a life for me 
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Today YouTube started exclusively giving me Spanish language ads. It's actually kinda interesting because normally I only ever see targeted ads for the young white male demographic, so I'm now getting to see things meant specifically to appeal to the American Hispanic population. Like there's a Hilary Clinton campaign ad that points out Donald Trump's "murderers and rapists" quote to appeal the listener not to vote for him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
I kind of love this. It's so dadaist, it even spells it out in the title. I had one of those portable battery-powered Casio keyboards, kinda like the one he uses in the video but slightly bigger. The basic synth loop of that track was literally the first preset on the keyboard. Yeah. The whole song is basically low-effort keyboard presets. Keep in mind that this was a pretty big hit. This isn't some obscure underground indie poo poo from the 80s. I still kind of can't quite grasp that this was a thing that mainstream radio stations regularly played, and even to this day sometimes do. I've heard it myself. And it wasn't even their only hit. edit: Man, i just noticed that in the video i linked the singer's just chewing gum the whole time. Does not give a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
HenryEx posted:Keep in mind that this was a pretty big hit. This isn't some obscure underground indie poo poo from the 80s. I still kind of can't quite grasp that this was a thing that mainstream radio stations regularly played, and even to this day sometimes do. I've heard it myself. And it wasn't even their only hit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
For some reason all the ads on my phone think I'm a senior citizen. Then I start getting spam about burial insurance and medicare supplements. Yesterday I got a registration packet for AARP in the mail. Who the gently caress do these people think I am and who has been telling them about me. How does this weird information spread? It's like a misinformation virus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Danger Mahoney posted:For some reason all the ads on my phone think I'm a senior citizen. Then I start getting spam about burial insurance and medicare supplements. Yesterday I got a registration packet for AARP in the mail. Is this your phone 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
Danger Mahoney posted:For some reason all the ads on my phone think I'm a senior citizen. Then I start getting spam about burial insurance and medicare supplements. Yesterday I got a registration packet for AARP in the mail. Yeah yeah, nobody wants to hear your stories about the Kaiser, granddad. Why don't you go and shake your cane at those punk kids?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
God drat it I'm telling you I was just thirty, who are you people and where's my new coke I'm thirsty drat it all
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:I honestly believe that RT usually interviews crazy Americans just to mock America. Probably. The same as when you hear about Russians in English-language media it's generally going to be Putin, dash-cam videos, or someone climbing a tall thing with no safety equipment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
Facebook just admitted that their stats regarding user engagement with ads have been overestimated by up to 80%,  internet advertising industry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
Guy Mann posted:Facebook just admitted that their stats regarding user engagement with ads have been overestimated by up to 80%, I've said it before, and I'll say it again, nothing gives me better schadenfreude than when it comes out that internet advertising is entirely the Emperor's New Clothes, and is entirely ran on imaginary money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
I'm no economist but that seems like a big deal edit: ooooh video ads I thought it was like total impressions or whatever of all of FB advertising
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
Tasteful Dickpic posted:Advertising isn't about providing you with information, it's just about brand recognition. I retained the music from the commercial, but I have no clue what the company was
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
Ryoshi posted:I think it's a pretty dumb move in marketing to keep the product/company named McAfee when John McAfee has lost his goddamn mind. Is he still wanted and hanging out in South America? I read some interview or something with him I think on Ars Technica and he was completely unhinged, he kept talking about this drug that he uses as an aphrodisiac and stuff like that. As of 2013 (maybe 2014?) he was living in SE Portland. He lived in a condo above my old roommate's restaurant and she would run food up to him and his "ladies" every morning. He was super nice to her and tipped her well. Apparently he was exactly as odd and paranoid as people make him out to be, but still very cordial. He sent our household a really nice wine and cheese basket at Christmas, delivered by a gigantic man who wore sunglasses at 9:30 at night. tftwyw not dumb moves in marketing: have the founder of your dumb antivirus company be a legitimately fascinating crazyperson
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 12:21
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:I've said it before, and I'll say it again, nothing gives me better schadenfreude than when it comes out that internet advertising is entirely the Emperor's New Clothes, and is entirely ran on imaginary money. I agree with you, and I'm not naysaying, but when is the whole thing just going to collapse under the sheer inefficacy of itself? What's that going to take?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
Radio Help posted:As of 2013 (maybe 2014?) he was living in SE Portland. He lived in a condo above my old roommate's restaurant and she would run food up to him and his "ladies" every morning. He was super nice to her and tipped her well. Apparently he was exactly as odd and paranoid as people make him out to be, but still very cordial. He sent our household a really nice wine and cheese basket at Christmas, delivered by a gigantic man who wore sunglasses at 9:30 at night. tftwyw That's what I want my rich people to be: insane and interesting. Flying around in jetpacks - not sponsoring someone to create lovely memes to help support your favourite policitcal candidate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:I agree with you, and I'm not naysaying, but when is the whole thing just going to collapse under the sheer inefficacy of itself? What's that going to take? Dot con bubble 2.0? It's gonna start when the advertisers decide to stop feeding the machine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Dot con bubble 2.0? It's gonna start when the advertisers decide to stop feeding the machine. So never, then?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
They've already started the next phase with companies like Totinos and Arbys, where they just have their millennial interns post Undertale and Sonic memes on Twitter and throw (comparatively) tiny amounts of money at niche entertainment like podcasts and YouTube channels so people who think they're too smart for advertising to work on them are willingly consuming and sharing advertising because they identify with it. Even in this very thread you have people saying that they go out of their way to watch ads just because GokuWeedlord420 or whoever on YouTube is actually doing the ad himself instead of just reading ad copy or having an ad play before his videos. Guy Mann has a new favorite as of 16:18 on Sep 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
spog posted:That's what I want my rich people to be: insane and interesting. Also accused of rape and murder? http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-documentary-gringo-belize-murder-allegations-2016-9 Edit. Has anyone seen this yet? I love good documentaries, but I haven't gotten around to this one Redrum and Coke has a new favorite as of 17:58 on Sep 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Dot con bubble 2.0? It's gonna start when the advertisers decide to stop feeding the machine. Seriously, internet advertising seems like a constantly inflating balloon that simply has to burst eventually, considering both the adblock wars, literally imaginary impressions for how effective video ads are on places like youtube, and the fact that pretty much every banner ad is ignored by all but 0.000001% of viewers, with an equally small amount of those viewers actually clicking on them with regularity, and anyone who honestly thinks that's money well spent is fooling themselves most of all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:I agree with you, and I'm not naysaying, but when is the whole thing just going to collapse under the sheer inefficacy of itself? What's that going to take? Wouldn't that be a bad thing? A lot of free sites depend on ad money. Maybe we should be hoping ad blockers don't continue to grow in popularity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Guy Mann posted:Facebook just admitted that their stats regarding user engagement with ads have been overestimated by up to 80%, The statistic they bungled is "average length of time a viewer spent watching a video". Rather than tracking everyone who clicked on the video at all, they only reported the data from people who watched for at least three seconds. It's described as "artificially inflating" the length, so they we know they flat-out didn't count people who watched for less than three seconds and averaged everyone who wathed for 3+, rather than just treating 0-2 as 0 (which would be deflating.) Technically, yes they did lie - the average amount of time a pair of eyeballs spent staring at the ad is shorter than what they reported - but the statistic they reported is absolutely accurate if you just rename it to something like "average length of time a viewer spent actually loving watching a video". Why the gently caress do advertisers care that they're not getting accurate data on how much they're paying to have some unknown number of schlubs watch their poo poo for two point nine seconds? I guess I just don't see why it matters, and it must matter because it was written up like it was A Big Deal. What am I missing other than the fact that they did misreport?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
You missed the part where internet ad people are in a circlejerk and throwing fun money into the air, lying to each other at every turn until there's no more truth to how the industry actually succeeds or fails.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Wouldn't that be a bad thing? A lot of free sites depend on ad money. Maybe we should be hoping ad blockers don't continue to grow in popularity. Maybe they should revamp the industry so that people aren't constantly trying to get AWAY from ads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:I think this article is really poorly written. Like if you are doing a statistical analysis, you want tails and outliers even if the summary data removes tails and outliers because the tails and outliers usually mean something important.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Johnny Aztec posted:Maybe they should revamp the industry so that people aren't constantly trying to get AWAY from ads. I feel like at this point a lot of the damage is done. If they magically made all ads malware free and unobtrusive tomorrow I still wouldn't disable ad block.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
Danger Mahoney posted:For some reason all the ads on my phone think I'm a senior citizen. Then I start getting spam about burial insurance and medicare supplements. Yesterday I got a registration packet for AARP in the mail. Because companies sell your information. About 10 years ago I signed up for a free trial and the employee forgot to change the default title from 'Mr' in the dropdown menu. Within a month, junk mail was arriving to Mr Lady Demelza, so it was pretty obvious that the company was making money from free trials by selling on data. Except then another company started sending junk mail with a different - but common alternative - initial for my first name. It got really weird when I received two polling cards: one in my name, and the other to this mis-gendered, mis-spelled version of me. This effectively allowed a typo to vote, which I felt was taking democratic principles a little too far. The local government official was very apologetic when I contacted them, but they never actually explained why they thought Mr Typo was a real person. Mr Typo was a mere 6 months old, had never signed up for any of the stupid offers, and only (as far as I know) existed in a junk mail database, so how did the election officials know about it? How did they know?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:the gently caress do advertisers care that they're not getting accurate data on how much they're paying to have some unknown number of schlubs watch their poo poo for two point If enough people are starting to watch your poo poo and then abandoning it in less than 3 seconds that it significantly changes the average-time-spent-watching metric, that indicates your poo poo is lovely and you would probably find that data more useful than a metric that discards all the people who think your poo poo is lovely and instead tells you that everything is fine. Edit: My brother just forwarded me an email he received from a recruiter. Subject line: "rear end. Construction Management Opportunity." You think you'd consider abbreviations like that before sending it out to thousands of people. Phanatic has a new favorite as of 22:55 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
rear end, or even rear end't, seems a little suspect but I am endlessly entertained that rear end'y is just about the official shorthand for assembly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:I guess I just don't see why it matters, and it must matter because it was written up like it was A Big Deal. What am I missing other than the fact that they did misreport? It matters because it's misleading. The videos autoplay as soon as there's more than half of the window on the screen, and they start muted so it's quite possible to not even notice them while you're doing other things. This means that a statistic Facebook has been reporting as representative of engagement is more accurately representative of impressions at best. It doesn't mean anything to anyone outside the industry, but within the industry it's kind of a big deal
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
Johnny Aztec posted:Maybe they should revamp the industry so that people aren't constantly trying to get AWAY from ads. I hate to say "Netflix of ____", which advertisers need to stop saying about every loving subscription service, but if I had to pay $10 a month for unlimited youtube without ads and creators were properly compensated, then I'd pay it in a second. I am not opposed to Internet thuggery, but I also want to make sure that people get the money they have earned for doing things right. It might seem insane, but I have started watching videos on my PS4 when I'm going to sleep, since the PS4 won't ever stop autoplaying youtube videos. That way, the channels I am subscribed to get ~8 hours of views with 100% ad engagement while I sleep. It's half-assed penance for "stealing" content during the day, and a sincere attempt to make sure that my favorite content creators get paid for creating content that I consume. No joke, I once let it run just to see when my system would automatically shutdown, but it ran for ~30 hours straight until I decided to stop the video myself
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
Plastik posted:It matters because it's misleading. The videos autoplay as soon as there's more than half of the window on the screen, and they start muted so it's quite possible to not even notice them while you're doing other things. This means that a statistic Facebook has been reporting as representative of engagement is more accurately representative of impressions at best. It doesn't mean anything to anyone outside the industry, but within the industry it's kind of a big deal Exactly. 3 seconds is a ridiculously short amount of time. It probably takes longer often for me to even mentally process what I'm looking at in a video. If they went by like a ten or twenty second metric, they'd probably have FAR more accurate data. It's all imaginary, and the points don't count.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
The funny thing is most people putting videos on Facebook that pay attention to those kinds of metrics have known that 3 seconds counts as a view on Facebook for ages, but apparently nobody advertising on the website bothered to check.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
Johnny Aztec posted:Maybe they should revamp the industry so that people aren't constantly trying to get AWAY from ads. To be honest, even of the non-annoying Internet ads out there, there's probably 0.1% that I would even voluntarily click on. Maybe subconsciously there's a recognition effect going on, as with regular advertising, but I don't think I've ever made a purchase based on an Internet ad. The same's probably true for most people here. I'd say it's in our interest to keep the fiction alive so we keep getting free content.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
They originally set the whole thing up to lie about metrics. Combined with their rehosting policy (if you link a video they automatically rehost it and they even used to delete your link) it allowed them to say that people "view more videos" on Facebook than on YouTube. It's a belligerent lie by any reasonable metric, but it's still technically true. Now the story is recirculating (it's two years old) because they recently admitted that they were miscalculating the length of time an average user viewed a video. Specifically, they were telling advertisers a number of people who viewed their video, which is everyone who saw the video at all, regardless of duration, and then they were telling them how long people watched it for, which was an average of all the people who viewed the video for more than three seconds. The problem is that the dashboard was set up in a way that implied these two numbers were working off the same set, not two different ones, which led advertisers to believe people were viewing their ads a lot longer than they were. This changes the relative value of Facebook ads in the marketplace, which makes a lot of advertisers feel scammed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 07:24
|
|
|
It's fun seeing advertisers get scammed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
The Door Frame posted:I hate to say "Netflix of ____", which advertisers need to stop saying about every loving subscription service, but if I had to pay $10 a month for unlimited youtube without ads and creators were properly compensated, then I'd pay it in a second.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 08:41
|
|
|
A lot of people making online content have set up Patreon (or equivalent) accounts now anyway, which seems like a much more sustainable way to support content creation online than banner ads. If you want to support someone online, throwing them $5 a month is far more money than they'd get than the ad revenue from idling a PS4 on their videos all night.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Yeah some former IGN guys quit and created a Patreon and they make over $20,000 a month. That's on top of the money they get from Youtube ads and merchandise. It's definitely possible if you have a dedicated audience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 09:24
|
|