Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 404 posts

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#241

Post by marcosdumay »

staticelf wrote: post #99
creshal wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Doesn't mean ads arent targeted. E.g. a 25 year old white programmer probably isn't getting Spanish language ads, or ads targeting new mothers, or ads for retirement communities. You'd be surprised. I bought a travel sewing kit five years ago on Amazon, and ever since I'm getting advertisements and "recommendations" for handbags, makeup and high-heeled shoes. It's so blatantly sexist and wrong it's almost funny aga…

Is it though? Just because you aren't interested in these other recommendations and connected ads doesn't mean the wide majority who purchases sewing kits aren't as well. If this "blantantly sexist" ads were wrong no one would purchase such ads. Sure they may be stereotypical, but that's what targeted ads are all about, creating data driven stereotypes that later can be used for increasing sales and relativity.

But they are wrong. The GP is not interested on those.

Yes, the "blatantly sexist" bias may have happened due to unbiased empiricism. But the ads as still wrong. Id the GP was an exception, that would be an worthless anecdote, but anecdotes of ads being correct are hard to find.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#242

Post by kazinator »

The fact that video objects can be started programmatically is the problem. There should be no API for a page to start a video; it should be only possible for a video to start via a UI action.

It's not just a problem with ads, but with videos in general. If I land in a video-hosting site, I don't want the video to start.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#243

Post by marcosdumay »

ozmbie wrote: post #121
ungzd wrote: post #27

BTW, nowadays everyone talks about AI, machine learning and "mobile-first". But when I open any mobile app or any mobile website with ads I see only ads of "clash of kings" and similar scammy games. They collect lots of data but ads have no targeting at all. At least ads on mobile phones. I can't understand it.

I don't get it either. Maybe the whole thing is a bubble. http://idlewords.com/2015/11/the_advertising_bubble.htm

Probably.

Most ads-supported games have only ads of ad-supported games. That would be sane if it was a fast growing market with reasonable barriers to entry, but "free" games are not.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#244

Post by spiderfarmer »

ddebernardy wrote: post #234
spiderfarmer wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As in? Both views and clicks can still be tracked so fraud will have to be dealt with in the same way as it is right now. If you are saying that fraud is harder to detect without building user profiles, that might be so. But it's not impossible. If you are saying that ads can be changed into clickbait I guess you'll have find a way to deal with that. I think an ad network should have an active relationship with both…

Fraud is hard to detect even with user profiling. Among other tricks, sophisticated fraudsters replay genuine user sessions collected on hacked computers to build fake profiles.

Whatever the solution, it will always be a game of cat and mouse.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#245

Post by gregatragenet3 »

I can see why advertising networks want to use ads which slow down browsers. The only ads I've 'clicked on' lately are those where the site was loading slowly and the bowser registered my click late, on an ad window which changed page layout as it loaded. I think most clickthroughs these days are from the page layout jumping around while rendering and not real. If the page rendered quickly you'd loose all these accidental clicks.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#247

Post by ddebernardy »

captainmuon wrote: post #2

I'm a bit shocked about the state of advertising. When I was making websites (~early 2000s), there were a lot more options to choose from, it seems. Now you basically just have Google and this opaque network of algorithmic auctions. Back then, you had a bunch of small business ad networks that you could choose from. I found you could also choose more different formats. OK, there was no video (thank God), but you coul…

> Back then, you had a bunch of small business ad networks that you could choose from.

There was a lot of consolidation. But they're still around. They're basically that opaque network of algorithmic auctions you mentionned, in fact. If they can't display one of their direct clients' ads, they sell the spot to the highest bidder.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#248

Post by dave_sullivan »

thirdsun wrote: post #208
cantlin wrote: post #184

At the Guardian we needed our own video player, because we couldn't rely on a third party platform not to take down something that we published. Editorial independence was important. We implemented our player on top of video.js, and most of the developers who were there at the time still have nightmares about it. We finally got the thing working, looking good, embeddable, reasonably cross-browser. We shipped it. A fe…

Thanks for your insight. Maybe I'm naive but how are these ads of any value to the advertiser? - nobody wants them, everybody ignores them. How can ads that surely almost exclusively receive accidental clicks be so worthwhile for publishers like you?

Advertising is a weird business.

There's different types of media: print, television, digital (banner ads). Print is dead (has been the increasingly accurate argument for 10 years now), television is expensive and untrackable, and digital is here to save the ad industry because that's where all your customers are and it's very trackable.

The value to the advertiser is either direct-action ("click here and buuuuuy!") or branding ("we exist, see!") Companies like Verizon, Proctor and Gamble, Johnson and Johnson, unilever, etc. spend billions on branding.

How does that money get allocated? Well, you've got a brand manager for, say, Acme Inc. Their job is "Get more people to buy" and they split their resources between creative--often working with big agencies (think Madmen, see AdAge)--and media buying. There's often pressure to spend less on creative and more on ad buys. And when ad buys don't perform, they say "We should have spent more on creative".

Media buying is basically buying banner ads (or tv or whatever). They're typically sold at a CPM (Cost Per thousand iMpressions), less often Cost Per Click.

So to answer your question: major brands have billions for branding and it's a bunch of people's jobs to spend that money and convince the people they work for that it's money well spent. And if it's not money well spent, they'll find someone who will tell them it is.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#249

Post by Someone1234 »

thirdsun wrote: post #208
cantlin wrote: post #184

At the Guardian we needed our own video player, because we couldn't rely on a third party platform not to take down something that we published. Editorial independence was important. We implemented our player on top of video.js, and most of the developers who were there at the time still have nightmares about it. We finally got the thing working, looking good, embeddable, reasonably cross-browser. We shipped it. A fe…

Thanks for your insight. Maybe I'm naive but how are these ads of any value to the advertiser? - nobody wants them, everybody ignores them. How can ads that surely almost exclusively receive accidental clicks be so worthwhile for publishers like you?

I've ran ads before (via Google AdWords), we had a few motivations:

- Name recognition. We don't need people to click, we just need them to associate our brand with their need.

- Sales leads. They have a need, we have a product, it wasn't a massive sales boost in B2B, but it paid for itself.

- Push competitor's ads down. Diminish their brand recognition/leads/etc.

- Advertise on competitor's search results, show us as a legitimate competitor in the consumer's mind.

The ultimate goal is that people in the industry say "we've heard of you." Very targeted adverts are a great way of doing that along with social engineering and attending inter-industry events.

It might sound crazy, but it was better for us overall if people didn't click. We got more value out of passive advertising than active click-throughs.

It is just like waving your hands around and saying "we exist!"

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#250

Post by bnastic »

cantlin wrote: post #184

At the Guardian we needed our own video player, because we couldn't rely on a third party platform not to take down something that we published. Editorial independence was important. We implemented our player on top of video.js, and most of the developers who were there at the time still have nightmares about it. We finally got the thing working, looking good, embeddable, reasonably cross-browser. We shipped it. A fe…

Seriously, how did you (and everyone else) end up in this mess?

Imagine your printed edition where your editors have no idea what sort of ads are printed in your paper, because it's all added at the printing firm by some shady characters.

Post reply on HN