VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks • Hacker News Board

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

#341

Post by intrasight » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 7:27 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #312

manigandham wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between the formats and the distribution systems. Content has always been a good marketing tool, we're just starting to see a lot more of it with publishers setting up their own "agencies" to sell pieces written by the same teams but for advertisers. Some are actually really great (Netflix stories for example). When it comes to distribution, there is just a lot that needs to be done for advertisi…

> However, because adblockers mostly work at the network interface level, the typical 3rd party javascript tag approach is very easy to disable, and self-published native content by publishers using the existing content management system is a good workaround. It's more of a stop gap then a long term approach though. The major adblocker filter lists tend to quickly add filters for "native" ads on any site with a non-t…

What is a "native" ad?

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

#342

Post by lostlogin » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 7:43 PM UTC

mercer wrote: post #258

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…

I've spent months working on the video players for all the brands for one of the largest media companies in the world. I did plenty unpleasant work for them, like building a clean redesign, agonizing over page load speeds, and then filling up the page with multi-megabyte tracking tools and every possible ad under sun (which would not only ruin the design, but often inexplicably and randomly break the page because of…

I always feel like people are brave to admit they do this sort of work, and I have less of this feeling reading about much older professions. However it's very interesting and the stories are often both amusing and horrifying whatever my overriding view.

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

#343

Post by roymurdock » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 7:46 PM UTC

intrasight wrote: post #341

JoshTriplett wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, because adblockers mostly work at the network interface level, the typical 3rd party javascript tag approach is very easy to disable, and self-published native content by publishers using the existing content management system is a good workaround. It's more of a stop gap then a long term approach though. The major adblocker filter lists tend to quickly add filters for "native" ads on any site with a non-t…

What is a "native" ad?

http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html

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

#344

Post by lostlogin » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 7:51 PM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #337

JoshTriplett wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since the advertising model isn't going to go away There are plenty of people who would like it to, and personally I hope they win. With sufficiently widespread and robust use of adblocking technology, perhaps advertising will become sufficiently unworkable to go away entirely.

You've said the same thing several times in all the advertising related threads. While I understand some of the sentiment, let me be as blunt as possible: Advertising will never go away. The fundamental model of advertising giving free access to content is great and works for pretty much everyone. It's fast, simple, egalitarian, requires no commitment and is very scalable. Adblocking tech will never cover 100% of ads…

>The fundamental model of advertising giving free access to content is great and works for pretty much everyone. It's fast, simple, egalitarian, requires no commitment and is very scalable.

Is it? Step back from the Internet. How many people keep things laden with adverts? Cars, magazine and appliances come covered in advertising crap. Better quality things suffer a less from this. We throw things away that are covered with adverts, or at a minimum pull them off. Things that come as they are, unadulterated, are things I place a higher value on. By and large adverts mark things out as cheap. I may be different to others in this regard but I like to pay more, lose the crap and that be it.

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

#345

Post by mancerayder » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 7:52 PM UTC

roymurdock wrote: post #334

JoshTriplett wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since the advertising model isn't going to go away There are plenty of people who would like it to, and personally I hope they win. With sufficiently widespread and robust use of adblocking technology, perhaps advertising will become sufficiently unworkable to go away entirely.

Ads will never disappear entirely, because at a basic level, they are really just packets of information. Some are more obnoxious, targeted, and/or dangerous than others, but seeing as how the internet was created to facilitate the distribution and dissemination of information, selfish ads will always find a way to latch into and ride along on more useful and/or altruistic information. I'd rather live in a world wher…

But submarines/native content is the logical end of all freely-published syndicated content on the web, given the arms race between ad blockers and ad networks. What could be more user-friendly than an ad disguised as an article?

So user-friendly, that the mistrust of the Internet is probably higher than ever [1]. Sometimes it's legitimately hard to tell what is real, and what is an ad, whether it's some website about some health concern (my favorite BS ones), some tech review site, or god knows what else. And as a discerning, analytical reader with a scientific mindset, I've trained myself to do my own research via studies and reputable sources (health) or even message forums (tech).

The user-friendliness of the ad industry presently is somewhat terrifying to me, if I'm honest.

1 - I can't back that up. :-) But why would I bother, when I can just state it, like one of those 'Top 3 Tablets [whose manufacturers that paid us ]' or 'Glowing Review of New Macbook [ with softball criticisms] '?

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

#346

Post by lostlogin » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 7:58 PM UTC

agarden wrote: post #292

peeky wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've actually emailed the Guardian before to say I would gladly pay at least whatever they earn from my ad impressions to have an ad-free site. They just pointed me to the mobile apps where this is already an option. I wish more sites offered an alternative to the dilemma of UX-breaking ads vs ad blocker guilt.

You can pay them $49/year. If that doesn't remove the ads, then install an ad blocker that you turn on for just their site. https://membership.theguardian.com/us/supporter?INTCMP=ADBLO...

The idea of paying them then paying someone else to remove their shit is a little insane. Until that is resolved, I pay for my ad blockers. The added bonus is that I can remove any content I don't like (lifestyle stories about our rugby players).

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

#347

Post by shostack » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 8:26 PM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #285

dave_sullivan wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!")…

> 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. I'll be the first to say there's a lot of mismanagement, incompetence, politics, etc that leads to this but it's also one of the most data driven ind…

Despite all that data though, there's still very little in the way of a clear approach to figuring out cross-channel attribution, valuing view-throughs etc.

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

#348

Post by manigandham » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 8:31 PM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #344

manigandham wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've said the same thing several times in all the advertising related threads. While I understand some of the sentiment, let me be as blunt as possible: Advertising will never go away. The fundamental model of advertising giving free access to content is great and works for pretty much everyone. It's fast, simple, egalitarian, requires no commitment and is very scalable. Adblocking tech will never cover 100% of ads…

>The fundamental model of advertising giving free access to content is great and works for pretty much everyone. It's fast, simple, egalitarian, requires no commitment and is very scalable. Is it? Step back from the Internet. How many people keep things laden with adverts? Cars, magazine and appliances come covered in advertising crap. Better quality things suffer a less from this. We throw things away that are cover…

Is it what?

> How many people keep things laden with adverts?

I dont know but this doesn't really have anything to do with the advertising model. Ads don't need to be around forever to do their job. Digital ads are by definition very ephemeral and instantaneous.

> Things that come as they are, unadulterated, are things I place a higher value on. By and large adverts mark things out as cheap.

That's because ads do make goods/services cheap(er). If you dont want ads, then you have to make up the cost by paying it yourself. You're just talking about a spectrum on how much of the true cost you want to pay.

> but I like to pay more, lose the crap and that be it.

Ok, you can do that. More publishers are starting to offer paid subscriptions and there are services like patreon, flattr, blendle, optimal, google contributor and more. More choice is good but most will choose ads for free content.

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

#349

Post by Fiahil » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 8:33 PM UTC

peeky wrote: post #279

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…

I've actually emailed the Guardian before to say I would gladly pay at least whatever they earn from my ad impressions to have an ad-free site. They just pointed me to the mobile apps where this is already an option. I wish more sites offered an alternative to the dilemma of UX-breaking ads vs ad blocker guilt.

Ad blocker guilt? Never felt that.

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

#350

Post by wtracy » Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

natch wrote: post #229

OK, so this guy is complaining about a cancer inflicted on us by advertisers like Google, while posting on a site that (speaking of cancers nobody is talking about) requires a Google login to view. I agree with his point, but the obliviousness to the problem caused by his choice of blogging platform is a bit rich.

OTOH, he literally got Google to pay for hosting his essays (I've never seen an ad on a G+ page, has anyone else?) that tear apart Google's practices, which I find even richer.