Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
1–10 of 71 posts
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#2Weren't the advertisers paying for the results by proxy -- clearly they saw that the results were worth the payment made. And they continued paying what they felt was a fair price for the results they saw.
So while the numbers measured may be different, the advertisers weren't naive enough to use that as the only metric to plan ads.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#3This is not new, and I've spoken about this here before. Facebook used fraudulent methods to artificially inflate their view counts, and pedelled those fake and grossly exagerrated #s for "eyeballs" to the unsuspecting advertizers.
"How Facebook is Stealing Billions of Views" - Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell exposed this with detailed analysis and evidence. Watch it here => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7tA3NNKF0Q
I contracted with their Ad team for a few months, and can't say more for NDA reasons, hence I am pointing you to publicly available media / expose.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#4FB audited a bunch of metrics and found issues with 4 out of 220. The narrative being pushed here is that all of them nefariously favored FB. The only problem with that is that it's not true.
> """Elsewhere, Facebook admitted to exaggerating the number of full views that video ads received"""
You can tell they didn't do any homework, since the issue was that full views were under reported when the audio and video tracks were not the exact same length. The result is that full views were actually roughly 35% greater than what page managers saw reported.
http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/11/an-update-on-metrics-and... goes into the details of what the issues with each metric calculation is. You can draw your own conclusions as to whether each was (a) important and (b) favored FB. That link also goes into FB's plans for next steps in making metrics externally audited and more transparent.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#5FB audited a bunch of metrics and found issues with 4 out of 220. The narrative being pushed here is that all of them nefariously favored FB. The only problem with that is that it's not true. > """Elsewhere, Facebook admitted to exaggerating the number of full views that video ads received""" You can tell they didn't do any homework, since the issue was that full views were under reported when the audio and video tra…
"FB investigated FB and found FB not guilty"
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#6FB audited a bunch of metrics and found issues with 4 out of 220. The narrative being pushed here is that all of them nefariously favored FB. The only problem with that is that it's not true. > """Elsewhere, Facebook admitted to exaggerating the number of full views that video ads received""" You can tell they didn't do any homework, since the issue was that full views were under reported when the audio and video tra…
> You can tell they didn't do any homework,
It's not a question of "doing their homework". That's the naive cop-out. The inflation of metrics and numbers is company-wide, and I am pretty certain most - if not all of it - is deliberate. Especially after 'Zuck' took the Company Public.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#7FB audited a bunch of metrics and found issues with 4 out of 220. The narrative being pushed here is that all of them nefariously favored FB. The only problem with that is that it's not true. > """Elsewhere, Facebook admitted to exaggerating the number of full views that video ads received""" You can tell they didn't do any homework, since the issue was that full views were under reported when the audio and video tra…
> You can tell they didn't do any homework, It's not a question of "doing their homework". That's the naive cop-out. The inflation of metrics and numbers is company-wide, and I am pretty certain most - if not all of it - is deliberate. Especially after 'Zuck' took the Company Public.
The NY Post are the ones that didn't do their homework. Their source for this article is FB trying for transparency.
If you have proof of inflating metrics and numbers, especially deliberately, you're welcome to post some. Posting detailed reports of errors discovered during an internal audit when under no obligation to do so, on the other hand, is not in keeping with your conspiracy theory.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#8FB audited a bunch of metrics and found issues with 4 out of 220. The narrative being pushed here is that all of them nefariously favored FB. The only problem with that is that it's not true. > """Elsewhere, Facebook admitted to exaggerating the number of full views that video ads received""" You can tell they didn't do any homework, since the issue was that full views were under reported when the audio and video tra…
"FB investigated FB and found FB not guilty"
Fwiw sounds like they are opening up to independent third party review with viewability vendors like Integral.
Now if only they'd let me use DCM tags to measure impression data and VTs.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#9Weren't the advertisers paying for the results by proxy -- clearly they saw that the results were worth the payment made. And they continued paying what they felt was a fair price for the results they saw. So while the numbers measured may be different, the advertisers weren't naive enough to use that as the only metric to plan ads.
I think that assumes that advertisers can immediately see the effect of brand advertising on the bottom line or some other metric, something I wouldn't assume especially for big businesses focused on awareness advertising.
Re: Facebook’s ad metric problem is becoming Zuckerberg’s headache
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can tell they didn't do any homework, It's not a question of "doing their homework". That's the naive cop-out. The inflation of metrics and numbers is company-wide, and I am pretty certain most - if not all of it - is deliberate. Especially after 'Zuck' took the Company Public.
The NY Post are the ones that didn't do their homework. Their source for this article is FB trying for transparency. If you have proof of inflating metrics and numbers, especially deliberately, you're welcome to post some. Posting detailed reports of errors discovered during an internal audit when under no obligation to do so, on the other hand, is not in keeping with your conspiracy theory.
It's not a 'conspiracy theory'. See my other comment. I worked at the Ad Team for a few months. Saw it from the inside.