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

Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 94 posts

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#31

Post by zitterbewegung »

geofft wrote: post #10
larkeith wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still, it's certainly a welcome change, and a step in the right direction. I wonder what the best way to combat large-scale astroturfing on a platform like twitter would be; My first thought would be a rep system akin to those of StackOverflow or HN, but I'm not sure how you would implement it such that there's not a large impact on legitimate new users - there's no system like upvotes Twitter could use to stratify.

I believe Reddit does have a problem with advertisers purchasing (or renting) accounts from established users who have enough karma/longevity to post in the various subreddits that block new users to avoid spam.

I think that is still an ongoing problem but you can use reddit sort of like a company forum where you don't have to pay reddit a dime by having a community manager and learning the platform.

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#33

Post by koolba »

stevehawk wrote: post #32

This is possibly a bad move business wise as it possibly exposes business intelligence information that a company may not want competitors to have.

I thought that as well but closer reading of the article indicates it’s specifically for political advertisements, not generic ad spend by corporations.

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#34

Post by master-litty »

koolba wrote: post #33
stevehawk wrote: post #32

This is possibly a bad move business wise as it possibly exposes business intelligence information that a company may not want competitors to have.

I thought that as well but closer reading of the article indicates it’s specifically for political advertisements, not generic ad spend by corporations.

So this is only applies to political advertisements? The title is misleading and should be changed.

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#35

Post by apoorv20 »

koolba wrote: post #33
stevehawk wrote: post #32

This is possibly a bad move business wise as it possibly exposes business intelligence information that a company may not want competitors to have.

I thought that as well but closer reading of the article indicates it’s specifically for political advertisements, not generic ad spend by corporations.

It seems that we will be able to see all the ads related to an advertiser account. [1]

[1] https://ads.twitter.com/transparency

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#36

Post by AznHisoka »

apoorv20 wrote: post #35
koolba wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that as well but closer reading of the article indicates it’s specifically for political advertisements, not generic ad spend by corporations.

It seems that we will be able to see all the ads related to an advertiser account. [1] [1] https://ads.twitter.com/transparency

I went to twitter.com/spotify, where is the link to see all their ads? Am I missing something?

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#37

Post by briandear »

mkl wrote: post #20
downandout wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

astroturfers influencing public opinion. For the most part, people don’t look to social media to find content that helps them form their opinions; they look to it to reinforce already held opinions. It's an echo chamber. That means astroturfing may lead to more divisiveness, as people seek out content that makes them more sure than ever that their opinion is the one and only correct one. But it does not “influence pu…

That seems unlikely. For anything new or unfamiliar, people will not have established opinions yet. Their opinions will form under the influence of their experiences, including astroturfers on social media.

Sadly, people dumb or intellectually lazy enough to let social help them form political views are allowed to vote.

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#38

Post by JumpCrisscross »

rock_hard wrote: post #16
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it fair for the opponent to have that information? I'm parsing "fair" in the form of: imagine two societies, one where such information is private the other where it's public. Who outperforms? Would the number of start-ups which cave because an incumbent snipes their marketing outweigh the number who could piggyback on an incumbent's revealed slicing? (The latter, by marketing to the same customers better or not…

You realize though that at least a Facebook has the same features, right? In fact FB went much farther in that for example they let you go back 7 YEARS in a pages ad history and not just 7 days like Twitter does

> FB went much farther in that for example they let you go back 7 YEARS in a pages ad history

I am not completely familiar with Facebook's ad platform. Does it really let anyone see, for example, which demographics Procter & Gamble is targeting with a particular Gilette ad? (Or its Gilette brand, generally?)

Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend

#39

Post by martin1975 »

I dislike both Twitter & Facebook, and am on the verge of closing both accounts, however I give them kudos for this - increasing transparency instead of censorship. While I understand our desire and pursuit for truth, I would like to leave the interpretation of any ultimate truths and meaning to rest with the end user, and not with any corporation or even government.
Post reply on HN