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

Post by larrik » Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 2:57 PM UTC

throwaway76543 wrote: post #76

matt4077 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been tried. Most directly by Google, but almost any publisher on the internet has tested various forms of subscription model. While some high-quality publications (the New York Times, Economist, etc.) have seen some success in recent years, the overwhelming evidence is that the economics just don't work out among the general public. Most people also underestimate the costs. IIRC, Google needs about $100/pa to su…

Google is currently selling this service for youtube, branded "youtube red." It costs $10/mo and as part of that they also offer to repair some of the crippleware in the youtube app. It doesn't seem worth it, to me. I need ad blockers anyway for other ad services and annoyances so I end up just avoiding their built-in ad-riddled apps and going through a browser for things like youtube. It's a poor experience but bett…

Post by Reedx » Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 3:18 PM UTC

throwaway76543 wrote: post #76

matt4077 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been tried. Most directly by Google, but almost any publisher on the internet has tested various forms of subscription model. While some high-quality publications (the New York Times, Economist, etc.) have seen some success in recent years, the overwhelming evidence is that the economics just don't work out among the general public. Most people also underestimate the costs. IIRC, Google needs about $100/pa to su…

Google is currently selling this service for youtube, branded "youtube red." It costs $10/mo and as part of that they also offer to repair some of the crippleware in the youtube app. It doesn't seem worth it, to me. I need ad blockers anyway for other ad services and annoyances so I end up just avoiding their built-in ad-riddled apps and going through a browser for things like youtube. It's a poor experience but bett…

Post by s73v3r_ » Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 5:33 PM UTC

notatoad wrote: post #52

avree wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. Twitter has the power to deny anyone they want from purchasing ads from them. WHOIS is not centrally controlled in the same way. Twitter could easily block "laundering" platforms from functioning simply by not allowing them to purchase advertisements.

The laundering will work the opposite way. Instead of hiding behind one big entity, political advertiser's will hide behind a multitude of smaller entities to make themselves look like grassroots organizations. You won't see "promoted by [Koch|Soros], who spent $8.5m on ads this year", you'll see things promoted by "milualkee citizens for freedom, who spent $1500 this year". But the money will be coming from the same…

Post by wpietri » Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 5:41 PM UTC

sidr wrote: post #77

wpietri wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, please. Twitter's average revenue per user is something like $2-3 per quarter. Your notion that you have to be some kind of Scrooge McDuck to spend $25/year on a Twitter Premium subscription is ridiculous. Jamming "virtue signaling" into places where it doesn't fit is its own kind of virtue signaling.

Even amongst those who say they would pay $25/year for Twitter premium, we'd first have to account for stated vs. revealed preferences of how many would actually pay. I can't speak about you as an individual, but study after study has shown that this can be a huge effect. And keep in mind, this is only among privacy minded tech people. The vast majority of social media users do not give a shit about this (and will ex…

Post by throwaway76543 » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 2:42 AM UTC

Reedx wrote: post #84

throwaway76543 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is currently selling this service for youtube, branded "youtube red." It costs $10/mo and as part of that they also offer to repair some of the crippleware in the youtube app. It doesn't seem worth it, to me. I need ad blockers anyway for other ad services and annoyances so I end up just avoiding their built-in ad-riddled apps and going through a browser for things like youtube. It's a poor experience but bett…

I've been paying for YouTube Red (now Premium) ever since they started it. It's very much worth it. Between Netflix and Youtube you can replace cable. It's frustrating how people complain about ad supported models while at the same time aren't willing to pay for it. So much entitlement. There's also the option of not consuming their resources.