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

Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 188 posts

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#171

Post by Mirioron »

mLuby wrote: post #101
Mirioron wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But consumers could get better services and products, because they'll know that there's a choice to be had. I always go to the same place to have my hair cut, because it's the only one I know. Maybe there are better options for me -cheaper, closer, faster, better. But I don't know about them and I'll probably never know about them as I don't really care enough about it to go out of my way to look into it. If someone…

> consumers could get better services and products Those services and products are not necessarily better, they're just better advertised. (In fact, they're likely worse.)

I'm saying better because the consumer now knows of more alternatives. They have to obviously make their own choice on the matter.

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#172

Post by Mirioron »

mantas wrote: post #110
Mirioron wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flip-side, businesses that rely on ad revenue would disappear. That means most of the commonly used websites. No more Google, Facebook, YouTube, Reddit, Twitch, almost all news sites etc. This also means that everything goes back to essentially subscription only and this without a credit card don't get much access to stuff (like it used to be).

How did TV and paper press existed? Non-targeted advertising brings €€€ too.

Paper press has been disappearing for quite a while even with subscription fees. They're often bankrolled by rich people or companies and likely aren't impartial.

I'm not sure TV is a good example either. The number of TV channels isn't that great. At the same time TV channels have a ridiculous amount of ads and they engage in all kinds of shady practices to sell you on something you don't want. Or in the cases of things like the BBC they extort the taxpayer.

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#173

Post by earthboundkid »

jariel wrote: post #119
earthboundkid wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can assert that, but where is the evidence? Tracking exists today and I never see ads relevant to my large American city. I see the same gross out earwax scams as everyone in the world.

"You can assert that, but where is the evidence?" It's not a remotely controversial statement. If you take a minute to actually run a marketing campaign for your company you'll learn all sorts of things. Including how targeting works. There are other options such as restricting the type and degree of targetting. The 'big outdoor ads' thing is not related to targeted ads, it's not part of this discussion. I'm fine wit…

Here is what I know. I know if I open a newspaper, I see ads for businesses, both local and national. If I go to the newspaper’s website, I see ads for one weird trick, the same ads on every site and in every city, and essentially no meaningful local content.

Yes, things on Facebook are different, but Facebook is not a publisher, it’s a parasite, so who cares?

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#174

Post by jariel »

earthboundkid wrote: post #173
jariel wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You can assert that, but where is the evidence?" It's not a remotely controversial statement. If you take a minute to actually run a marketing campaign for your company you'll learn all sorts of things. Including how targeting works. There are other options such as restricting the type and degree of targetting. The 'big outdoor ads' thing is not related to targeted ads, it's not part of this discussion. I'm fine wit…

Here is what I know. I know if I open a newspaper, I see ads for businesses, both local and national. If I go to the newspaper’s website, I see ads for one weird trick, the same ads on every site and in every city, and essentially no meaningful local content. Yes, things on Facebook are different, but Facebook is not a publisher, it’s a parasite, so who cares?

1) Banner ads on websites are often targeted via networks, often Google.

2) Those 'stupid ads' are often targeted, and they make money, sadly.

3) You're probably not accounting for the majority of ads you see. If you literally tracked/recorded every ad, you might see a different picture.

4) Many ads are not very well targeted, yes, and that's why you see irrelevance. Well-targeted ads are generally more relevant (sometimes not obvious) and this is 100% validated by returns to advertisers. This is not a joke.

5) Facebook and Google represent most of the ad market, so, the people that 'care' are basically everyone who wants to place an ad online.

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#175

Post by avalys »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #130
avalys wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the cost that advertising imposes exactly?

Go to a drug store. Find a generic no-brand ibuprofen. Check the price. Find a branded ibuprofen that is advertised on TV. In the UK, Nurofen is popular. Check the price. The difference is advertising. Same goes for detergent, breakfast cereal, AA batteries, etc., etc.

That's not a cost imposed on you - you're free to buy the generic off-brand.

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#176

Post by PaulRobinson »

avalys wrote: post #175
PaulRobinson wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go to a drug store. Find a generic no-brand ibuprofen. Check the price. Find a branded ibuprofen that is advertised on TV. In the UK, Nurofen is popular. Check the price. The difference is advertising. Same goes for detergent, breakfast cereal, AA batteries, etc., etc.

That's not a cost imposed on you - you're free to buy the generic off-brand.

Enough competitors will eventually realise that the only way to sell any units at all is to advertise, and so will start to ramp up their own efforts.

Eventually the advertising cost is in all products, and there is no cheap generic off-brand.

This is already the case in cars, houses (you're paying the brokers whether directly or indirectly), jobs (the recruiter fees comes out of your salary and training budgets), etc., etc.

Getting rid of "advertising" in a sector is possibly the biggest economic disruptor you could ever apply to it.

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#177

Post by Supermancho »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #25

I'd add nuance to this: Ban _involuntarily_ targeted advertising. I am 100% ok with Google, Facebook etc. knowing that I live in Oxfordshire, UK; that I love cycling; that I play the church organ. That's who I am. If they want to target cycling, classical music, and local ads at me based on this information, that's great. I would happily log onto these sites and click checkboxes based on this (or do it via browser se…

> I am not ok with them building up a detailed personal profile of my anxieties, day-to-day worries and preoccupations

Luckily no company cares about those things...enough to buy the information. Theres a dissonance between people knowing ad targeting is basically useless and them imagining it is super subtly effective. Ads arent effective at leveragong purchases. The data is conclusive. Yes the brands might appear in your head when faced with the monumentally unlikely choice of not knowing ANYTHING about various products in the category. Its far more likely you pull out a cell phone and check reviews or your family/friends recommend something or you will do a comparison of which has more shelf space or you will read the labels. More lkkely all of these things, none of which is "I saw an ad on twitch". In 15 years of digital advertising, this idea that demographic data (one of the pillars like geolocation), does anything to influence the market. With the corporate magic of attribution* the smoke and mirrors continue. *sales to people who saw an ad causes the adtech dept to be given credit for part of the revenue, as if the ad did something. No science that isnt decades out of date, just dissonance.

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#178

Post by mantas »

Mirioron wrote: post #172
mantas wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did TV and paper press existed? Non-targeted advertising brings €€€ too.

Paper press has been disappearing for quite a while even with subscription fees. They're often bankrolled by rich people or companies and likely aren't impartial. I'm not sure TV is a good example either. The number of TV channels isn't that great. At the same time TV channels have a ridiculous amount of ads and they engage in all kinds of shady practices to sell you on something you don't want. Or in the cases of th…

Paper press and TV did really well for decades. Sure, once targeted advertising came around, everyone jumped onto it and non-targeted advertising started to fall. But if targeted advertising would be outlawed, most of that budget would just return to other advertising channels. Other advertising channels as in not-targeted ads in websites/youtube/etc. Classic paper and tv are gone for good IMO.

> TV channels have a ridiculous amount of ads and they engage in all kinds of shady practices to sell you on something you don't want

Not much worse than interwebs if you disable AdBlock&friends...

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#179

Post by NikolaNovak »

ddevault wrote: post #106
NikolaNovak wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As concerned as I am for my privacy and control over my information I don't know that I would accept a straight theory of "Advertising is bad". 1. I appreciate, in principle, the notion that I may be informed of opportunities, products, services that might interest me. I'm more focused on my ability to control a) Information you gather on me and b) How when and what it is presented to me - rather than its existence.…

>1. I appreciate, in principle, the notion that I may be informed of opportunities, products, services that might interest me. I'm more focused on my ability to control a) Information you gather on me and b) How when and what it is presented to me - rather than its existence. You should research products that interest you, rather than being manipulating into choosing something that you otherwise might not. >2. As ano…

>>You should research products that interest you, rather than being manipulating into choosing something that you otherwise might not.

I don't believe this is feasible:

1. For all people

2. In all circumstances

3. For all products - especially new ones, or radically changed/improved ones. I may simply be unaware something exists. And reviewers need to find out about it somehow. And to the point, how will ANYbody find out about ANY product if we "ban advertising"?

Believe it not, most people out there in the wide world are not fellow geeks who get bodily joy out of researching products that interest them :-)

Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?

#180

Post by Mirioron »

mantas wrote: post #178
Mirioron wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paper press has been disappearing for quite a while even with subscription fees. They're often bankrolled by rich people or companies and likely aren't impartial. I'm not sure TV is a good example either. The number of TV channels isn't that great. At the same time TV channels have a ridiculous amount of ads and they engage in all kinds of shady practices to sell you on something you don't want. Or in the cases of th…

Paper press and TV did really well for decades. Sure, once targeted advertising came around, everyone jumped onto it and non-targeted advertising started to fall. But if targeted advertising would be outlawed, most of that budget would just return to other advertising channels. Other advertising channels as in not-targeted ads in websites/youtube/etc. Classic paper and tv are gone for good IMO. > TV channels have a r…

I think TV ads are much worse than ads on the internet. Imagine YouTube, where you have to watch an ad that's a fifth of the length of the video for every video.

10 minute video? 2 minutes of unskippable ads. Right now we tend to have skippable ads that are much shorter.

Post reply on HN