Live data from Hacker News

After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

jordan-shared.medium.com

291–300 of 322 posts

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#291
> Our legacy promotional business, Freebies (freebies.com, free.ca), publishes notices of free samples

A vast amount of free samples are actually review scams. You buy the thing from Amazon, they refund you so you appear as a verified purchase and then you write a 'honest' review. I regularly report these when I see them, I presume others too, if they got involved in this sort of thing, then a ban is right.

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#292
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is absolutely full to the brim with “crap content”. Crap content happens to be what drives engagement, so hosting crap content is a large part of Facebook’s business model. You’re speaking with a pretty authoritative tone there as though you’re absolutely sure that Facebook has had a change of heart and only wants to host quality content, and there’s no other reason why the pages were removed. Do you have so…

Please don't harangue another user like this. The site guidelines put it this way: "Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Curious conversation requires a certain lightness of touch. You can still make your same point that way; actually it will work better that way.

What is objectionable about that post? The OP said "Facebook decided they don't want to be a part of this type of content distribution" as if they were privy to some business decision that was not public knowledge. The reply simply asked them to substantiate it. I do not see any hostility in it.

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wondered who's actually making the money, when so many ads inside free mobile games are for other free mobile games. Someone has to actually buy something at some point! I wish there was a global tracker for services that make money through ads, that reported the percent of ads that are for other services in the same category. All that data is secret though, probably.

I don’t actually know. And I was about to joke, but on second thought bet it is actually true, that at the end of the chain, all the money is in actually selling ED pills, hair-loss treatments, and porn.

Or just blatant click fraud.

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#296
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is absolutely full to the brim with “crap content”. Crap content happens to be what drives engagement, so hosting crap content is a large part of Facebook’s business model. You’re speaking with a pretty authoritative tone there as though you’re absolutely sure that Facebook has had a change of heart and only wants to host quality content, and there’s no other reason why the pages were removed. Do you have so…

Please don't harangue another user like this. The site guidelines put it this way: "Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Curious conversation requires a certain lightness of touch. You can still make your same point that way; actually it will work better that way.

Sorry but I'm with _vertigo on this one. Maybe it could have been slightly more tactfully worded but I would not classify this a 'haranguing' and _vertigo makes a very salient point. There is no shortage of questionable material and businesses that are allowed to be monetized and advertise on Facebook. It seems that this particular company may have become too high profile and is being punished not for violating Facebook's vague terms of service but for the risk of bringing light to it and unwanted scrutiny.

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#297

Let's be fair here. Shared.com is in the business of producing and distributing crap content. That's a subjective term, but it's like the supreme court ruling on pornography, you'll know it when you see it. These guys most likely "skirt the line" to just operate as a mediocre and crappy content distribution network, that at scale, makes a lot of money because there is a certain subset of the population that will eat…

At first glance, Facebook's content is a way crappier. Did you check "Recommended videos" section recently?

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#298
A lot of the commenters are ignored the major point here. "Facebook have given them no explanation on how their content violates their guidelines"

Facebook has been happy to take their money all these years, now all of a sudden they are bad guys.

At the very least Facebook owes them a better explanation.

Re: After spending $57M on Facebook ads, I was kicked off

#299

Another sign that several FAANGs exist as a monopoly. When you're so big that you can provide effectively no customer service to a customer spending in the 10s of millions (and they have no competitor they can go to afterwards) there's a problem.

I agree with you. When the issue of Apple's anti-competitive behaviour comes up on HN, it is always rebuffed by saying Apple does not have a monopoly—its US share of smartphone market is merely 40%. This is demonstration that you don't need a 100% market share to act anti-competitively. Facebook and Google each have less than 30% market share in ad spend in the US.

I can at least get Apple on the phone. Sometimes I can’t even get an actual human to email me back from Google.
Post reply on HN