Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#301

Post by aerosmile » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

renewiltord wrote: post #247

masswerk wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I studied media theory and publishing, but well before the Web became the all-decisive factor. Meaning, I have some idea about those things and have still an interest in them. (Also, I actually programmed ad embedding mechanisms for ad networks, but quit this field, when things became too invasive and ads too aggressive and I couldn't justify this any longer. – At this time, tracking was commonly done for…

* There is a pervasive belief on HN that marketing teams are making easy errors, i.e. there is low hanging fruit * Consultancies that improve marketing campaign efficacy make lots of money * HN users are making small fractions of that money and constantly complaining about it * Any HN user capable of picking this low hanging fruit could do this for two years and retire for life * They are not * Conclusion: Either the…

Alternative conclusion: as with all things in a capitalist society, there is a small minority of people that is killing it, and they are not making it easy for everyone else to discover their playbooks.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#302

Post by aerosmile » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 5:54 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #277

aerosmile wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All related studies are showing that the latter isn't working anyway. This is very common on HN these days - stating something with a lot of confidence that turns out to be some self-constructed mental model that has nothing to do with reality. Then, add the obligatory "all related studies are showing it" and you have met the publishing standards. Legally or illegally, morally or immorally, for better or worse, Fac…

>"You want proof? Look at their financial statements." Homeopathy peddlers make a killing, so does the agile consultants and th catholic Church, if this is proof they must both be right? Just because someone made loads of money doesnt mean their claims are sciebtifivally valid.

I went out of my way not to give Facebook any moral high ground, and yet you still managed to get offended.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#303

Post by jfengel » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #199

alkonaut wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If sites can’t fund their content with ads based information I’m willing to give up, then they can beg me for money, or charge for the content, or beg me to look at ads or whatever. But I want that transaction to be transparent and deliberate. And I don’t care if 90% of content online just disappears because we click the privacy button. Then it was never a viable business model to begin with.

Yes, if Facebook goes away due to lack of ads and no paid subscribers it means it simply was not worth paying for in enough people's minds. Imagine that your entire business is only appealing to people if it is free. I mean a lot of crappy 70's sitcoms would not exist if people had to buy tickets to watch. Honestly, I would not mind that world. :-)

It seems that the news is only appealing to people when it's free. In part that's because it's competing with a lot of other things that are free -- including "news" subsidized by those who want to influence what news you consume.

People really like free. When it's there, it will tend to suck the air out of almost everything else. Including things that are almost-but-not-quite-free.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#304

Post by boring_twenties » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

fairity wrote: post #260

Be careful what you wish for. If ad publishers like Facebook generate less revenue per ad impression (which is what these tracking changes do), publishers will inevitably end up showing users more ads not less (to make up for the lost revenue).

Out of the first 12 posts in my facebook feed currently, three are ads (25%). Two of those ads are for the same exact thing FWIW.

How many more ads could they possibly squeeze in before people just give up using the platform?

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#305

Post by freeone3000 » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 5:56 PM UTC

zohch wrote: post #152

freeone3000 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing about this change prevents Facebook from serving ads! Opting out doesn't remove ads, only tracking.

I agree, but I still don't understand what people who prefer not to have their eyeballs monetized are doing on Facebook.

Connecting with their friends and family.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#306

Post by only_as_i_fall » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

melomal wrote: post #44

danbruc wrote: post #3

That sense of entitlement makes me sick. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we would have to spend way too much on ads. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise my small business can not survive. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we can not understand who our customers are. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we can not identify new customers. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we can not evaluate the e…

I love the personal entitlement people have when using free email, free social media, free search engines and everything else to the point they are offended if they try to make ends meet by making profit. Do you think Y Combinator investments don't use tracking? You would get laughed out of a room if you said you track nothing and have a solid product. A phone call to ask about your product is tracking because it all…

You're identifying the wrong problem. Users aren't upset because they can't use social media for free while not being tracked, they're upset because they can't use social media without being tracked period.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#307

Post by zohch » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 6:00 PM UTC

freeone3000 wrote: post #305

zohch wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but I still don't understand what people who prefer not to have their eyeballs monetized are doing on Facebook.

Connecting with their friends and family.

They could just use something else, instead of using Facebook while complaining about it all the time how they don't want to use it because it monetizes their eyeballs.

Seems to me like using something else would be easier, or at least make for a happier life.

Like if I don't like spinnach but I really need to get some fiber, it seems like the simpler option is to find another way to get fiber, rather than eating spinnach while constantly moaning to the whole world how spinnach is just the worst.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#308

Post by after_care » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

boring_twenties wrote: post #304

fairity wrote: post #260

Be careful what you wish for. If ad publishers like Facebook generate less revenue per ad impression (which is what these tracking changes do), publishers will inevitably end up showing users more ads not less (to make up for the lost revenue).

Out of the first 12 posts in my facebook feed currently, three are ads (25%). Two of those ads are for the same exact thing FWIW. How many more ads could they possibly squeeze in before people just give up using the platform?

People’s attention is a marketplace. If only one platform increases their ads then likely people will move to other platforms. I think it’s more likely all platforms (or no platforms) will increase their ads because all social media will have this problem.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#309

Post by pseudalopex » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

aerosmile wrote: post #302

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"You want proof? Look at their financial statements." Homeopathy peddlers make a killing, so does the agile consultants and th catholic Church, if this is proof they must both be right? Just because someone made loads of money doesnt mean their claims are sciebtifivally valid.

I went out of my way not to give Facebook any moral high ground, and yet you still managed to get offended.

Snark isn't a sign of offense.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#310

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

mariusor wrote: post #276

imglorp wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really about wanted vs unwanted ads? How about tracking, aggregation, selling and reselling your data, and abandoned privacy therefrom? Malware? Bandwidth from downloading all the non-content? Burning cpu's to run the teraquads of javascript?

I do not want any ads. I'm using Firefox containers for isolating Facebook on regular websites, I liked 4 total pages, I removed most of the information from my profile, I have scrubbed 90% of my past activity. The only things I deliberately allow Fb to know are my friends and my old pictures. I feel like that is an equitable exchange for me using their website.

[deleted]