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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 632 posts

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

#471

Post by tobr »

sturza wrote: post #386
tobr wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 30-40 years old, male and live in a certain region. And that's information that would help advertisers Region, sure, that makes sense for a local business. But targeting gender or age is discrimination.

how would you sell bras for women over 50?

First of all, what makes a bra only suitable if you are over 50, other than discrimination?

You can always find an example of a product that is easier to sell to a specific niche group of people. That doesn’t give the advertiser the right to know that fact about everyone. For the specific case of bras - how would you sell bras for women with large breasts if you don’t know who has large breasts? Do you think that slight inconvenience on behalf of the advertiser should give them the right to keep a database of everyone’s cup size?

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

#472

Post by TheAceOfHearts »

leokennis wrote: post #389
air7 wrote: post #366

I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…

Re: blocking ads guilt free: Not that long ago someone posted this beautiful Banksy quote about it on HN: > “People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They ar…

In the same spirit, I saw this post recently[0]:

"All institutions & organizations must shut the hell up. To all egregores: you do not speak unless spoken to, and I will NEVER speak to you. I do not want to hear 'thank you' from a corporation. I am a divine being : you are a construct. You have no right to speak in my holy tongue."

[0] https://twitter.com/St_Rev/status/1413780183283294208

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

#473

Post by Animats »

jimkleiber wrote: post #385
air7 wrote: post #366

I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…

Your post inspires me to look at it from a real-world analogy. If I imagine that online ads are the same as offline ads, I start to think about what offline ad tracking would look like. I imagine cameras being on the streets to watch me walk down the street, following me to different stores to see what I buy, with whom I meet, and other activities to inform which billboards/street advertisements should exist. I think…

physically remove an ad to open a door to a building

"Oh, that's where it is. I couldn't find the product because the ad was in the way." Grocery store standalone displays partially blocking aisles and shelves are a pain during busy periods. You get cart jams.

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

#474

Post by archduck »

afavour wrote: post #402
BeetleB wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You see it today with newspaper paywalls and the like. Curious example, since this was the case for most of the history of journalism.

Not entirely, historically newspapers had both ads and a sale price. That price was subsidised by ads. But you’re right that it’s not so clear. Maybe a more straightforward example is broadcast TV: ABC, NBC and the like. Free at delivery, paid for by ads.

Classifieds were a huge source of income as well.

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

#475

Post by Auracle »

frickinLasers wrote: post #465
Auracle wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a photographer, and I right now I’m targeting local teenagers and their moms for high school senior portrait sessions. I would think they’d rather see that, be reminded it’s time to get them done, and possibly learn about a better photographer than seeing an ad for an ice cream maker or what have you.

Not a mom, but if I want to learn about a better [photographer/plumber/mechanic/whatever] I will use the tools that list and attempt to give accurate information about businesses (yelp, angi, BBB, ?), inadequate though they may be. My brain doesn't register your ad. If it does, I'm probably less likely to consider your business, because you shoved an intrusive internet ad in my face.

I mostly "boost" posts to my page, for what it's worth.

Also, all three of those are worthless for photographers. We're not like a plumber where as long as the job is done right and priced well you're good. Our style is why you're hiring us, so an ad showing one of my images makes a lot of sense.

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

#476

Post by [deleted] »

r00fus wrote: post #456
dfrankow wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is prisonner's dilemma / tragedy of the commons. The best-performing ads made more money, anyone who didn't grab attention enough would be strongly pushed towards grabbing more attention by industry norms. It was rational for every individual to grab more attention, but it was bad for the group. Prisoner's dilemma problems are hard to solve.

It's solved by banning that group/activity. When the value proposition is net-negative, there should be curbs on such activity.

[deleted]

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

#477

Post by smegger001 »

ElFitz wrote: post #468
leokennis wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re: blocking ads guilt free: Not that long ago someone posted this beautiful Banksy quote about it on HN: > “People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They ar…

> But don’t pretend that by offering your site for free and me using it for free somehow requires me to see shitty ads. If you want my money, ask for it. If your content is worth it I’ll pay for it. One of my personal favorites: movie theatres. You pay, a handsome amount of money, to see a movie, once, and if you happen to have the weird idea of not be just late enough to the movie, you get the wonderful, once in a l…

I went to the theatre last weekend (first time since before the late unpleasantness) and showed up about ten minutes after the posted showtime. The attendant at the ticket booth confused asked "are you sure you don't want the next showing that one has already started". I confirmed no I wanted the one that had "started". I didn't miss any movie though just the ads.

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

#478

Post by Auracle »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #364
Auracle wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a photographer, and I right now I’m targeting local teenagers and their moms for high school senior portrait sessions. I would think they’d rather see that, be reminded it’s time to get them done, and possibly learn about a better photographer than seeing an ad for an ice cream maker or what have you.

In other words you want to manipulate them into buying something they wouldn’t have if they hadn’t seen your ad. That doesn’t sound like a good thing for the person on the other side of the transaction.

Most people (in my area) hire a photographer to take senior photos. They may hire me because they see my ad instead of someone else they already know of because they like my work better.

Or, let's say they decided to just do it on their own/have a friend do it...until they see one of my images and go "wow."

The second may be spending money when they wouldn't, but that's pretty rare. If they do it's because they decided it was worth it. The others are just being shown another option that they might not have known existed, meaning they're more informed about where they're going to spend their money.

I don't see who is getting hurt in this scenario. I get work that I need to survive and they're getting photos that they're excited about.

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

#479

Post by rhizome »

air7 wrote: post #366

I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…

Run ads internally for a period of time disconnected from the number of clicks. It's worked well for decades. Basically, to reduce the integration of ads and browsers.

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

#480

Post by rchaud »

celestialcheese wrote: post #359
rchaud wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We go back to the stone age. Me make product ('content'). You want product. You pay money. Patreon, paid newsletters and paid news subscriptions are all mature industries now. Why do we act like the sky's going to fall if the spigot of useless memes, influencer primping and political propaganda gets turned off?

Wait. Influencer pimping is going to get significantly worse in a "3rd party tracking-free" world. Coupon codes and "link in bio" are one of the few channels that aren't affected by this.

Influencers have direct deals from sponsors, so the sponsors are less reliant on FB's ad-targeting capabilities.

Influencers get their own vanity URLs with discounts and tracking attached, so attribution is no issue, beyond the friction of the extra 'link in bio' step. It'll be recorded accurately whether or not the vendor's site has the Facebook Pixel installed.

Post reply on HN