Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers • Hacker News Board

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#41

Post by snowpid » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 9:47 AM UTC

a2128 wrote: post #15

This reads like a tragic story. Once you've collected enough data on every internet user out there to group them into different advertising cohorts, the remaining ungrouped users, by process of elimination (due to privacy or targeted advertising laws), are children; and now they can be targeted just as easily.

" nce you've collected enough data on every internet user " I guess by legal I can force companies not to collect data from me. (I am not a kid). I just happen not to live in the US. But this article reads more like a US problem.

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#42

Post by rendaw » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 9:48 AM UTC

imiric wrote: post #22

"We're sorry." This is not surprising. Google has a history violating the privacy of and targetting ads to not only teenagers, but children: - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/business/youtube-ads-kids... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/business/media/youtube-ki... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/20/business/media/google-you... - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/technology/google-youtube... - https://www.n…

In case anyone replies with "well all companies are bad in some way"... scale is also a factor here. Even if Google does the same things as a small family owned business, they have significantly greater ability to inflict harm.

And I'm not sure I buy that all companies are bad. A lot of companies are earnest and customer-focused when they're smaller and desperate for more users. And I've worked at many companies which were bumbling but not really manipulative or malicious.

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#43

Post by meiraleal » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 9:49 AM UTC

brainwad wrote: post #10

esperent wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem is that it's targeted advertising of children.

So is all the advertising run during morning cartoons, and that targets an even younger demo than 13-17 year olds.

What does wad mean? Dead?

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#44

Post by meiraleal » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 9:50 AM UTC

edpichler wrote: post #18

Market data science is tragically fascinating. It's a superpower, capable of being used for eithger good or bad.

By good you mean profit?

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#45

Post by stephenr » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 9:51 AM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #30

imiric wrote: post #22

"We're sorry." This is not surprising. Google has a history violating the privacy of and targetting ads to not only teenagers, but children: - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/business/youtube-ads-kids... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/business/media/youtube-ki... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/20/business/media/google-you... - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/technology/google-youtube... - https://www.n…

Not allowing advertising to children I think isn't the correct route for society. Instead we should prevent children having money. Until you're 16, you may not handle money. You may not buy things for money. You may not sell things. You may not enter into contracts to exchange money. Your parents however can do all of those things on your behalf. At that point, advertising to children no longer is relevant - the chil…

Ah yes, why let children learn about money and responsibility, much better to treat them like pets so that advertising scumbags don't have a reason to target them.

The mental gymnastics people will do to avoid having to admit that daddy Google is a creepy advertising company never ceases to astound me.

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#46

Post by HenryBemis » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 9:54 AM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #30

imiric wrote: post #22

"We're sorry." This is not surprising. Google has a history violating the privacy of and targetting ads to not only teenagers, but children: - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/business/youtube-ads-kids... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/business/media/youtube-ki... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/20/business/media/google-you... - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/technology/google-youtube... - https://www.n…

Not allowing advertising to children I think isn't the correct route for society. Instead we should prevent children having money. Until you're 16, you may not handle money. You may not buy things for money. You may not sell things. You may not enter into contracts to exchange money. Your parents however can do all of those things on your behalf. At that point, advertising to children no longer is relevant - the chil…

There are so many things wrong with your post!! In your spirit, we should be able to sell heroin to kids, just not give them money, only the first free dose (that's that all the blinking and sounds on the ads do to their brains). I had a colleague once that said exactly that (and he effing meant it) "if selling heroin to kids was legal, I would be outside a school right now - it's their parents' problem" (yes he has kids)(at the time he was a IT contractor making GBP 1200 per day - and that was 8 years ago)(there are scum and scum.. and then there was him).

Anyway.. we (should) protect kids as much as possible from as many possible risks and threats (old and new).

(also, go see a therapist, you need help)

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#47

Post by iamacyborg » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 10:01 AM UTC

Ylpertnodi wrote: post #20

miki123211 wrote: post #16

Funnily enough, this is one case where contextual advertising would actually work better than what we have now. With contextual advertising, you could very easily target children with very specific interests and/or in specific age groups by targeting the ads at the videos they most often watch.

> this is one case where contextual advertising would actually work better than what we have now. No. No. No. That a) would involve tracking and b) what we have now are ads based on what you bought/ have looked at. I already have an 'x', why would i want more ads for it...or ads for what some algorithm thinks i might be interested in, related to it. Unless I choose to.

Contextual ads wouldn’t require tracking as it’s just advertising based on the page context, ie a video about a videogame will have different ads than an article about remortgaging.

There should probably be laws in place to prevent advertising targeting children though, regardless of the advertising mechanism.

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#48

Post by GuB-42 » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 10:03 AM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #30

imiric wrote: post #22

"We're sorry." This is not surprising. Google has a history violating the privacy of and targetting ads to not only teenagers, but children: - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/business/youtube-ads-kids... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/business/media/youtube-ki... - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/20/business/media/google-you... - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/technology/google-youtube... - https://www.n…

Not allowing advertising to children I think isn't the correct route for society. Instead we should prevent children having money. Until you're 16, you may not handle money. You may not buy things for money. You may not sell things. You may not enter into contracts to exchange money. Your parents however can do all of those things on your behalf. At that point, advertising to children no longer is relevant - the chil…

It is already the case, more or less. Parents manage their children assets, including money, and children abilities to enter into contract is very limited. They can manipulate money, but only if they parents let them, and they usually do, because it would be crazy not to.

It changes nothing to the situation with ads. Ads for children actually target the parents, manipulating children so that they can in turn manipulate their parents. It can be terrible, for example by advertising for something fashionable to wear at school, too expensive for the child allowance, they expect their parents to buy it, because if they don't their kids may get bullied. Not giving children access to money won't solve this problem, quite the opposite actually, if it was their money, they could realize how overpriced the thing is and how much they could do by spending it elsewhere.

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#49

Post by Xen9 » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 10:06 AM UTC

gU9x3u8XmQNG wrote: post #14

nonrandomstring wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be very grateful if you could elaborate or link to a relevant source as this is rather interesting.

Second this! Quite interesting. @Xen9 please follow up!

My mind would be the source. This is actually one of my least confident comments; I was almost not going to post it. I consider putting a text together later.

Regardless—I've observed, to one example, a young girl I know wanting to buy horse toys to make YouTube horse videos with play & interest in horses being a side motive. The adults are proud of her basically being an instrument of marketing. On one hand, making your own video's at young age is of course something to be proud of and encouragement for children sounds healthy.

Yet this behaviour also has no principles outside "status games." Even knowing that girls of young age are particularly prone to socialization & conformity, one can compare this to "cool new toy everyone has" trope to notice that this dark evolution would be closer to "being a popular advertisement like everyone else" which partly the South Park movie Cred portrays aptly.

Re: Google and Meta struck secret ads deal to target teenagers

#50

Post by Zambyte » Thu, Aug 08, 2024, 10:07 AM UTC

a2128 wrote: post #15

This reads like a tragic story. Once you've collected enough data on every internet user out there to group them into different advertising cohorts, the remaining ungrouped users, by process of elimination (due to privacy or targeted advertising laws), are children; and now they can be targeted just as easily.

We could also make it illegal to advertise to children at all. Wouldn't that be funny if all of us started clicking "I am below 18" :D