Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
1–10 of 94 posts
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#2Won't this just lead to "laundering" platforms like what happened with Whois?
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#3Won't this just lead to "laundering" platforms like what happened with Whois?
yes. Added friction is still typically good in an adversarial problem like this one. This won't fix the problem forever but will weed out certain actors due to extra effort.
In other words, it's a step in the right direction, good for twitter.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#4This only applies to overt ads which are hardly the problem. It does nothing to mitigate the armies of astroturfers influencing public opinion.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#5This is going to give away a huge competitive advantage for good marketers.
If I know my political ads are most effective with Women, 45-65, who are Hispanic, and that's where I'm focusing my spend....
Is it fair for the opponent to have that information? If they give that level of detail for political ads, I hope they at least spare startup businesses who are still researching to find their ideal audience.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#6This only applies to overt ads which are hardly the problem. It does nothing to mitigate the armies of astroturfers influencing public opinion.
Still, it's certainly a welcome change, and a step in the right direction.
I wonder what the best way to combat large-scale astroturfing on a platform like twitter would be; My first thought would be a rep system akin to those of StackOverflow or HN, but I'm not sure how you would implement it such that there's not a large impact on legitimate new users - there's no system like upvotes Twitter could use to stratify.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#7Won't this just lead to "laundering" platforms like what happened with Whois?
yes. Added friction is still typically good in an adversarial problem like this one. This won't fix the problem forever but will weed out certain actors due to extra effort. In other words, it's a step in the right direction, good for twitter.
yes good for twitter, it is a positive change. not sufficient by a country mile, like it or not there will have to be some legislative remedies if we are to avoid dire consequences.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#8Won't this just lead to "laundering" platforms like what happened with Whois?
Not necessarily. Twitter has the power to deny anyone they want from purchasing ads from them. WHOIS is not centrally controlled in the same way. Twitter could easily block "laundering" platforms from functioning simply by not allowing them to purchase advertisements.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#9Won't this just lead to "laundering" platforms like what happened with Whois?
This ad was purchased by Americans for America.
Re: Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend
#10This only applies to overt ads which are hardly the problem. It does nothing to mitigate the armies of astroturfers influencing public opinion.
Still, it's certainly a welcome change, and a step in the right direction. I wonder what the best way to combat large-scale astroturfing on a platform like twitter would be; My first thought would be a rep system akin to those of StackOverflow or HN, but I'm not sure how you would implement it such that there's not a large impact on legitimate new users - there's no system like upvotes Twitter could use to stratify.
I believe Reddit does have a problem with advertisers purchasing (or renting) accounts from established users who have enough karma/longevity to post in the various subreddits that block new users to avoid spam.