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

Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

amediaoperator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#11

Post by toss1 »

Surprising it is taking advertisers this long to wake up, considering the decades I've been reading articles on HN about the massive fraud rates from entire fraud ecosystems.

The saying in marketing used to be: "Half of all marketing dollars are wasted, but we never know which half".

In the internet, it seems to be more like "90% are wasted" and literally never even get a human impression, nevermind a human click-thru and sale.

What was always surprising to me was how the advertisers just went along with the scam. Perhaps as if the marketers' bonuses depended more on advertisement budget spent instead of sales increased.

If that's the case, what is making them catch on now?

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#12

Post by ashleyn »

Seems like important context behind the push for things like Web Environment Integrity (similar in concept to "trusted computing" if you were around for that controversy in the early 2000s): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing

If your service providers are funded by ads, and ads begin demanding "verified clicks", your service providers are greatly incentivised to begin pushing for locking down your ability to run what you want on your own hardware. Through manipulation of web standards, or through lobbying.

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#13

Post by pjc50 »

toss1 wrote: post #11

Surprising it is taking advertisers this long to wake up, considering the decades I've been reading articles on HN about the massive fraud rates from entire fraud ecosystems. The saying in marketing used to be: "Half of all marketing dollars are wasted, but we never know which half". In the internet, it seems to be more like "90% are wasted" and literally never even get a human impression, nevermind a human click-thr…

It was generally believed that "pivot to video" was entirely fraudulent.

What's happening now is the retreat from the open internet; users are either taking the Google AI search summary as gospel and not clicking through, or just going to chatgpt by themselves. Traffic from actual humans to non-FAANG pages is falling.

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#14

Post by blooalien »

toss1 wrote: post #11

Surprising it is taking advertisers this long to wake up, considering the decades I've been reading articles on HN about the massive fraud rates from entire fraud ecosystems. The saying in marketing used to be: "Half of all marketing dollars are wasted, but we never know which half". In the internet, it seems to be more like "90% are wasted" and literally never even get a human impression, nevermind a human click-thr…

> If that's the case, what is making them catch on now?

Perhaps the threat that "AI" will soon be the only "eyes" that see (and subsequently ignore) their online adverts?

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#15

Post by mananaysiempre »

pjc50 wrote: post #4
colesantiago wrote: post #2

Analogue hole. This 'Verified Clicks' doesn't make sense. What makes a click 'verified', bots can still click links with browser use anyway and you will not be able to tell.

"Please drink verification can" (Black Mirror)

Not Black Mirror, 2013 vintage 4chan.

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#16

Post by kijin »

toss1 wrote: post #11

Surprising it is taking advertisers this long to wake up, considering the decades I've been reading articles on HN about the massive fraud rates from entire fraud ecosystems. The saying in marketing used to be: "Half of all marketing dollars are wasted, but we never know which half". In the internet, it seems to be more like "90% are wasted" and literally never even get a human impression, nevermind a human click-thr…

Back when 90% of ad spending was wasted, they still made money from the 10% that resulted in sales. That expectation was built into the CPM/CPC, and hence the ad budget.

With the amount of bot traffic I'm seeing these days, I would guess that the waste ratio is more like 99% now. That means a 90% reduction in conversions for the same ad budget. Surely someone is feeling the difference.

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#17

Post by garciasn »

Retr0id wrote: post #9
garciasn wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.ph/PIrQi The article is about email marketing. Some company has a proprietary algorithm that purportedly detects whether a click is legitimate based on 8y of development and data collection. It’s definitely a race against the growing capabilities of the models in use and one that will be very difficult to win which is why there has been a significant push toward verification across the Internet—not be…

And I have a proprietary algorithm that can identify whether Brooklyn Bridge is up for sale or not.

I mean it’s a marketing PR piece that’s likely targeted toward CMOs who are in love with email marketing.

Email marketing is inexpensive, easier to measure, relies on the ridiculous CDPs and ESPs they’ve been tricked into investing in, and the measured numbers are larger than other digital channels.

The problem isn’t that bots are clicking, it’s that those big numbers aren’t going up and to the right in a reliable way any longer and those CMOs need to change how they’re measuring media.

At the end of the day, CMOs need to be measuring contribution to revenue, not meaningless marketing metrics the rest of the C-suite doesn’t give the slightest of fucks about. But that’s super hard for most organizations without competent Marketing Science or capable agencies, and it’s seemingly expensive because their budgets are already tight from all of the fly-by-night shit they’re over invested in. So; they continue to push what they know as well as chip away at their budgets with silly providers who provide little value instead of biting the bullet and doing the right thing.

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#18

Post by blooalien »

Retr0id wrote: post #9
garciasn wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.ph/PIrQi The article is about email marketing. Some company has a proprietary algorithm that purportedly detects whether a click is legitimate based on 8y of development and data collection. It’s definitely a race against the growing capabilities of the models in use and one that will be very difficult to win which is why there has been a significant push toward verification across the Internet—not be…

And I have a proprietary algorithm that can identify whether Brooklyn Bridge is up for sale or not.

> ... whether Brooklyn Bridge is up for sale or not.

My "Magic 8-Ball" says: "Signs point to yes."

Re: Advertisers Could Soon Demand 'Verified Clicks'

#19

Post by CodesInChaos »

ashleyn wrote: post #12

Seems like important context behind the push for things like Web Environment Integrity (similar in concept to "trusted computing" if you were around for that controversy in the early 2000s): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing If your service providers are funded by ads, and ads begin demanding "verified clicks", your service providers are greatly in…

BTW Google had another go at forcing Treacherous Computing on people. This time it's a reCAPTCHA successor, which requires the user to scan a QR code using a Google/Apple owned phone.
Post reply on HN