is there any chance facebook will improve in the future, in any way? both the increasingly terrible user experience and the company's shady practices seem like features rather than bugs at this point and to fix either would require a fundamental shift that i can't imagine happening.
Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
121–130 of 185 posts
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you (and why do people in general) not use server logs for analytics of this sort? Seems like it might show requests that failed to get to the point of processing the analytics JS as well as those running adblockers.
Not sure how I’d set up server logging on a serverless site. (Not being snarky; I really don’t know.) I accept that GA will be off +/-10% because it’s clientside. Don’t need total accuracy to make marketing decisions.
Yes but you’re saying twitter say their metrics are off by a factor of 5 because it’s not running the GA JS. If you wanted to properly investigate that looking at the server logs would probably give a better idea in this case.
I guess with serverless you should be able to see this either with your own logging or perhaps on AWS with Cloudwatch? (no idea as I’ve not used it).
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, I thought something like 40% of browsers run adblockers, and possibly a disproportionate amount in your demographics. That could explain the bulk if the difference.
That’s a good point! Twitter’s tracking is almost perfect with their link shortener. I wonder if/when adblockers will take care of that as well (resolve the link once then cache it).
> Twitter’s tracking is almost perfect with their link shortener.
Perfect for measuring raw HTTP requests, sure, but if you post a link to a brand new, zero-follower account you'll still get a few dozen bots that are doing link analysis against the Twitter firehose (well, a random sampling of it).
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've also stopped using it. I just went there for the first time in months and counted the sponsored posts. They appear every 4, 5 or 6 posts. Are you sure you don't mistake sponsored post for real ones?
I'm also a very infrequent user. I just checked my feed very carefully, making sure each photo was from someone I was following, and it was over 50 posts before I saw an ad.
Are you on the mobile app or the website?
I get an ad every 3-4 posts on the app, but none on the site.
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Youtube's autoplay actually works for some people. They want to watch the next video many times. It's far different from let them click on this by mistake
I assume parent was referring to... gets up and walks away, while youtube continues to autoplay
Surely though that's different from fake likes assuming the advertiser is aware of it.
I feel like YouTube by now is more similar to TV advertising, you take in consideration that people could just have the tv on in the background while doing something else or going around the house. Unless you don't know what you are doing with your advertising budget of course.
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a direct response marketer, and only manage ad campaigns that provably generate revenue. Over $10,000,000 spend across more than a dozen companies. I can tell you that for many products Facebook absolutely outperforms Google.
It would be more interesting to know actual proportions. I don’t believe FB or G will outperform other in all cases all the time.
FB and G together make up about 85% of all new online marketing spend.
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you (and why do people in general) not use server logs for analytics of this sort? Seems like it might show requests that failed to get to the point of processing the analytics JS as well as those running adblockers.
Not sure how I’d set up server logging on a serverless site. (Not being snarky; I really don’t know.) I accept that GA will be off +/-10% because it’s clientside. Don’t need total accuracy to make marketing decisions.
"Serverless"... someone's running a server. What kind? For instance, if you're on AWS and an ELB is involved, you can set up ELB logging to S3.
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't seem knowledgable about quarterly earnings reports.
You are correct, no company has ever filed a "misrepresenting" earnings report ever, certainly not ones that share the same high moral standards as Facebook.
Cooking the books is far worse than pushing misleading metrics to customers, at least as far as corporate ethics goes. The risks would be enormous, and the benefit would be temporarily propping up the stock price, which is not all that helpful if you aren't currently raising money. Facebook most likely isn't defrauding investors simply because it goes against Facebook's interests to do so.
Of course, companies come up with their own metrics all the time, but they have to be published alongside GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) metrics.
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Revenue and users are both increasing year over year.
Do shareholders also care whether the revenue is accelerating or will they be happy if it's just increasing?
They prefer the former, but the latter means FB is by no means imploding (losing users).
Re: Facebook lured advertisers by inflating video ad-watch times: lawsuit
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume parent was referring to... gets up and walks away, while youtube continues to autoplay
Surely though that's different from fake likes assuming the advertiser is aware of it. I feel like YouTube by now is more similar to TV advertising, you take in consideration that people could just have the tv on in the background while doing something else or going around the house. Unless you don't know what you are doing with your advertising budget of course.
I don't if advertisers are thinking of it like TV but I believe you're right. Many people I know, including myself, leave videos running while working it gaming. It's not our primary focus, but it's there in the background.
Of course I run a malware blocker, I mean ad blocker, so I'm not seeing those ads served by malware networks.