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

After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

digiday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 464 posts

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#171

Post by lbotos »

RandallBrown wrote: post #141
Sharlin wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But do people generally think that targeted ads are especially accurate? If anything, I’d think people are bothered by all that privacy invasion and still getting completely irrelevant ads!

My Facebook/Instagram are stunningly on point. I've even bought a few things from them.

I want to echo this. I need a new bag and gym clothes. Instagram is hitting me hard with this. I haven't consciously shopped for them either, but I assume I've looked at enough content to get me in those buckets. I am considering getting one of the bags they've shown me.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#172

Post by Quinner »

piquadrat wrote: post #144
duxup wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does make sense the way you describe it. But the ads I see are way off target. Hell Google's news ... AI or whatever they're doing has been absolutely convinced I'm a Nebraska Cornhuskers fan, probabbly because my team plays them and I google something about them once in a while.... but in the past even when I told Google directly "I don't want to see stories about Nebraska Cornhuskers" ... after a while it again…

Google News for the longest time kept showing me updates for the Fremantle Dockers, an Australian football team (I'm Swiss, and never set foot on Australian soil). I wonder why...

Do you use / search for information about Docker (the container platform)?

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#173

Post by alkonaut »

cm2012 wrote: post #146

It's amazing how so many people who no knowledge of online advertising post so confidently in these threads. Since I have a lot of experience with targeted ads, it makes me trust the comments on topics I'm not an expert on less.

I think it's fair to say that fear is always a product of not knowing. But when it comes to integrity and privacy online I think history has tought us that it's usually worse than we fear. Also: I think people (especially in adtech) underestimate the privacy people expect online.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#174

Post by paulsutter »

bitofhope wrote: post #6

I honestly would not be surprised if the difference in effectiveness of targeted vs untargeted advertisement turns out to be none, negligible or even unfavorable to targeted. Sure, NYT is not enough data to be significant, especially when compensating for my confirmation bias, but I would really like to see more sites stop tracking, at least from an ethical standpoint.

Examples of effective targeting:

- Intent targeting via search remains by far the most effective form of targeting. Type life insurance into Google, very high value ads. Mortgage, a car model, etc. This is why Google is so valuable.

- For display, the biggest lift from targeting is via retargeting (showing you the shirt you considered on a commerce site)

New York Times was definitely using ad exchanges only for their remnant inventory, so there is nothing surprising or interesting about this article.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#175

Post by BoorishBears »

cyborgx7 wrote: post #21
BoorishBears wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And all the other software developers working on things directly and indirectly funded by that industry should what? Take up knitting?

If you already acknowledge that it's just a bullshit job because people need to make money to live, maybe they could do something that is not actively harmful.

What the fuck are you talking about? How many people in this industry indirectly rely on companies like Google for employment?

What percentage of mobile app development is paid for with ads?

What percentage of web development is paid for with ads?

How many open source projects are contributed to by developers who work at companies that rely on ads to you, pay their actual bills

How many “side projects” on this site are paid for with ads

How many projects are B2B where the other B is in ads, or relied on ads, or relies on something that relies on ads.

Sometimes I love HN but then I remember how, frankly, full of shit some people are.

We’ve built this house of cards on ads. If ads go, the industry will collapse into a shadow of itself and half of you won’t get to eat.

It’s nice to act like ads are just this evil thing devs invented but surprise surprise, they’re a form of payment because people don’t like to pay for stuff.

Remove the way people pay for stuff and suddenly this industry where you make 6 figures for jerking off to javascript frameworks doesn’t make sense.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#176

Post by snowwrestler »

Tsubasachan wrote: post #140
bitofhope wrote: post #6

I honestly would not be surprised if the difference in effectiveness of targeted vs untargeted advertisement turns out to be none, negligible or even unfavorable to targeted. Sure, NYT is not enough data to be significant, especially when compensating for my confirmation bias, but I would really like to see more sites stop tracking, at least from an ethical standpoint.

What if I told you the NYT has been doing "untargeted" advertising for 150 years? Besides if you advertise in the NYT you ARE technically targeting people: namely NYT readers. Thats a demographic right there. And a lucrative one.

National newspapers have several ways to target print ads:

- Calendar: You can buy an ad for one day, a whole week, the weekend, just Sunday, etc.

- Section: You can run your ad in the Travel section instead of Sports.

- Region: For national papers, you can have your ad printed in only one region--for example buying a full-page NY Times ad that is only printed in the papers printed in DC.

- Edition: Papers use to run a morning edition and an updated afternoon and evening edition. Some papers now produce a free thin version that is handed out free to commuters.

Big papers have also long offered ad campaign management services, where you work with their staff to optimize a campaign (including creative sometimes) to target the audience you want.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#177

Post by JoeAltmaier »

BoorishBears wrote: post #175
cyborgx7 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you already acknowledge that it's just a bullshit job because people need to make money to live, maybe they could do something that is not actively harmful.

What the fuck are you talking about? How many people in this industry indirectly rely on companies like Google for employment? What percentage of mobile app development is paid for with ads? What percentage of web development is paid for with ads? How many open source projects are contributed to by developers who work at companies that rely on ads to you, pay their actual bills How many “side projects” on this site a…

Take it down a notch?

Lots of sites sell things, which is enough reason to make those sites. Millions of sites are representing businesses (restaurant etc). No, the web isn't going away because joe shmoe can't put up ads. Its so cheap to put up a website anyway, folks do it for many reasons.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#178

Post by seba_dos1 »

piquadrat wrote: post #144
duxup wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does make sense the way you describe it. But the ads I see are way off target. Hell Google's news ... AI or whatever they're doing has been absolutely convinced I'm a Nebraska Cornhuskers fan, probabbly because my team plays them and I google something about them once in a while.... but in the past even when I told Google directly "I don't want to see stories about Nebraska Cornhuskers" ... after a while it again…

Google News for the longest time kept showing me updates for the Fremantle Dockers, an Australian football team (I'm Swiss, and never set foot on Australian soil). I wonder why...

Maemo user? :D

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#179

Post by asr »

CPLX wrote: post #159
tzs wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You be surprised how much less sophisticated Googles and Facebooks ad targeting is! If Google's ability to discern my interests for ads is as bad as is their ability to discern my interests for news, then I would not be surprised. I have never been aware of listening to any music by the band "Foo Fighters". I've almost certainly heard their songs in passing, but never in a context that gave me the name of the band.…

Oddly enough, I recently have been seeing an onslaught of Foo Fighters stories on Google news. I am in fact a music fan and musician who knows their songs but I have no special interest in them. I wonder if something about them triggers some runway like function in Google’s algorithm.

Obviously Google treats "foo" as a placeholder and returns these stories whenever it thinks the user might be interested in a story about a conflict.

Re: After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

#180

Post by reaperducer »

distances wrote: post #107
rusk wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience of targeted advertising is Amazon trying to sell me things I’ve already bought ...

And Booking pushing advertisements for the exact same hotel I've just checked on their service. I can't understand how that would seem like a good idea to anyone.

And Booking pushing advertisements for the exact same hotel I've just checked on their service. I can't understand how that would seem like a good idea to anyone.

This happened to me just last week. Unfortunately, it's the least of Booking's user-hostile traits.

Like sending me e-mails pestering me to review a hotel I checked into less than an hour before.

Or flashing "Hurry! Only 1 room left!" when I know for a fact that the hotel I'm inquiring about is 90% empty.

Or flashing "23 people booked this hotel in the last 24 hours!" when I know the inn only has 4 rooms and is in probably the lest popular destination in North America.

Unfortunately, there's a particular place I have to travel to which only has one motel within 70 miles, and the only way to book a room in advance is through Booking.

Post reply on HN