31–40 of 44 posts
> Facebook/Instagram ad prices are already skyrocketing due to Apple's update.
So that adds a little wrinkle. I don't have a FB account and certainly don't advertise there, just saying.
While I do support this change from a users' perspective, I find it hard to believe Facebook's official reason to "honor users' choices". What's the real motivation behind this Facebook update?
1. Facebook believed that the best thing for users was to have one account and identity across all services 2. Users expressed that they thought this was terrible 3. Facebook reconsidered, now thinks it's best to support accounts that aren't linked
How is this not fraud? Why hasn't Facebook been fined billions of dollars and its executives charged criminally for doing this repeatedly? I've (begrudgingly) placed Facebook ads trying to claw my way from the bottom. If these are funny numbers, I want my money back! Give me my money, Mr. Zuckerberg.
I think this would only be fraud if they counted users in this manner and then lied and said they didn't. Sucks to be buying FB ads right now because they're gonna be worth much less but I don't think it's fraud as long as they're upfront about it.
I'm reminded of how they count video engagement and I'm still salty about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advertisers are not paying for reach, they are paying for CPM and CPC. Advertisers are not double charged for clicks or impressions, because neither metric promises a unique person. Facebook already documents this issue with their biz account vs personal accounts: > For example, this means that if someone saw a post while using their business Page and then switched to their personal profile and saw the same post, we…
Removed the price reference to focus on the article's main point. Honestly it's a bit frustrating when you've spent hours researching something and reached the HN front page to have someone tear you apart over a small speculation at the bottom of the piece. But that's HN, I guess. Thank you for the correction.
While I do support this change from a users' perspective, I find it hard to believe Facebook's official reason to "honor users' choices". What's the real motivation behind this Facebook update?
The cause is likely not money or goodwill: it’s legal privacy rulings. GDPR and the FCO ruling [1] have made it so cross-platform data (like the IG-FB data here to guess if two ad spend users are the same) isn’t allowed without explicit consent. My guess is that’s what’s driving this. [1]. https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/7/18215143/facebook-whatsapp...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advertisers are not paying for reach, they are paying for CPM and CPC. Advertisers are not double charged for clicks or impressions, because neither metric promises a unique person. Facebook already documents this issue with their biz account vs personal accounts: > For example, this means that if someone saw a post while using their business Page and then switched to their personal profile and saw the same post, we…
Removed the price reference to focus on the article's main point. Honestly it's a bit frustrating when you've spent hours researching something and reached the HN front page to have someone tear you apart over a small speculation at the bottom of the piece. But that's HN, I guess. Thank you for the correction.
> First of all, understand that when you advertise on Facebook, you are reaching accounts, not people.
This has always been true, since biz views were counted differently than personal. Facebook has never claimed otherwise.
> we may see advertisers misled in many ways, such as thinking they're reaching more people than they are if they look at their unique link clicks metrics.
Why would advertisers be misled? You linked to the documentation on how Facebook is transparent with their accounting. Advertisers can clearly see how this is calculated.
You're making a lot of noise about nothing...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Removed the price reference to focus on the article's main point. Honestly it's a bit frustrating when you've spent hours researching something and reached the HN front page to have someone tear you apart over a small speculation at the bottom of the piece. But that's HN, I guess. Thank you for the correction.
The whole premise is that this change is a change we should care about, but I'm not seeing how its a difference to status quo. > First of all, understand that when you advertise on Facebook, you are reaching accounts, not people. This has always been true, since biz views were counted differently than personal. Facebook has never claimed otherwise. > we may see advertisers misled in many ways, such as thinking they'r…
Do you have any evidence that the average advertiser can "clearly see" how this is calculated? Try this: Go to any Facebook Ads group, DM 10 advertisers and ask them if the "Impression" metric tracks accounts or people. See what % of them reply confused.
Second, it appears that you haven't ran Facebook Ads at all. When you see your ad set performance, one of the primary columns you see is "Reach". If you hover over, you'll see this:
> Reach > The number of people who saw your ads at least once. Reach is different to impressions, which may include multiple views of your ads by the same people.
My argument is that Facebook is changing the definition of "people" to "accounts". If you are the SAME ad both on Facebook and Instagram, Facebook will report your reach as "2" (compared to "1", as it was before the change). How is this "noise about nothing"?
Third, the documentation you linked me to has been recently updated to reflect the news release Facebook announced. This information hasn't always been there.
Your arguments made sense at the beginning (with regards to the "double pricing" argument) but they appear extremely biased now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole premise is that this change is a change we should care about, but I'm not seeing how its a difference to status quo. > First of all, understand that when you advertise on Facebook, you are reaching accounts, not people. This has always been true, since biz views were counted differently than personal. Facebook has never claimed otherwise. > we may see advertisers misled in many ways, such as thinking they'r…
> Advertisers can clearly see how this is calculated. Do you have any evidence that the average advertiser can "clearly see" how this is calculated? Try this: Go to any Facebook Ads group, DM 10 advertisers and ask them if the "Impression" metric tracks accounts or people. See what % of them reply confused. Second, it appears that you haven't ran Facebook Ads at all. When you see your ad set performance, one of the p…
We already discussed: "The number of people who saw your ads at least once."
Facebook provides a link to what they define is "people" and provide an example of this specific situation we are discussing [1]. We can even look back to Dec 2020 to see this definition [2], which is way before the announcement published.
Unfortunately, Facebook seems to of shuffled around their biz documentation page, so I can't easily find a direct source on wayback machine, but reachlocal.com in 2017 [3] published a blog article describing Facebook impressions as per view.
Please explain what there is to be mad about? There are no definition changes. Advertisers have always known that impressions were views. Advertisers have always known that there can be duplicate "reaches" due to 1 human managing multiple accounts (biz vs personal).
[0] - https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6320?hl=en [1] - https://www.facebook.com/business/help/283579896000936 [2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20201223180727/https://www.faceb... [3] - https://blog.reachlocal.com/facebook-advertising-terms-you-n...