Tech-savvy audiences block Google Analytics

Post by zaphar » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 3:39 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #423

mgh2 wrote: post #377

Why is this even at the front page of HN? I give them credit for the brilliant marketing. This is an ad disguised as an article targeting the "tech savvy" by bundling HN and Reddit (a truth + a lie makes the statement more true), a common clickbait tactic > This makes sense especially considering how difficult it is to install an adblocker on Chrome, the most popular browser on mobile devices. Nope, it is really easy…

Well, for extra irony, I use the Steven Black /etc/hosts content to block on the order of 70,000 domain names, and plausible.io is in there. So I can't even read the article because I'm one of the people it describes.

Post by nitrogen » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #444

tehjoker wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is how it is with documentaries. Just because they are getting lower viewing numbers doesn't mean you shouldn't keep promoting them. Certainly there should be a mix of entertainment and public interest stuff, but following audience preferences for entertainment creates a feedback loop that damages society.

Things like documentaries are mostly watched by already well-off people (mostly middle class and up). In Germany, public TV is paid for by (nearly?) every household. [0] Forcing everyone, including poor people, to subsidize rich people's taste for documentaries seems a bit.. off? Similar arguments apply to public libraries and opera houses, though at least there the financing is done mostly via progressive taxation.…

Post by monkpit » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

q-big wrote: post #353

mattmanser wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you say that, but isn't that exactly why Netflix got rid of ratings? All the documentaries were getting really high ratings, so would display highly in searches, but not many people actually watched them. It's the same for most content, I read a huge amount. I do read some intellectual books, but only occasionally. The rest of the time I read utter, thoroughly entertaining, trash. I don't want to read about an…

> Well, you say that, but isn't that exactly why Netflix got rid of ratings? > All the documentaries were getting really high ratings, so would display highly in searches, but not many people actually watched them. This rather shows that ratings do work, but are used wrongly for giving recommendations: If you want to create suggestions for a user, in many case the wrong answer is "suggest what has really high ratings…

Post by monkpit » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 3:47 PM UTC

turbinerneiter wrote: post #57

scrollaway wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'd just end up costing the high quality content providers money. Ads wouldn't just get cheaper for them. On the contrary, clicking only on trash, and having the high quality content have a much higher signal-to-noise ratio would have the desired effect. Maybe.

The idea is not so much of clicking on high quality content ads, but sending visits to high quality content pages and click on the ads of those pages, to get them more money. Would obviously stop working if the sales after the ad click are not made. But, hey this isn't a gameplan, this was just a "what if" :D

Post by ghostpepper » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 3:49 PM UTC