51–60 of 354 posts
The top-spent ad in the last 7 days included no targeting other than "nationwide, 18+." That seems folly, doesn't it? Huge waste?
From the insights tab, with a date range of the past year, the state where the second most ad money was spent was California (after Pennsylvania). California is not even close to being a swing state, afaik?
California has over 10 million people more than Texas. It’s huge, so absolute number comparisons are often confusing. As usual, XKCD (can’t find the comic) - https://x.com/xkcd/status/1339348000750104576?lang=en
(That tweet is excellent.)
In Norway it's forbidden with political ads on TV . Reasoning being that live images can have a huge influence, while also possibly being inflammatory and dumb down the debate. But main reason mainly is that it would give those with enough money to afford these "expensive tv ads" a leg up. However, this law hasn't been updated in decades. So it's still only TV ads that's illegal. So it feels like a quite arbitrary re…
Also media outlets are free to propagandize all day. You can't restrict that because we don't want to restrict freedom of the press. But then that begs the question, don't all companies and individuals have the same freedom of the press that media companies do?
Edit: my bad for generalizing all countries of Europe
Kudos to Google. We also need this for all the non-Google outlets.
Here's the equivalent from Meta: https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=active&a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd expect the demographics of google ad viewers to be more or less "the internet at large, minus a few markets like China were Google is much less prevalent, and a few groups techy enough to disproportionately run adblockers"
If I were in the Trump campaign I'd be targeting Facebook over Google by a fair margin. A lot of older folks live on there.
The purpose of a political ad is not to convince undecided people to vote for [party]. The number of undecideds is vanishingly small, so there's no ROI there. The purpose of a political ad is to convince people who have already picked a side to actually vote vs not voting. So you need to carefully target your "go vote" message to your own team.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are TV ads any different from MDG posters or the AP ads at bus stops? We allow the latter in Norway and they're not that much cheaper than TV ads.
They're different as in a video can influence you much stronger than a poster. But maybe you misunderstood me, my point was that the way we have it today isn't necessarily good either. Just curious about how one can give people good information, without it being too inflammatory, and without making an election a race about who has the most money.
We agree there should at least be one medium of advertising for political parties. But where do we draw the line?
For instance, I would be happy with making all ads plain text, standard font and size so that the ads won't abuse human attention by showing bright colors, happy images etc.
Interesting to compare the top ads when sorting "Amount spent: high to low" and "Number of times shown: high to low". Political ads from 4 years ago appear to have been shown many more times for much less cost. This year's ads seem considerably more expensive while also reaching a smaller audience.
From the insights tab, with a date range of the past year, the state where the second most ad money was spent was California (after Pennsylvania). California is not even close to being a swing state, afaik?
California is strongly "blue" on the national issues these days, but that doesn't mean that there aren't hotly contested elections and ballot measures at issue within the state. Seperately, it brings potential as a source of funding to spend elsewhere specifically because some of the national questions aren't really open. If you are confident in the ROI, you can run ads there to drive fundraising -- especially early…
The top-spent ad in the last 7 days included no targeting other than "nationwide, 18+." That seems folly, doesn't it? Huge waste?
Wouldn't an essentially untargeted ad be the most expensive to run? Meaning that something like that will always be the top-spent?
But without targeting constraints you will get essentially remnants and are unlikely to reach any of your actual target, e.g. undecided likely voters in swing states