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

“35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 398 posts

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#61

Post by lukeramsden »

wlesieutre wrote: post #42
acoard wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert, but one observation I had is podcasts seem to follow this model. Most podcast ads I hear are read by the hosts themselves, though a small number splice in targeted advertiser-provided audio (eg a UK soccer podcast will play me local Canadian ads). For the podcasts that follow the former model, they don't seem to rely on timeslots (i.e. payment just for ad being shown), though some may be involved. Inst…

Spotify will be inserting targeted ads into their podcast streams, if they haven't started already. Something to keep in mind for anyone who was thinking of listening to podcasts on Spotify. I think Stitcher does this as well.

Are you saying they're going to do this to paid users too, or just free users?

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#62

Post by ValueNull »

ffpip wrote: post #41
thrownaway954 wrote: post #3

adnauseam.io i don't know how many people actually install this extension, but it is specifically designed to clicks ads so you don't have to :)

That is a stupid idea and will get your accounts and IP banned from Google and Cloudflare. Use it yourself if you want, do not encourage others to use it. It is based off uBlock Origin. Just use uBlock Origin.

I’ve used AdNauseum for close to a year with no issues, it seems to be pretty good about simulating realistic clicks.

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#63

Post by rtkwe »

earthboundkid wrote: post #8

Every newspaper in America has obvious scam ads on its homepage. The whole online ad market is diseased and needs to be uprooted. Common sense fixes: - Never allow dynamic ad content! Ads should be individually approved by publishers and not subject to change after approval. - Ban user tracking and targeting. It's a red queen's race and no one benefits. Everyone is better off once it's illegal. - Pay for ad time slot…

There's a lot of reasons they're not done that way on the internet, for starters it's reverting back to requiring people in the loop for ad sales which is expensive on both sides of the equation. Add to that that the 'personalized' ads are, if the targeting is functioning properly, worth more to the buyer [0] than simple placement ads and you can see why automatic targeted ads dominate the space, human approved/sold, non-personalized ads are both worth less on a per impression basis and more expensive for the buyer and seller to use.

[0] For example a make-up company really doesn't really care about putting an ad in front of me a man who doesn't wear make-up.

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#65

Post by lorthemar »

earthboundkid wrote: post #8

Every newspaper in America has obvious scam ads on its homepage. The whole online ad market is diseased and needs to be uprooted. Common sense fixes: - Never allow dynamic ad content! Ads should be individually approved by publishers and not subject to change after approval. - Ban user tracking and targeting. It's a red queen's race and no one benefits. Everyone is better off once it's illegal. - Pay for ad time slot…

>Pay for ad time slots, not user impressions.

This is probably the worst thing you can do to online advertising. It's probably one of the only good things about the online ad industry. If you book time slots, only the biggest players will be able to compete for that slot. Essentially killing the entire selling point of online ads, which is giving a chance to smaller players a chance at the game. I don't want to, ever, see online ads transform into TV ads. Targeting would be okay if it was done properly. In its current state, it's unethical and probably should be illegeal. Advertisers shouldn't know what I like, they should only know that a certain device with a certain ID likes X,Y topics.

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#66

Post by bishalb »

ffpip wrote: post #37

> Facebook lookalike audiences. Upload customer list (with attributes you want in your targeted demographic) and have Facebook create a lookalike audience for it. Incredibly precise What the fuck? Facebook allows people to do these things?

Why not?

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#67

Post by calrueb »

ffpip wrote: post #37

> Facebook lookalike audiences. Upload customer list (with attributes you want in your targeted demographic) and have Facebook create a lookalike audience for it. Incredibly precise What the fuck? Facebook allows people to do these things?

I believe this is almost table stakes for an ad platform these days. Marketers expect ever-more precise targeting to get better CPCs/CPAs/ROAS. This is especially true as an ad platform becomes more popular and CPMs naturally rise due to increased competition in the auction. When a company like FB/GOOG innovates in the ad targeting/measurement space every company will follow suit because their customers (advertisers) are going to ask for it. I believe market forces will continue to drive innovation in ads targeting until someone steps in and draws a line in the sand (eg regulation via the governement).

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#68

Post by thrwn_frthr_awy »

cj wrote: post #56
dantheman wrote: post #17

If I'm going to see ads, I'd prefer targeted ones personally. Show me something I might want - product discover is actually hard, if an ad can show me something that solves a need/want I have that's great for me and for the company.

I think the average (non-technical) person would agree. I know a lot of very non-technical people, some of who dislike facebook in general, talk about how good facebook is at showing them ads that actually get them to discover and buy new products. The people I've heard this sentiment from don't feel like they were manipulated into buying something that ultimately didn't meet expectations. I commonly hear things like…

My non technical friends and family do not like targets ads. Anytime they see specific ads for a store the just visited (online or brick-and-mortar) they think the microphones are on and being used. There’s a difference of an ad for a generic pet product you may like vs an ad for the exact product you viewed on another site. They do not understand how two completely different sites share their information. They do not like when they do a google search for an illness, view a webmd page, and then see ads for their illness on the phone apps.

During my time at Apple one of the big things they impressed on new hires is that there are things we can do with technology, that may even be beneficial to the user, but will be perceived as creepy. For instance, Starbucks could use facial recognition to greet you by your name at a location you’ve never been to. They could have already started your drink with a high probability it is what you order based on time and weather. But these things are “creepy” to much of the population and should be avoided. Ad networks do not care because their customer is not the end-user.

Re: “35-50% of clicks on Reddit Ads are fraudulent”

#70

Post by algo_trader »

danpalmer wrote: post #7

I get the impression that Reddit's ad network is just immature. We're finding that Reddit ads perform well and are cheap, suggesting that there isn't much competition for clicks. More mature ad networks such as Google's and Facebook's are better at reducing spam clicks. Google bought a company focused on this about 10 years ago, I'm sure Facebook put similar effort in. I'm sure this is something they'll work to impro…

Can u share any approx pricing/click-through rate ?

We are considering driving some traffic into very basic sites. We dont really intent to monetize, so cheap trashy visitors are ok

Post reply on HN