If you haven’t heard them, I really recommend episode 440 and 441 of Freakonomics: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/does-advertising-actually-work-part-1-tv-ep-440/
I don’t know much about the ads business, but I would guess that at least some advertisers have their own metrics on this and they know better than us. Even if some of their ads run on these bad...
I don’t know much about the ads business, but I would guess that at least some advertisers have their own metrics on this and they know better than us.
Even if some of their ads run on these bad third-party websites, they might make enough money from the other ad impressions that they’re satisfied?
But other people might try them and give up, or keep running them because they aren’t really paying attention.
As someone who's helped people try to figure out advertising strategies and quantify the results, it's all hopes and dreams. People advertise because they want more people to buy their stuff, but...
As someone who's helped people try to figure out advertising strategies and quantify the results, it's all hopes and dreams. People advertise because they want more people to buy their stuff, but so many ads have no proof they work. A few companies (mostly online retail) have enough visibility all the way through their customer funnel that they can make specific advertising choices, but it's rare to be able to have enough info to make good decisions.
I'm mercifully not handling advertising for anyone at the moment, but my understanding is that it might be better in the long term, maybe, but right now, people get to re-learn the whole system....
I'm mercifully not handling advertising for anyone at the moment, but my understanding is that it might be better in the long term, maybe, but right now, people get to re-learn the whole system. Everyone had their ideas of what the best metrics were and how to put it all together, and now people will have the same needs but less skill with the tool they have to use to get those needs met. It's certainly going to benefit Google to have people putting money into the system with less skill, but we'll have to see if it's a benefit in the long term to have more granularity.
This context shines a light on how there was seemingly such a massive disparity in Youtube and Twitch's (one of the larger ad supported video platforms) attitudes towards adblockers. Twitch has...
This context shines a light on how there was seemingly such a massive disparity in Youtube and Twitch's (one of the larger ad supported video platforms) attitudes towards adblockers.
Twitch has been militantly fighting adblockers for the better part of 2-3 years now (see TwitchAdSolutions a Github repository that has cataloging workarounds since this started), and has been aggressively trying to increase the amount and types of ads they show.
Whereas, YouTube has largely turned a blind eye to adblockers, which has lead to a healthy community of 3rd party solutions to skipping ads on the platform (uBlock Origin, https://piped.video/, NewPipe, etc...).
I wouldn't be surprised by this news. I've worked in digital marketing for 15 years and have been a victim of Google Search ad fraud on their Google Search Partners network, which is the same...
I wouldn't be surprised by this news. I've worked in digital marketing for 15 years and have been a victim of Google Search ad fraud on their Google Search Partners network, which is the same thing as what is being described in this exposè, only for YouTube. LinkedIn and Facebook also have ad partner sites that are rife with fraud. Advertisers are shockingly unaware of much of this fraud in my experience, and all the platforms have recently stopped reimbursing for click fraud even if you have third party tools that prove you've been defrauded. Programmatic ads just as bad too, if not worse in some cases. Best thing advertisers can do is exclude all these search partners and questionable publisher sites where possible, which raises the cost per impression or click, but greatly reduces the exposure to fraud.
Here is a different perspective on the story, but it's not a direct contradiction at all. If this is true, this is huge news. https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/29/google_trueview_skepticism/
This sounds pretty bad for Google and reinforced my belief that most, if not all adds aren't worth the money. Seems like a big scam.
If you haven’t heard them, I really recommend episode 440 and 441 of Freakonomics: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/does-advertising-actually-work-part-1-tv-ep-440/
I don’t know much about the ads business, but I would guess that at least some advertisers have their own metrics on this and they know better than us.
Even if some of their ads run on these bad third-party websites, they might make enough money from the other ad impressions that they’re satisfied?
But other people might try them and give up, or keep running them because they aren’t really paying attention.
As someone who's helped people try to figure out advertising strategies and quantify the results, it's all hopes and dreams. People advertise because they want more people to buy their stuff, but so many ads have no proof they work. A few companies (mostly online retail) have enough visibility all the way through their customer funnel that they can make specific advertising choices, but it's rare to be able to have enough info to make good decisions.
What do you think of the GA4 rollout, I don't work in the space but hear mummerings that's it's a huge step back.
I'm mercifully not handling advertising for anyone at the moment, but my understanding is that it might be better in the long term, maybe, but right now, people get to re-learn the whole system. Everyone had their ideas of what the best metrics were and how to put it all together, and now people will have the same needs but less skill with the tool they have to use to get those needs met. It's certainly going to benefit Google to have people putting money into the system with less skill, but we'll have to see if it's a benefit in the long term to have more granularity.
This context shines a light on how there was seemingly such a massive disparity in Youtube and Twitch's (one of the larger ad supported video platforms) attitudes towards adblockers.
Twitch has been militantly fighting adblockers for the better part of 2-3 years now (see TwitchAdSolutions a Github repository that has cataloging workarounds since this started), and has been aggressively trying to increase the amount and types of ads they show.
Whereas, YouTube has largely turned a blind eye to adblockers, which has lead to a healthy community of 3rd party solutions to skipping ads on the platform (uBlock Origin, https://piped.video/, NewPipe, etc...).
With the news that YouTube has been experimenting with blocking users who adblock from using the platform, I wonder if we see YouTube get rid of the
Skip Adsbutton and aggressively increase the number of ads on the platform in the same way Twitch has over the past few years.I wouldn't be surprised by this news. I've worked in digital marketing for 15 years and have been a victim of Google Search ad fraud on their Google Search Partners network, which is the same thing as what is being described in this exposè, only for YouTube. LinkedIn and Facebook also have ad partner sites that are rife with fraud. Advertisers are shockingly unaware of much of this fraud in my experience, and all the platforms have recently stopped reimbursing for click fraud even if you have third party tools that prove you've been defrauded. Programmatic ads just as bad too, if not worse in some cases. Best thing advertisers can do is exclude all these search partners and questionable publisher sites where possible, which raises the cost per impression or click, but greatly reduces the exposure to fraud.
Here is a different perspective on the story, but it's not a direct contradiction at all. If this is true, this is huge news. https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/29/google_trueview_skepticism/